查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 檔案全宗理論與檔案來源範圍界定=The Archival Theory of Respect pour les Fonds and an Re-examination of the Origin of Archival Records |
---|---|
作者 | 宋兆霖; | 書刊名 | 故宮學術季刊 |
卷期 | 18:2 民89.冬 |
頁次 | 頁159-178+186-187 |
分類號 | 572.97 |
關鍵詞 | 檔案全宗; 檔案全宗理論; 尊重全宗原則; 來源原則; 事由原則; 登記室原則; 自由來源原則; Archival fonds; Archival theory of respect pour les fonds; Principle of respect des fonds; Principle of provenance; Principle of pertinence; Registratur pririzip; Registry principle; Free principle of provenance; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 全宗理論是檔案來源原則的具體化表現,也是最具檔案整理成效之實務應用規範。檔案全宗無非是一組導源於同一形成者,且具有相當規模的文件集合體;其內容如果脫離同一形成者的來源界定,則檔案組織的完整性即無從維繫。因此之故,全宗的意義,在於揭示檔案的基本分類整理單位,並維護文件形成來源的聯繫,不使文件分散混置。本文的主要目的,即在闡述檔案全宗構建之理論基礎,並說明來源原則之實質內容。全篇探討的重點有三:第一、作為社會活動過程的真實記錄,檔案本身的存在價值已明確標示全宗組織的立足點,是即尊重客觀史實、維持歷史原貌;因此,全宗理論可謂為歷史主義思維架構在檔案整理中的應用。第二、檔案全宗的組織體系,由國家檔案全宗與機關檔案全宗構成;前者是經鑑定具有永久保存價值,由國家統一典藏管理之檔案集結,嘗被喻為國家主權的表徵,而後者則導源於具備獨立行文權之社會組織,為其職能活動過程中所形成檔案文件之有機整體。第三、透過對社會活動組成諸元的分析,得知傳統來源原則強調之檔案形成者,僅是同一社會活動的狹義表象;社會組織據以產生文件檔案的職能活動內容與目標,未始不可納入來源原則的廣義制約範圍。事實上,將檔案來源範圍由形成者擴展為社會活動的過程與目標,不僅可使全宗理論的核心架構益臻完備,兼顧各種類型檔案全宗的組織與管理,亦能更精確、客觀地反映檔案產生的脈絡,從而維護文件之間的歷史有機聯繫。 |
英文摘要 | The archival theory of respect pour les fonds is the crystallization of the principle of provenance, and is generally recognized as an effective and feasible approach to organizing archives. An archival fond is a collection of records of one and the same origin, or provenance. The implication is that records from any records-creating body are considered a unit and kept separate from other records. It also denotes that the original outer borders of archives and the original inner order of the records should be kept intact. Any departure from the principe is to bring about an awkward situation whereas maintaining the structural integrity of archives would be impossible. The purpose of this paper then is to expound the theoretical foundation of the making of archival fonds and to explore the nature of archival provenance. There conceptual constructs will be addressed. First, an archival record is one which was drawn up or used in the course of a transaction (be it administrative or executive, public or private) of which itself formed a part, and subsequently preserved for its information on the transaction. They very raison d'etre of records has thus dictated the foundation upon which archival fonds are to be established, i.e., the preservation of all faithful representations of social transactions. In other words, what constitutes the core of the provenance principe is in effect historicist in nature. Second, there are two types of archival fonds: national and organizational. The former is made up of records that are deemed worthy of keeping for posterity and are best collectively preserved in the custody of the government; it is frequently referred to as a symbol of national sovereignty. The latter consists of records of individual social institutions that are empowered to issue or to create documents of potential evidential or informational value; it is the organic totality of an institution's archival records in the course of realizing its social functions. Third, the notion of the records-creating body that is so predominant in the provenance principle is an interpretation of the concept of origin in the narrow sense. Given that social institutions are to a large extent dominated by their functions and that without one or more live functions no institution would be able to endure, it is held that the definition of archival provenance is not complete without consideration for the actions that social institutions take to fulfill their functions. After all, records of potential value do come from these actions, don't they? With the perspective of provenance broadened, it is believed that archivists would be in a better position to understand the process in which archival records come about more precisely and to preserve the structural integrity of archival fonds more effectively. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。