T his collection of essays brings to focus a moment in the evolution of the

Ethics &

Ethics & Critical Thinking

complex decision making processes required when conservators consider the
treatment of cultural heritage materials. The papers presented here are drawn from

Critical
two consecutive years of presentations at the American Institute for Conservation
of Historic and Artistic Works (AIC) Annual Meeting General Sessions. These
were, in 2010, The Conservation Continuum: Examining the Past, Envisioning the

Thinking
Future, and in 2011, Ethos Logos Pathos: Ethical Principles and Critical Thinking in
Conservation. Contributors to this thoughtful book include Barbara Appelbaum,
Deborah Bede, Gabriëlle Beentjes, James Janowski, Jane E. Klinger, Frank Matero,

in Conservation
Salvador Muñoz Viñas, Bill Wei, and George Wheeler.

in Conservation

A publication of the American Institute for

Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works Edited by Pamela Hatchfield
Ethics &
Critical
Thinking
in Conservation
Edited by Pamela Hatchfield

American Institute for Conservation

of Historic & Artistic Works
 The American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works (AIC) promotes the
preservation of cultural heritage as a means toward a deeper understanding of our shared
humanity—the need to express ourselves through creative achievement in the arts, literature,
architecture, and technology. We honor the history and integrity of achievements in the
humanities and science through the preservation of cultural materials for future generations.

American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works

1156 15th Street NW, Suite 320
Washington, D.C. 20005
[email protected]
www.conservation-us.org

Eryl Wentworth, Executive Director

© 2013 American Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic
or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written
permission from the publisher, except in the case of a reviewer, who may quote brief passages
embodied in critical articles or in a review.

Bonnie Naugle, editorial coordination & design

Jerri Newman, copy editing

The participation of Salvador Muñoz Viñas in the 2011 AIC Annual Meeting was made
possible in part through a travel grant to the Foundation of the American Institute for
Conservation from the Samuel H. Kress Foundation.
 Contents
Preface
Pamela Hatchfield.............................................................................................vii

Chapter 1. Conservation in the 21st Century: Will a 20th Century

Code of Ethics Suffice?
Barbara Appelbaum............................................................................................1

Chapter 2. Legacies from the Past: Previous Repairs

Deborah Bede....................................................................................................11

Chapter 3. To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision-making in

Preparing Archives for Digitization
Gabriëlle Beentjes..............................................................................................23

Chapter 4. Resuscitating Bamiyan’s Buddhas? A Dispatch from

Dresden, Two Lessons Learned
James Janowski..................................................................................................49

Chapter 5. Objects of Trauma, Finding the Balance

Jane E. Klinger...................................................................................................79

Chapter 6. On Time and the Modalities of Conservation

Frank Matero ....................................................................................................91

Chapter 7. The Frankenstein Syndrome

Salvador Muñoz Viñas ..................................................................................111

Chapter 8. Restoration Ethics, Cleaning, and Perception:

Case Studies from the Dutch Government Collection
W. Wei, Z. Benders, and E. Domela Nieuwenhuis.......................................127

Chapter 9. Book Review: Conservation Takes a Reflective Turn

George Wheeler, with an introduction by Nancie Ravenel..........................139

v
 Chapter 3

To Treat or Not to Treat:

Decision Making in
Preparing Archives for
Digitization
GABRIËLLE BEENTJES

ABSTRACT—The ethical code of archivists is studied to find out how important

physical form is for archival reliability, and is compared to the ethical code of
conservators. Important concepts in these codes of ethics are authenticity, integ-
rity, and intrinsic value. It appears that although the concept of authenticity is
understood differently by archivists and conservators, both professional ethical
codes prescribe minimal intervention to protect the reliability of the original,
and as such, its authenticity, integrity, and intrinsic value. Two digitization proj-
ects of the National Archives of the Netherlands exemplify how the objective of
maximizing accessibility influences decisions required in preparing archives for
digitization, especially where adjustment of the original to the demands of the
digitizing device is needed to capture as much written information as possible.
As the original record is the most reliable source of information, attention should
be given to creating digital access without causing damage to the original, for
example by developing more affordable and sophisticated digitizing techniques,
always reserving enough funds in the budget for proper conservation of the origi-
nals before and after digitization.

23
24 Gabriëlle Beentjes

1. Introduction
Archives keep, store, and provide access to documents of governmental,
institutional, and private origin, as sources of evidence and information
about the institutions or persons that created them. People interested
more or less professionally in national, local, or personal history, such
as historians, genealogists, lawyers, and journalists, use these records.
Digitization of archival documents is a core business of archives as a
means of making their collections broadly available to researchers. To
provide better, broader, and easier access, archives have started digi-
tizing first their finding-aids, and subsequently their most consulted or
most important collections.
The source of the impetus to broaden access through digitization
is found not only in the archives. There is a political/economic back-
ground of stimulating information and communications technology
to it, as well as—in the case of Europe—an ideological mission: digi-
tizing European cultural heritage is considered a means of consoli-
dating European identity on the Web (Poole 2010). To this purpose the
European Commission supported programs such as APEnet (Archives
Portal Europe), which created a portal to the collections and archival
descriptions of several European National Archives. This program
is followed by APEx to enrich digital content and cooperating with
Europeana, the portal of digitized collections of museums, libraries,
archives, and audio-visual collections. For more information, see the
ICT Policy Support Programme of the European Commission, part of
the EU Digital Agenda.1
Preservation digitizing is thought to deliver images that are
truthful representatives of the original records; however, whether the
information that is digitally captured can be considered a reliable rep-
resentation of the original is questionable. It is not clear how truthful
these representations of archival records are and whether they contain
all the information needed to interpret them correctly. The physical
characteristics of the original are often not satisfyingly represented
or are purposely diminished visually to maximize accessibility of the
textual content. Moreover, some objects are not specifically suited to
the digitizing process and need to be treated or even adjusted in order
to be able to digitize them, which means the original object might not
be in the same condition after the digitizing process as it was before.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 25

Guidelines for digitizing archival records barely give instructions on

how to digitize physical characteristics.
This essay explores the practice of digitizing archives, and identifies
what aspects of records are considered important and which aspects of
digitization deserve more attention. It is meant to provide a theoretical
background to the decision-making model designed for use during
preparation of archives for digitization (Beentjes 2011).

