sign in sign up
<<
Home , Book, Presentation copy, Provenance

Provenance Records in Rare and Special Collections

JUDITH A. OVERMIER and ElAINE M. DOAK

Provenance records provide access (0 evidence about a book's previous ownership. Those records are d on physica l evidence present in the book. The physical evidence o f ownership ra kes many fo rms, such as bookplates, signarures , inscriptions, sramps, marginal annotatio ns, and branded bind in gs. The lire rarure ancl ora l tradition of the rare book world have always suggested that records of previo us ownership and their physical formal should be ma in ta ined fo sentime ntal reasons and for the ir research va lue to literary, historical, and bibliographical scholarship. That va lu e has been affirmed in rhe w ri tings of numerous based both in the professio n of li brary and info rmation science and in a broad variety of o ther subject disciplines. I Traditional recognition of the impo rrance of provenance evi dence has been confirmed and expanded by th e developme nt of the "new" history of the book and its exploratio ns into the social hislOry of book productio n, rea ding, book ownership, book , and persona l and private histo ry.2 It has been recommended that the evid e nce of each book's provenance be maintained in natio nal bibliographic databases in standardized and location so th at it is searchable and retrievabl e by library users and library personne 1. 5 The profession has sought to fa cilitate (his by establishi ng basic authori ty standards, both for name and format , in such ca taloging 100is as AACR2R, Descriptive Cataloging oj Rare , and Provenance Evidence: Thesaurus for Use in Rare Book a nd Special Collections Calaloging.,j It is clear from the published work of literary, hi sto ri cal , and bibliogra phic researchers that they access provenance evide nce both by name and by format and that such evidence is impo rtant to them. It is also evident from professional and research that although th e traditions and scholarship of li brari anship recommend the ma intenance of provenance records, li brari es arc not "systemati c o r thoro ug h" in doing 50.5

j udirh A. Overmier is Associate Pro fessor in the School of Librd.ry and Studies at the University of O klahoma, Norman. Ela ine M. Doak is Special Collecrions !Arc hivisl al Truman Stare University in Kirksv ille, Missouri.

91 92 RARE BOOKS & L1BRARIANSHIP

Because this type of record is not one of the basic or standard catalog entri es, the facilitation of access by scholars depends upon the voluntary efforts of rare book and special collections personnel to include provenance informat ion in ca talog records or to maintain spec ial files. We have sought to describe current practices in maintaining provenance fil es and to determine the extent to which rare book and special coll ections departments actually incorporate provenance evidence into th eir cataloging records in a standardized form and location.

CURRENT PRACTICE For this survey of current provenance file practices in rare book and special coll ections , we identified 474 rare book and special collections departments using Rare Books, 1983-84: Trends, Collections, Sources, edited by Alice D. Sc hreyer (New York: Bowker, 1984) and Directory of Special Libraries and Information Centers(Detroit: Ga le, 1990). Four categories of collections eliminated from that list prior to and during the initial progress of the study were: a) coll ections in medical libraries because they were covered in a previous study, b) co llections that were primarily archival in natu re with a focus not on books and also because "provenance" is defined differently by , c) collecti ons that were duplicated in the two sources used to identify collecti ons (i.e., each coll ection was included only once), and d) collections that no longer exist. The reSUlting 344 coll ections formed the final population; 248 coll ections returned the survey instrument, yielding a response rate of 72 perce nt. Of these 248 respondents, only 82 (33%) re plied that they maintained a provenance fil e. There are commonly expressed beliefs that the geographic location of coll ecti ons, the size of their holdings, and/or the length of thei r existence impact many aspects of professional practice in rare book and special collections libraries. These beliefs prompted an analysis of the relationships between maintaining or not maintaining a prove nance file and the characteristics of geographic location, size of holdings, and age of the responding libraries. To determine whether or not thef(~ exists a relationship between the maintenance of provenance files and those three ch aracteristics, we tested the data using the Chi Square statistic (X'). We used this test because this portion of the study contains categori ca l da ta. For this analys is, the level at which results were considered significa nt was set at p<.05. The 248 responding coll ections are distributed widely throughout the United States; so too, it appears, are the 82 respondents reporting that they do maintain a provenance file, as shown in figure l. It is the case, however, that the likelihood of having a provenance fil e is statisti cally related to geographical location when locati on is parsed dichoto­ mously. Collections located east of the Mississippi are more likely than those in the west to have provenance fil es (X'~7.23, df~l , p~ .OI). Collection sizes of the 248 respondents range from 119 volumes to 900,000 titles/volumes (with thirteen of unknown size, or only 5%). Collection sizes of pOSitive respondents range from 600 volumes to 900,000 (W ith three unknown, or PROVENANCE RECORDS 93

iwi' ~h'~~ ~ ~ ~UB! , \ :l <:: 0 ." "<:: 0c.. ;a'" .... .~ 0 ~ s~ 0 ~ s~ s! z . ~~ i -!'l % ,;• .~ ~ 5~ ~ :=~ q ... '"" q ~ ~ s "~ "<:: ! 81 s ~ d "'~ Sn sU 0/) .S;. " 8 _6 == • O. :l ~ S! .~ _ ;t 00 <:: ~ - ~ , ~O ." s . "<:: ! a. 8- s~ ....~ .§ s I 0 0 ~ z • !1 d - i < S ! • s i ~ ~ 3•

