Introduction

History is a powerful form of memory because it synthesizes individual experience with a larger community. As either a shared or contested view about what has been, history taps into the past through the tangible written memorials that survive from earlier times—books, objects, and archives of records and papers. It is the multiplicity of types of sources that strengthens the historian's credibility and arguments. One part of that rich mix of sources originates with individual people whose interactions and communicative practices in documentary form may be either windows through which we see or mirrors that reflect and refract. Personal papers survive from antiquity and will certainly continue to be made in the future, as the growth of blogs attests. Personal materials are indispensable to a balance in history, but what do we know about these sources and their histories? Why were some forms of recording favored? Why did new forms emerge? Who made and kept records and why?

At the first International Conference on the History of Records and Archives (I-CHORA), held in Toronto in 2003, participants from many countries agreed that the history of records and record practices and the history of their repositories were rich areas that embraced the interests of scholars as diverse as social historians, cultural theorists, communication and media specialists, archivists, librarians, and other scholarly curatorial professions.¹ The excitement generated at I-CHORA 1 has proved to be more than a frisson of the moment: three subsequent conferences have delved into selected issues in greater detail, and further conferences have been mooted.²

Each conference has aimed to draw international researchers into a multidisciplinary dialogue focusing on documentary practices defined as broadly and comprehensively as possible. Practices in the creation and management of records, as the varied forms of records themselves, have a complex history that is largely unknown because relevant research has been done by different disciplines, each with its own special slant on a topic. Themes that bridge lines established by method, sociohistorical periods, or well-developed disciplinary tracks have yet to take firm hold. The studies that are in print are scattered among disciplines; nevertheless, they are remarkably rich, suggesting many areas of shared interests that cross disciplinary boundaries.³ The I-CHORA conferences are the first steps along the road to more regular communication and discussion among interested groups. Each of the four international conferences has endeavored to elevate this metahistory of sources to center stage in the hope of jump-starting a multidisciplinary dialogue among researchers working within this area.⁴

I-CHORA 3, held in Boston at the Massachusetts Historical Society, 27–29 September 2007, featured the theme of personal papers.⁵ Personal papers are not simply containers for personal exchanges and narrative, or embodiments of agreements, contracts, and business communications, or flights of imaginative fancy and personal doodling; they also reflect social norms and customs, partake in the communication technologies of their time, and collectively embody an unfolding history of social practices and interactions. Their value to us as ways of accessing the past and as trustworthy evidence for history is enhanced, refined, and expanded by the critical study of the sources themselves. The organizing committee recognized the complexity of this topic but nonetheless was convinced that the area of personal documentary practices promised to attract scholars from areas as diverse as gender studies, literary criticism, and social history.⁶ A considerable body of literature in these areas shares common ground by being based on personal materials. These either are used as sources of evidence or comprise the theoretical frame that directs the research. Diaries, for example, have been used to provide evidence about experiences, ideas, and social norms from a time in the past. Additionally, diaries and diary habits have been the topic of research. Organizing committee members hoped that by promoting the theme of personal papers and welcoming the multiple viewpoints, sociohistorical eras, and interests that these papers touch, they would encourage a broader sharing of ideas than has been possible in small interest groups assembled at discipline-specific or professional conferences.

Twenty-six papers were accepted for the conference from the thirty-eight...