2. Importance of Appearance
Traditionally, archival objects are more often thought of as carriers of
texts, rather than as objects in their own right, “perhaps because we see
the documents we handle as simply providing reliable information in
support of other material culture, and therefore materially ‘invisible’”
(Taylor 1995, 9). However, the appearance of an archival record can be
important for several reasons. Most important is the direct archival link
between appearance and interpretation of textual content (Gouw 1955;
Bearman and Lytle 2000). Texts in an official report will be interpreted
differently than the same ones in a diary, which is why the descrip-
tive element form of appearance is used in inventories. Reading such a
description, the researcher already knows what kind of information he
will find without even seeing the actual record.
This form of appearance can in itself be the subject of research, in
documentalist research, for example, where among other things “the
relationship between the nature of the action generating a document
and the form of the document” is studied (Duranti 1989, 11). It can be
part of research dedicated to the history of archives, or of the interrela-
tionship between records, archives, and technology. Growth of interest
in this subject is shown by the number of proposals for a conference in
2010, followed by publication of a selection of the presented lectures in
a special issue of the Journal of American Archivists in 2011 (Williams
and Proctor).
Comparable to books, the bindings of which can tell something
about how they were valued by their owner (Foot 2006a), the composi-
tion, materials, structure, or decoration of an archival object could also
be studied as a source of information about the “economic or social cir-
cumstances of its production, about those for whom it was produced
and about the culture in which it functioned” (Foot 2006b, 29), such
26 Gabriëlle Beentjes

Fig. 1. (left) A letter by Victor de

Stuers that can be well researched
for its textual content, and also as
an example of how de Stuers cor-
responded by illustrating what the
letter he writes is about. National
Archives of the Netherlands, The
Hague: Ministerie van Binnenlandse
Zaken: Afdeling Kunsten en Weten-
schappen, 1875–1918, Catalog ref-
erence number 2.04.13, Inventory
number 3281.

Fig. 2. (below) One of the first

Turkish documents in which Latin
letters are used instead of Arabic,
not only in the text but also in the
seal. However, the imprint in the
seal is barely visible on the scan.
National Archives of the Nether-
lands, The Hague: Ministerie van
Buitenlandse Zaken, Catalog refer-
ence number 2.05.02, Inventory
number 545.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 27

as the importance of the institution creating it. If the function of an

archive was more public, for example, this might be reflected in the
way its records were bound or written. Context-driven research like
that by Ann Stoler (2010) shows how valuable it can be to study not
only what has been written that is now in the archives, but also how
these archives are formed, by whom, and why—information not that
easy to find in the average digital copy. Sometimes the physical appear-
ance of an object can tell a story of its own, as shown by Ala Rekrut in
her thesis, exploring how visible damage on a document illustrates a
phase in the life of its former owner (2006).
These examples show that digitizing without attention to the orig-
inal form, be it in metadata or in image, might mean ignoring infor-
mation potentially essential to a proper interpretation of the textual
content (because the form of appearance provides information about
the relevance or meaning of its content), as well as denying it as a
source of information in itself (fig. 1). Especially where preservation
imaging is involved, with the aim to withhold the original from access
after digitization, this would be an undesirable situation.

3. Guidelines
To support digitization projects and to be able to digitize according to
national and international standards of quality and durability, guide-
lines have been developed, like the Technical Guidelines for Digitizing
Cultural Heritage Materials: Creation of Raster Image Master Files
developed by the Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative
Still Image Working Group for digitizing cultural heritage materials
(FADGI 2010), which in turn is partly based on those established by
the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in
2004. Most of these guidelines, and also those developed by other insti-
tutions, mainly focus on technical prescriptions for the digital images,
for example, metadata and color management.2 However, sometimes
they also contain a concise description of how to digitize docu-
ments in practice, and some attention is paid to the record’s physical
characteristics:
Some documents have embossed seals, such as notarized docu-
ments, or wax seals that are an intrinsic legal aspect of the docu-
ments. Most scanners are designed with lighting to minimize
28 Gabriëlle Beentjes

the three dimensional aspects of the original documents being

scanned, in order to emphasize the legibility of the text or writing.
In most cases, embossed seals or the imprint on a wax seal will not
be visible and/or legible in digital images from these scanners, and
this raises questions about the authenticity of the digital represen-
tation of the documents. (FADGI 2010, 51)
Two remarks in this quotation show starting point and conse-
quence of the current practice of digitizing records. The starting point
is: “Most scanners are designed with lighting to minimize the three
dimensional aspects of the original documents being scanned, in order
to emphasize the legibility of the text or writing.” This implies that
textual content of records is supposed to be the most important source
of information to be reproduced digitally. Only in case of preserva-
tion digitizing it is thought important to capture not only text, but also
physical, three-dimensional aspects of the original, to get closer to the
original character of the record. Some of these characteristics are listed
in the Guidelines, with a description of how to handle them during
digitization (NARA 2004).
The consequence of focusing on text while digitizing is described
in the second part of the following: “…seals are an intrinsic legal aspect
of the documents…[They] will not be visible and/or legible in digital
images...and this raises questions about the authenticity of the digital
representation of the documents.”
Later in this essay, authenticity will be discussed regarding whether
it is possible to transfer the aspect of authenticity of an original docu-
ment to its digital copy. Where non-current archives are concerned, it
is probably more logical to strive for reliable copies, which still means
all authentic aspects of the record should be legible on the digital copy,
because these are proof of its reliability. To be able to do this, special
digitizing techniques (for example, raking light in case of seals) are
needed to capture detail that would otherwise be rendered invisible. If
such detail is not readable after digitizing, the digital copy will only be
a representative of textual content and one would need to consult the
original record for proof of reliability (fig. 2).
As said, how to reproduce three-dimensional documents in a
two-dimensional, virtual way is a problem that is especially recog-
nized where preservation digitizing is concerned. Some institutions
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 29

