NYNEWYOR-L Archives

From: <>
Subject: Archives letter
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 21:03:27 EST

A rebuttal to NYC-L abt archives..
Great letter.

When you refer to the Municipal Archives, Old Records Division, you are
making a composite of two separate repositories. The Municipal Archives, on
the first floor of 31 Chambers St, primarily houses vital records. The
Division of Old Records, on the seventh floor, part of the NY County Clerk's
Office, houses records from the Supreme Court of NY County, Superior Court,
Mayor's Court/Court of Common Pleas and other materials. It is not part of
the Municipal Archives. It's a county, not municipal, repository.

I am a regular volunteer at the Division of Old Records. I'd like to clarify
something. It happens to be a very well-organized repository--one of the best
in NYC. Nothing is "strewn haphazardly." The archive doesn't need
"reorganizing." The archivists are anything but careless. It's easy to spend
a few hours in a busy public office and decide that it's disorganized. But
you've gotten the wrong first impression.

While I and most others share your concern about preservation of old records,
I can also assure you that the archivists at the Division of Old Records take
much care in keeping their collection in good condition. Unfortunately,
researchers have greatly added to the wear-and-tear of the collection,
especially over the last year, with the boom in the public's interest in
genealogy. It's heartbreaking. An education project in handling old records
would certainly be a good thing-- not for the archivists, but for the
visitors.

Preservation projects are regularly in progress at the Division of Old
Records. Public funding is never enough, of course, for what might be done.
But just recently, thousands of 18th century parchments were sent to a
conservator. I know, because I helped in the preparation. Take a look, for
instance, at some of the 17th century Minute Books sometime. They have been
magnificently preserved, with fragments woven into acid-free paper and placed
in beautiful boxes.

Yes, the city directories from about 1902-1915 are crumbling. That's
heartbreaking, too. But, at the time of their printing, highly acidic paper
was used. And, so, over time, the directories crumbled. If you looked at
earlier directories in the cabinet closer to the front door, you saw what
good shape they're in. That's because the paper was better and has lasted
through the decades, and because the directories have been well cared for at
the Division of Old Records.

As far as I know, every NYC directory, from Longworth's to Lain's to
Upington's to Trow's and others have been microfilmed. Many have been and
will continue to be digitized, both by Ancestry and by Primary Source Media.
The New York Historical Society has also photocopied an entire set of NYC
directories, from their inception in 1787 to their last publication in 1933
and care fastidiously for their Brooklyn, Richmond, and Queens collections of
directories. So, yes, city directories will live on for future generations of
researchers.

I strongly suggest that before you point fingers at the archivists of the
Division of Old Records or criticize the way the facility is run, be sure
that you know the facts. The Division of Old Records is a well-run, organized
repository. How Bruce Abrams and Joe Van Nostrand manage to handle all that
they are required to do--from assisting genealogical researchers and
historians to dealing with current needs for law and equity judgments and
divorce records of those people who want to remarry and so much more--I don't
know. But I do know that they do it with care, skill, and grace.

Best wishes,

Leslie Corn
NYC Genealogical Research, Due Diligence, & Missing Heirs
New York, NY
NYG&BS Library Committee, Education & Publications Committe, and Subcommittee
on Collection Development
Co-Chair, Repositories, NYG&BS NYC 2000 Research Conference, April 30-May 7,
2000
http://www.citydirectories.psmedia.com/city/essay_main1.html

This thread:

• Archives letter by <>