clearly state that digitization is “not a suitable method for the long-
term preservation of analogue records” (Parliamentary Archives 2008,
2). NARA asks the digital library community to discuss “how many
representations are needed for preservation reformatting to accurately
document the original records” (NARA 2004, 69; Digital Library Fed-
eration 2004). This request is repeated by FADGI, with the addition
that “originals for which it is considered appropriate to have multiple
representations in order to be considered preservation reformatting
probably warrant preservation in original form” (2010, 90).
The British Library’s Endangered Archives Programme (2011), set
up to provide both access to fragile resources as well as to safeguard the
originals from too much handling, prescribes preservation digitizing
as follows:
Your copying process should also respect the items being copied as
objects as well as information carriers.
Copying should follow the original unit(s) of material. That is,
covers of volumes, albums, files etc. should be copied first, followed
by their contents. Blank pages in volumes and books should also be
copied, in the place in which they appear in the original. In order to
recreate the original look of a unit such as a photograph album, it
may be necessary to capture individual pages (which may contain
many photographs) before copying each photograph individually.
The Dutch Metamorfoze program is comparable, stating, “The
preservation masters provided in this context must be of such a quality
and measurable relationship to the original, that they can in fact replace
it. This means that all the information visible in the original must also
be visible in the preservation master; the information transfer must be
complete since the original is threatened by autonomous decay and
will no longer be used once it has been digitized” (Dormolen 2012, 4).
However, in spite of extensive technical descriptions, neither the
British Library nor the Metamorfoze guidelines explain how exactly to
digitize the originals to result in complete information transfer, i.e., how
to capture a three-dimensional object with all information visible in a
two-dimensional digital image. Apparently it is the owner or keeper of
the archive who is expected to decide what information is worth cap-
turing as a replacement of the original, and general consensus on this
subject does not exist, except that in most cases, focus is laid on the text.
30 Gabriëlle Beentjes

4. Ethics
Related to the problem of how to completely digitize the information
contained by an object is that of preparing an object for digitization.
IFLA UNESCO Guidelines for digitization explicitly include this phase
in their description of digitizing projects:
Once the selection process has been finalized, a further ongoing
cost is that of preparation. An estimate of staff time should take
into consideration the retrieval of materials for digitization and
their return to the shelf. This function should therefore include the
cost of preservation and conservation required to protect integ-
rity of source materials, including documentation, microfilming,
flattening, cleaning, repair of minor tears, or the disbinding of
volumes and possible subsequent rebinding or protective enclo-
sure of source material. (IFLA UNESCO 2002, 38)

It is striking that “disbinding of volumes” apparently is accepted as

part of preparations for digitization, while at the same time “to protect
integrity of source materials” is mentioned. It also means that physical
information in the original object is discarded to obtain more informa-
tion—textual content—on the digital copy. Can it be ethically defended
to adjust the physical form of archival materials to some kind of new
form for the use one wants to make of it, i.e., digitization to provide
broader accessibility? Already in 1998, the Library of Congress, sur-
veying which reproduction method is best suited for access versus
preservation copying, concluded that:
No discussion of a preservation reformatting could omit due con-
sideration of conservation. Especially if the original item is to be
retained, it must not be damaged in any way by the reformatting
process. Conservation treatment may precede or follow scanning
but ought to be part of any reformatting plan. Some members said
that it would be better to suffer an inferior image than to injure the
original. (Library of Congress 1998)
Nevertheless, sometimes it seems accessibility prevails over the
well being of the records during digitization. In order to find out how,
or whether, this is professionally justified, the ethical codes of archi-
vists and conservators are consulted in the following paragraphs.
Articles 1, 3 and 4 of the Code of Ethics of the International Council
of Archives (ICA 1996a) contain the following prescriptions:
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 31

“Archivists should protect the integrity of archival material and

thus guarantee that it continues to be reliable evidence of the past.”
They should also “protect the authenticity of documents during
archival processing, preservation and use…Replacement of originals
with other formats should be done in the light of the legal, intrinsic
and information value of the records.” Archives should be “kept or…
destroyed primarily to save essential testimony of the activity of the
person or the institution which produced and accumulated the docu-
ments but also bearing in mind changing research needs.”
These articles contain a lot of keywords, like integrity, authenticity,
legal, intrinsic and information value, and research needs. Some of
these terms can be recognized from their use in the guidelines for
digitization, which suggests a general consensus and understanding
of their meaning. Understanding the exact meaning of these concepts
might provide insight into how records should be treated during con-
servation and digitization.

4.1 AUTHENTICITY
To start with protecting the authenticity of documents, is it their
original form that should be protected (including the text), or just the
textual content? In general, the ICA describes the reason of being for
archives as follows:
The first and most fundamental reason for creating archives is
to prove legal rights. Secondly, archives serve as instruments for
the administration of an organization. Finally, archives are cul-
tural heritage and they are one of the preconditions for social and
political accountability. All these purposes can be served only with
authentic documents, that is with documents that are reliable not
only at the moment when they are created but remain reliable for
a long time to come. That means that those documents must be
preserved from destruction and from alteration. (1996b, 6)

Thus, authentic documents should be reliable when they are created,

and afterwards they should not be altered. The Glossary of the Society
of American Archivists (SAA) includes a more elaborate definition of
authenticity: “The quality of being genuine, not a counterfeit, and free
from tampering, and is typically inferred from internal and external
evidence, including its physical characteristics, structure, content, and
32 Gabriëlle Beentjes

context” (Pearce-Moses 2005). A signature is mentioned as an impor-

tant sign of authenticity because it identifies its creator, but the explana-
tion that goes with the definition also suggests testing the ink used to
write the document, or analyzing its paper carrier. As such, a digital
reproduction can never satisfy as an authentic document in itself; it can
only be seen as a representative of the original authentic document.
Luciana Duranti distinguishes reliability from authenticity: “A
record is reliable when it can be treated as the fact of which it is evi-
dence. By contrast, a record is authentic when it is the document that
it claims to be” (Duranti 1995, 7). A digital copy will be reliable if
the original record is reliable. It is not authentic, unless some sign of
authentication by someone authorized to do so, is added to the digital
copy. However, in that case, the digital copy should not be considered a
copy, but an authentic original in itself, consisting of a reliable copy of
the original document and an added authorization.
From a conservator’s view, there is no difference between physical
form and textual content of a record, probably because a conservator is
trained to preserve objects as a whole. Interestingly, this attitude is also
found in late 19th and early 20th century archivists, starting with Sir
Henry Cole, from 1840 assistant keeper of The Public Record Office in
England. He “realized the value of preserving the book and its binding as
a single entity, respecting the binding as an intrinsic part of an archive’s
documentary evidence” (Bearman 1997, 84). The principles and ethics
of archival repair developed by Cole are adopted by later keepers like
Hilary Jenkinson, writing in 1953: “A principle upon which we have for
many years insisted is that in the case of Documents which are Archives
any physical element which is present (small or large, beautiful or the
reverse, obviously important or by ordinary standards negligible), from
the materials in which a volume is bound down to the needle-holes
through which it is sewn, is evidential and must be neither destroyed
nor obscured in Repair.” (cited by Ellis and Walne 2003, 295).
His colleague Roger Ellis states in 1951, “No process of repair shall
be allowed to remove, diminish or obscure in any way the document’s
value as evidence; and this must apply not only to the evidence obvi-
ously conveyed by the writing upon the document, but also to those
overtones of evidence conveyed by it through other means” (cited by
Cunha 1971, 242).
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 33

During the 20th century, conservators developed their own ethical

principles, corresponding with those of these archivists, and with
minimum intervention as a basic rule. In 2003, the international Code
of Ethics was developed and promoted by the European Confedera-
tion of Conservators-Restorers’ Organisations, summarizing ethical
principles by stating, among other things, “The Conservator-Restorer
shall respect the aesthetic, historic and spiritual significance and the
physical integrity of the cultural heritage entrusted to her/his care.”
However, he “shall take into account the requirements of its social use
while preserving the cultural heritage,” which in the case of archives
conservation, can be interpreted as keeping the archives in or restoring
them to such a condition that they can be consulted in the reading
room, as accessibility of archives is the main objective of keeping them.
However, preserving or conserving a record to make or keep it acces-
sible, i.e. to prevent further deterioration, should only include minimal
technical intervention, and as much original material as possible
should be preserved. (ECCO 2003, articles 5, 6, 8).
In traditional conservation theories, a parchment-bound imprint
recased in library buckram is considered to be not as authentic as
its not-rebound neighbor originating from the same era (Bearman
1997), as in the archival view on authenticity. However, this could be
considered a subjective notion, as noted in contemporary conserva-
tion theory described by Muñoz Viñas: “The present condition is the
only actually authentic condition. Any other presumed, preferred or
expected condition exists only in the minds of the subjects, in their
imagination or in their memory. Non-authentic states cannot exist in
the real world. Likewise, non-existing conditions are non-authentic
by definition: therefore, speaking of an object which exists in a non-
authentic condition is a kind of oxymoron” (2005, 94).
This means there is a confusion of tongues when modern conser-
vators and archivists discuss authenticity: conservators refer to the
actual present physical state of the object, while archivists refer to the
textual content and meaning of the object, which should coincide with
its physical properties when originally created. Taking the archival
definition of authenticity literally, a rebound record is not authentic,
while it is authentic for a conservator, though not in its original state.
According to the ethical codes of both archivists and conservators,
34 Gabriëlle Beentjes

Fig. 3. A letter sealed to another document. The possible meaning of this construction will
disappear when the strap of paper is cut to be able to digitize the letter. National Archives
of the Netherlands/National Archives of Surinam, Gouvernementssecretarie in Suriname,
Catalog reference number 1.05.10.01, Inventory number 437.

adjusting an object means affecting its authenticity, even when done

on behalf of conservation. However, accessibility is what archives
are for. If the physical appearance hinders access, both archivists and
conservators generally accept some loss of authenticity while altering
the appearance on behalf of this accessibility. For example, if a record
cannot be read because it is part of a bundle, which is bound with a
string or ribbon through the documents, it is accepted practice to cut
the string—although the physical material of the string and structure of
the bundle is lost. Archivists consider the holes in the paper to be proof
enough of the fact that the bundle of paper had been bound if combined
with a description as “bundle” in the inventory. From a conservator’s
viewpoint removing the ribbon or string from the bundle affects the
original construction and material, therefore this should be properly
documented. As this treatment is “required by the social use” of the
record (its physical accessibility), it is accepted as a necessary treatment.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 35

A difference in opinion between archivists and conservators comes

into being when the string through the bundle does not hinder consul-
tation in physical form, but does hinder digitization (fig. 3). Perhaps
in that case the complete text is not readable, or perhaps the paper
will be damaged by the string or ribbon that holds the pages together
while turning the pages and flattening them on the bookscan. Should
the string in that case be cut it would mean a deliberately affected loss
of information, without reasons to do with preservation. Generally the
archivist will choose for digital accessibility by cutting the string, while
the conservator objects to such a working procedure, in accordance to
the Code of Ethics: Article 16: “The Conservator-Restorer shall rec-
ommend proper reproduction procedures in order not to damage the
original” (ECCO 2003).

4.2 INTEGRITY
Integrity, the second concept highlighted in the archival code of
ethics, is defined as “the quality of being whole and unaltered through
loss, tampering, or corruption,” with the further elaboration:
Integrity is a relative concept that assesses whether the essential
nature of a record has changed. As a record ages, its ink may fade or
bits of the paper may be chipped from edge without any significant
loss of integrity. Contrawise, loss of a page from a record, especially
one bearing authorizing signatures, has a significant impact on the
record’s integrity. In the context of records, integrity relates to the
potential loss of physical or intellectual elements after a record has
been created. It is distinguished from completeness, which refers
to the presence of all required physical and intellectual elements
when the record is created. (Pearce-Moses 2005)

A rather complicated definition, explained by the Dutch definition

by Den Teuling: “characteristic of the record that its form, content and
structure at the moment of consultation are the same as when it was
received or created” (2007, 18). When significant parts of the record
are lost during its lifetime, it has lost integrity. This can apply to intel-
lectual (content) as well as physical elements (a page). Digitized, the
record has definitely lost physical elements, as it is a virtual representa-
tion of the original, and as such, it has lost integrity and authenticity.
Classical conservation theories confirm this viewpoint: “The
36 Gabriëlle Beentjes

‘integrity’ of an object may lie upon four main factors: (1) its material
components, (2) its perceivable features, (3) the producer’s intent and
(4) its original function” (Muñoz Viñas 2005, 66). This means that in
conservation, only the original object exists in full integrity, because its
digital version cannot possess its material components and can only
give an image of its features and functioning.

4.3 RESEARCH
Earlier it was mentioned how form of appearance is inspiring
several new kinds of research in archival records. Apart from that
and the short description in inventories of form of appearance, it is
questionable to what extent physical appearance of records is needed
to interpret their textual content correctly. Apparently, looking at how
digitization is performed—focusing on text and eliminating all aspects
that could disturb the readability of that text—it is assumed that aspects
of form of appearance are not important. Interviews with several
researchers, however, show that it is the goal of the research that defines
the importance of physical aspects of records (fig 4). (The interviews
were held in the course of a dissertation research project on behalf of
the MRes Heritage Science, Centre for Sustainable Heritage, Univer-
sity College of London; results are expected to be made available in
September 2013.)
In case the record is used as a primary source, to reconstruct deci-
sion-making processes for example, it is important to be able to verify
all aspects of the record, text as well as physical characteristics. It is
also very important to know for sure whether all available documents
have been digitized and indexes are complete. When using the record
as a reference or a secondary source of information about something
other than the archive itself—for example, a remark in a diary about
where and when some photographs are bought—then only the text is
important, assuming the authenticity of the diary is stated. Knowing
this, research needs as mentioned in the ICA Code of Ethics (1996a)
are met by always offering access to digitized records as well as to their
originals, even when digitizing has been performed for preservation
purposes; very fragile objects can be protected by limiting physical
access to those researchers actually needing verification.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 37

Fig. 4. Although the description of this record tells us it is of Japanese origin, neither the
description nor the image itself is very clear about the materials, Japanese paper and drawing
chalk, that make this object quite special. National Archives of the Netherlands, The Hague,
Nederlandse Factorij in Japan, Catalog reference number 1.04.21, Inventory number 610.

4.4 INTRINSIC VALUE

Because research needs can change over time, it is difficult to know
what elements or characteristics of records are worth preserving, and
as such, should not be amended solely for the sake of digitizing. This
probably depends on the values attached to the records. Legal, intrinsic,
and information value are the terms used in the ICA Code of Ethics
(1996a), of which legal value is well-defined and non-questionable,
because this value has already been evaluated during appraisal and
selection of the archive. However, some physical aspects, like seals, add
to legal value because they are integral to the authenticity of the record.
Information value is defined by the SAA as “content, independent
of any intrinsic or evidential value,” in other words, text. Intrinsic value
is defined as “the usefulness or significance of an item derived from
its physical or associational qualities, inherent in its original form and
generally independent of its content, that are integral to its material
38 Gabriëlle Beentjes

nature and would be lost in reproduction” (Pearce-Moses 2005).

It is the first time archival terminology shows awareness of losing
specific features of an object in the process of reproduction. However,
it is still quite difficult to decide what physical or associational qualities
inherent in its original form are useful or significant, because often
these qualities are either subjective or dependent on context. One
parchment binding in a collection of 1000 linen bindings is special;
the same binding among 500 parchment bindings might become just
part of the collection with nothing inherently special about it. Cri-
teria for intrinsic value set by the 1980 Committee on Intrinsic Value
established by the U.S. National Archives and Records Service (NARA
1999), such as “physical form that may be the subject for study if the
records provide meaningful documentation or significant examples of
the form” and “unique or curious physical features,” do not help very
much either, as these are still subjective and dependent of context.
Because the Committee was aware of the subjectivity of such criteria,
it advised collaboration with researchers and materials experts (for
example, conservators) to make reliable decisions about what is worth
keeping and what is not. In other words, it is not a purely archival deci-
sion what physical characteristics should be preserved; it should be a
joint exercise in valuation.
Just like conservation, which “increases some of an object’s pos-
sible functionalities or values, very often at the cost of decreasing
others” (Muñoz Viñas 2005, 180), digitization decreases the possible
meanings of the object by favoring some aspects of the object, i.e. its
textual information value, by making those aspects broadly accessible,
while neglecting other aspects like the object’s physical characteristics.
Digitization could even lead to damaging the originals and, possibly,
within the reality of limited budgets, result in lower investment in
their conservation, resulting in an even greater decrease in the value
of the originals.

5. Decision Making in Practice (The Dutch National Archives)

When conservators and archivists of the National Archives of the
Netherlands started to discuss preparation for digitization and tried to
develop a decision-making model (fig. 5), the result was mainly prac-
tice driven. The most important problems in preparing for digitization
Fig. 5. Decision-making model to aid decisions on how to prepare records for digitization, as
developed by the Conservation Department of the National Archives of the Netherlands in 2011.
40 Gabriëlle Beentjes

appeared to be damage, tight bindings, and overlapping fixed texts.

Apart from these object-related problems, in most projects time and
money were restricted, which obviously influenced decisions made
and methods of treatment chosen.
Since the presentation of the decision-making model at the AIC
Conference (Beentjes 2011), several collections have been prepared at
the Dutch National Archives (DNA), and it appeared that condition
and accessibility were foremost in guiding preparation of the records.
If accessibility was limited because of damage, then the first measures
to be taken were to stabilize the damage and at the same time restore
access, taking into account the digitizing method. When the physical
condition was fair and adjusting the appearance of the object was at
stake, decisions were influenced by physical accessibility, goal of the
digitization (substitution or making accessible on a broader scale),
and value or status of the archive (UNESCO World Heritage or “just”
mutual Dutch-colonial heritage).
Because it is so difficult to establish the value of records, and
more specifically the value of their physical aspects, in practice the
restorers and archivists of the DNA based their decisions on the pos-
sibility of consulting the original records (including damage-related
arguments), and the probability that a researcher would like to study
exactly that digitized page on which the text is not 100% in focus. Two
examples are given to illustrate how these two key points are applied
in decision making.

5.1 THE SURINAM ARCHIVES

The Dutch colonial institutions in Surinam formed the Surinam
archives. From 1916 on, they were transported to the Netherlands due
to the lack of a proper local facility in which to store them. Last year,
Surinam opened a new state-of-the-art archival building, and it was
decided to bring the archives back to the Surinam National Archives.
However, before leaving the DNA, they will be digitized. More than half
of this archive, roughly 400 out of 700 meters, is severely damaged by
ink corrosion, acid, and water damage/fungi. Except for one category
that is beyond repair and considered lost, most of the damaged records
can be repaired but will remain very fragile even after treatment. If
tightly bound and/or side stitched, these records will be damaged
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 41

during physical access, but even more so during digitization.

Preventing damage is therefore one argument to cut some of the
bindings, in any case at least the side stitches, because the paper is
already damaged during ordinary page-turning and further damage is
anticipated to occur to the originals when pressed by the bookscan’s
glass plate. Another argument is that digital images will replace the
originals in the DNA. Almost half of the Dutch citizens of Surinam
origin live in the Netherlands (ACB Kenniscentrum 2010), and
they are expected to be the group most interested in these records.
After transport of the archives back to Surinam, they will only have
access to the digital version of the records and would have to travel to
Surinam to see the original. Therefore, it is important for the DNA to
have completely readable digital copies available. However, because it
also concerns cultural heritage of a sensitive period in Dutch-Surinam
history and is as such a socially and emotionally valuable archive,
wherever possible the records are kept in their original form.

5.2 THE ARCHIVES OF THE WEST INDIA COMPANY

The records of the West India Company are included in the
UNESCO Memory of the World Register (UNESCO 2011). Part of this
archive will be digitized. It is in a fairly good condition; damage is in
general limited to pages that are folded to fit in the parchment cover.
The records open beautifully, except for those that were rebound in the
past, probably in the 1950s and ’60s, considering the cardboard and
flying papers used. To access those rebound records and make proper
digitizing possible, the binding straps are torn loose from the cardboard
cover, a practice that is only acceptable based on the thought that no
structural damage or loss of information in or about the original docu-
ment is caused by doing this.
However, there are several serious issues with original bindings in
this archive. A lot of bindings contain single pages, folded and sewn
in combination with the following quire, which means text is disap-
pearing under the first page of the quire and appearing again at the
end of the quire, several pages later. In the original record, the text
can be reconstructed and read by turning the pages back and forth,
but the strips of paper are too small (1 cm maximum, more often even
less) to digitally capture the text on them. Where only fragments of
42 Gabriëlle Beentjes

letters appear at these edges, nothing is done, supposing this informa-

tion can be deduced from the visible text on the greater portion of the
paper. Where vital information would be lost digitally, like figures in
an account, the paper is incised when possible and slid from under-
neath the quire. The result is a loose leaf with some incisions, without
damage to the original binding. The original position of the loose leaf
and the pages directly before and after it are documented by num-
bering them. If this procedure is not possible because of a complicated
sewing structure or the risk of causing too much damage, nothing is
done, anticipating that those researchers interested in the information
on this particular page will be invited to study the original, notwith-
standing the fact that it is digitally available. Thus, although this project
concerns preservation digitizing, it is accepted the original cannot be
fully replaced by the digital copy, as it contains more information than
can be captured digitally.

6. Conclusion
According to the ethical codes of both professions, archivists and con-
servators, records should be preserved in their physical form because
of the value attached to authenticity and integrity of the original.
However, sometimes accessibility is hindered by the physical form,
and in such cases it is considered an acceptable practice by both
archivists and conservators to adjust the original so that the record’s
textual information can be accessed. Strictly speaking, authenticity is
affected in such situations, although from a conservator’s viewpoint it
could also be stated that it is not authenticity but the record’s original
state that is affected. Authenticity in conservation is often seen as the
“true state” of the object, which can be considered a subjective term,
dependent on how we think the object looked when it was created. In
the archivist’s definition, if “the record is what it purports to be,” then
it is authentic. For example, a letter of William of Orange is a letter
of William of Orange because its paper and ink are contemporary, it
contains William’s handwriting and signature, and it is sealed with his
family crest. However, the way it was originally folded is traditionally
not considered to be a significant element of the letter, although for
a conservator, this would be part of the original state and as such, it
would be a characteristic that is important to preserve.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 43

Digitizing such a letter will make it broadly accessible, resulting

in less need to consult the original. Limiting access to the original
by referring to its digital copy is therefore a very justifiable method
of preserving it: it prevents mechanical damage caused by handling.
On the other hand, digitization of the letter of William of Orange will
probably be focused on the text and signature of William while trying
to minimize the effect of the folds in the paper as they could hinder the
readability of the letter. The seal will only be visible if it is captured with
special lighting. Thus, digitally, it is not the same letter with the same
characteristics of authenticity as the original, although it is supposed to
be reliable. This also means that though the letter is broadly accessible,
at the same time, possible methods and subjects of research are limited:
the digital image does not offer the same complex details and charac-
teristics as the original, like the folding lines and details of the seal.
Therefore, even if preservation digitizing guidelines would prescribe
capturing all characteristics of the letter, its digital copy can and will
never be a replacement of the original.
Adjusting records to be able to digitize them is contradictory to the
ethical codes of both archivists and conservators. At this moment, the
argument most often heard in favor of adjustment is creating broader
access of the records by digital availability. However, this only accounts
for their textual content. It must not be allowed that after digitization,
all that is left in the repository are records that are damaged not only
by the unintended wear and tear incurred during normal use, but also
by deliberate adjustments, resulting in records that are easy to digitize
but in which several non-textual information values are sacrificed. In
pursuit of creating broad access to interesting and important archives,
serious attention should be given to the possibilities of creating digital
access without causing any damage whatsoever to the original, perhaps
by developing more affordable, sophisticated digitizing techniques. In
any case, it is paramount to reserve enough in the budget for proper
conservation of the originals before and after digitization, as they will
always be our most complete and reliable sources of information.
In practice, damage and goal of the project appear to be important
factors in decisions concerning adjustment of records on behalf of dig-
itization, even before other values such as authenticity and integrity are
discussed. An archive that is severely damaged can be restored while
44 Gabriëlle Beentjes

taking into account amendments for digitization. For example, one can
disbind a severely damaged book to make conservation of the separate
pages easier, and at the same time facilitate the digitizing process.
Because access to the original records will be limited, an archive
that will not be physically available to the institution that offers access
to it, such as a private archive or an archive that will be returned to its
former owner, will probably have to be digitized in more detail than an
archive that will still be available in the repository. However, the extent of
amendments allowed, if any, should always be discussed with the owner.
Digitization of original records is an efficient and valuable way to
let the world know what kinds of beautiful, interesting, and important
documents are kept by archival institutions. However, digital images of
records should be considered as literal, not authentic, representations
of the originals. They can tell a lot, but will never contain all the his-
toric, emotional, and social characteristics and values embodied in the
originals that make them so unique and valuable. Therefore, original
records should be kept in as original and reliable states as possible,
which means not only not adjusting them to produce copies, but more
importantly by making an enduring investment in conservation and
restoration to keep them accessible for the use of future generations.

Acknowledgments
Many thanks to all colleagues of the National Archives and National
Library of the Netherlands for their input, help, cooperation, and criti-
cism while developing the flowchart. Thanks to the interviewees for
sharing their thoughts on the use of physical and digitized documents
with me. A very big thank you to Rob for our inspiring discussions
during thinking about and writing this article. All illustrations appear
courtesy of the National Archives of the Netherlands.

Notes
1. Websites for the digital European cultural heritage projects are: APEnet
(Archives Portal Europe) at www.apenet.eu; APEx at www.apex-project.eu;
Europeana at www.europeana.eu; and the EU Digital Agenda at www.ec.europa.eu/
information_society/activities/ict_psp (accessed 05/18/2012).
2. An overview of guidelines on digitizing paper-based documentary heritage can
be found at www.minervaeurope.org/guidelines.htm, accessed 05/18/12.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 45

References
ACB Kenniscentrum (2010). Surinamers in Nederland. www.
acbkenniscentrum.nl/publicatie/surinamers-in-nederland (accessed
05/25/2012).
Bearman, F. 1997. Conservation principles and ethics: Their origin and
development. IPC conference papers London 1997: Proceedings of the Fourth
International Conference of the Institute of Paper Conservation 6–9 April
1997, ed. J. Eagan. 83–89.
Bearman, D., and R. Lytle. 2000. The power of the principle of provenance.
Context: Interpretatiekaders in de archivistiek. Jaarboek. ‘s-Gravenhage:
Stichting Archiefpublicaties. 29–44.
Beentjes, G. 2011. Digitizing archives; Does it keep or destroy the originals?
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Institute for Con-
servation, Philadelphia.
British Library. 2011. Endangered Archives Programme. Guidelines for
copying archival material. http://eap.bl.uk/downloads/guidelines_copying.
pdf (accessed 06/27/2012).
Cunha, G. M., and D. G. Cunha. 1971. Conservation of library materials. A
manual and bibliography on the care, repair and restoration of library mate-
rials. 2nd ed. Metuchen, N.J.: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.
Den Teuling, A. J. M. 2007. Archiefterminologie voor Nederland en Vlaan-
deren. ‘s-Gravenhage, Holland: Stichting Archiefpublicaties.
Digital Library Federation. 2004. Benchmark for faithful digital reproductions
of monographs and serials. Version 1, December 2002. http://old.diglib.org/
standards/bmarkfin.htm (accessed 02/14/13).
Dormolen, H. van. 2012. Metamorfoze Preservation Imaging Guidelines. The
Hague: National Library of the Netherlands.
Duranti, L. 1989. Diplomatics. New uses of an old science. Archivaria 28:7–27.
Duranti, L. 1995. Reliability and authenticity. The concepts and their implica-
tions. Archivaria 39:5–10.
ECCO. 2003. E.C.C.O. Professional Guidelines (II): Code of Ethics. Brussels:
European Confederation of Conservator-Restorers’ Organisations.
Ellis, R. H. and P. Walne, eds. 2003. Selected writings of Sir Hilary Jenkinson.
Reissue with a new introduction by T. M. Eastwood. Chicago: Society of
American Archivists.
FADGI. 2010. Technical guidelines for digitizing cultural heritage materials:
Creation of raster image master files. Federal Agencies Digitization Initia-
tive, Still Image Working Group. www.digitizationguidelines.gov (accessed
06/14/12).
46 Gabriëlle Beentjes

Foot, M. 2006a. Bookbinders at work. Their roles and methods. Newcastle,

Del.: Oak Knoll Press.
Foot, M. 2006b. Preservation policy and planning. Preservation management
for libraries, archives and museums. Ed. G. Gorman and S. Shep. London:
Facet Publishing. 19–41.
Gouw, J. L. van der. 1955. Inleiding tot de archivistiek. Zwolle: W. E. J. Tjeenk
Willink.
ICA. 1996a. Code of Ethics. International Council of Archivists. www.ica.org
(accessed 06/13/12).
ICA. 1996b. Authenticity of electronic documents. International Council of
Archivists. www.ica.org (accessed 06/13/12).
IFLA UNESCO. 2002. Guidelines for Digitization Projects for collections
and holdings in the public domain, particularly those held by libraries and
archives. http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s19/pubs/digit-guide.pdf (accessed
06/13/12).
Library of Congress. 1998. Manuscript Digitization Demonstration Project.
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/pictel/ (accessed 05/18/12).
Muñoz-Viñas, S. 2005. Contemporary Theory of Conservation. Amsterdam:
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
NARA. 1999. Intrinsic Value in Archival Material, Staff Information Paper
Number 21. Web version based on National Archives and Records
Administration, (1982). Washington, DC. Available from: www.archives.
gov/research/alic/reference/archives-resources/archival-material-
intrinsic-value.html (accessed 05/21/2012).
NARA. 2004. Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Archival Materials for
Electronic Access: Creation of Production Master Files – Raster Images.
U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. www.archives.gov/
preservation/technical/guidelines.pdf (accessed 02/14/13).
Parliamentary Archives. 2008. Digitisation Guidelines. London: Parliamen-
tary Archives, Houses of Parliament. Pearce-Moses, R. 2005. A Glossary
of Archival and Records Terminology. Society of American Archivists.
www.archivists.org/glossary (accessed 05/19/12).
Poole, N. 2010. The cost of digitizing Europe’s cultural heritage. A report for
the Comité des Sages of the European Commission. The Collections Trust.
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/digital_libraries/doc/
refgroup/annexes/digiti_report.pdf (accessed 02/14/13).
Rekrut, A. 2006. Reconnecting mind and matter: materiality in archival
theory and practice. M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba/University of
Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
To Treat or Not to Treat: Decision Making in Preparing Archives for Digitization 47

Stoller, A. 2010. Along the archival grain: Epistemic anxieties and colonial
common sense. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Taylor, H. 1995.“Heritage” revisited: Documents as artifacts in the context of
museums and material culture. Archivaria 40:8–20.
UNESCO. 2011. Memory of the World: Dutch West India Company
(Westindische Compagnie) Archives. www.unesco.org/new/en/
communication-and-infor mation/f lagship-projec t-ac tivities/
memor y-of-the-world/register/full-list-of-registered-heritage/
registered-heritage-page-2/dutch-west-india-company-westindische-
compagnie-archives/#c215081 (accessed 05/25/12).
Williams, C., and Proctor, M. 2011. Editorial, Journal of the Society of Archi-
vists 32(1): 1–3.

Author Biography
GABRIËLLE BEENTJES  has worked as a paper conservator at several
archives in the Netherlands. In September 2011, she started a Master of
Research Heritage Science at University College of London. Since 2008, she has
been senior adviser in conservation at the National Archives of the Netherlands,
where she coordinates work in the conservation studio, with staff consisting of
four established conservators and a variable number of conservators working on
projects. A major activity for the past few years has been preparing for digitization,
a kind of work that demands a new attitude towards archival records and their
conservation. Thinking of effective, efficient, and above all ethical treatments,
led to the development of a flowchart to help make stakeholders aware of the
consequences of decisions made in preparing for digitization. Writing this
article as a theoretical background on how to treat records made Gabriëlle and
her colleagues (archivists as well as conservators) even more aware of the special
characteristics of archives. Address: drs Gabriëlle Beentjes, Nationaal Archief,
Postbus 90520, 2509 LM The Hague, The Netherlands; gabrielle.beentjes@
nationaalarchief.nl