o 94 RARE BOOKS & MANUSCRIPTS LIBRARIANSHIP only 4%), while collection sizes of negative resp'ondents range from 119 to 604,000 (with ten unknown, or only 6%). One might suspect that larger collections, possibly because they have more staff available and have invested more time and money in the collections, are more likely to have provenance files. To determine if the likelihood of having a provenance file is related to the number of volumes in the collection, we divided the collections into four size categories, <24,999 (Y=23, N=99); 25,000-49,999 (Y=16, N=29); 50,000-99,999 (Y=12, N=16); >100,000 (Y=8, N=12). The likelihood of having a provenance file is statistically related to the number of volumes in the collection. Indeed, the likelihood of a collection's having a provenance file increases monotonically from 19 percent to 70 percent with the size of the collection (X'=36.79, df=3, p=.OOl) Founding dates of the collections of the 248 respondents range from 1731 to 1990 (with 30 unknown, or 12%). The founding dates of positive respondents range from 1731 to 1980 (with five unknown, or only 6%), while the founding dates of negative respondents range from 1748 to 1990 (with 25 unknown, or 15%). Oral tradition maintains that older collections are more likely to maintain a provenance file. To assess whether the likelihood of having a provenance file is related to the founding date of the collection, we categorized the collections by the time periods, <1899 (Y=10, N=l1); 1900- 1945 (Y=23, N=24); 1946-1959 (Y=15, N=25); 1960- 1969 (Y=16, N=36); 1970-1979 (Y=12, N=34); >1980 (Y=I, N=l1) The likelihood of having a provenance file is statisically related to the founding date of the collection. The older the library is, the more likely it is to have a provenance file (X'=1l.30, df=5, p=.047). It is clear from the statistical analysis that the collection characteristics of geographic location, size of holdings, and/or length of existence are, in fact, related to the maintenance of provenance files. Specifically, the data show that coll ections east of the Mississippi are more likely to have provenance files) that the larger the collection the more likely it is to have provenance files, and that the older the library the more likely it is to have provenance files. The maintenance of provenance files in national bibliographic databases in standardized form and location is recommended by the profession. At the same time, it is clear that collections do not always do so. To what extent do rare book and special collections departments actually incorporate provenance evidence into their cataloging records and in what form' Only 42 (51%) of the 82 respondents that reported maintaining provenance file records reported making such records for the entire collection. Those that do not make provenance records for the entire collection commented that records are kept "off and on" or only for some portion or portions of the collection. These select portions were specified as a) locally significant individuals, b) specific authors, c) categories of authors, d) noted individuals, e) "interesting" inscriptions, f) the "most important," g) relevantto local or subject history, h) of widely recognized prominence, i) older works, j) rare works, and k) selected subject areas. Table 1 shows categories of entries made in the provenance ftles of reporting rare book/special collections, ranked by dle percentage oflibraries giving positive responses. PROVENANCE RECORDS 95

We learned also th at particular kinds of provenance evidence are recorded, such as owner's signatures, branded bindings, labels of various kinds, bookplate mottoes for unidentified owners, release stamps , withdrawn stamps, primer's copies, shelfmarks, institutional bookplates, any identifiable mark of ownership, armorial bindings, bookbinders' tickets , marginal notes, review copies, , and external evidence such as aucti on records. And we learned that only sixteen (20%) of the 82 positive respondents record illegible marks of ownership. Only 42 (5 1%) of the 82 coll ecti ons maintaining provenance records reported keeping those records online. Twenty-three (54%) of these 42 reported using the MARC 755 field to provide physical characteristics access as is recommended in Provenance Evidence by the Standards Committee of ACRL's Rare Books and Manuscripts (RBMS). [Ed. note, The 755 field has recently been eliminated;

TABLE 1 Provenance File Characteristcs of Respondents (N=82)

File Entries Number Entering % Entering Owner's signature 75 91% Personal owner's bookplates 74 90 Recipient of presentation 68 83 Presenter of 68 83 Personal library stamps 56 68 Owner's binding 50 61 Institutional library stamps 44 54 all data origina ll y recorded there are now recorded in 655 ( term-/ form).] Of the 42 collecti ons maintaining their provenance records online, 35 (83%) used local note fields, nine (21%) used record level note fields, and 27 (64%) used name added entri es for former owners. Only a dishearte ning 23 (280/0) of the 82 respondents reported using the provenance terms established by the RBMS Standards Committee. Nine (11%) reported using in-house lists of terms or natural language terms.

RELATION TO OTIlER STIJDIES The only previous research study of provenance practices6 focused on medical rare book libraries and found that only fifteen (21%) of seventy respondents maintained a provenance file. The percentages of the medical collections making the more common provenance file entries are compared to the current results in table 2. This table highlights, for the most part, similarities between the practice of specialized medical rare book collections and the more general group of rare book and special collections li braries surveyed for this present study. One noticeable difference is the apparent devaluing of personal library stamps as provenance evidence by medical rare book collections. 96 RARE BOOKS & MANUSCRIPTS LIBRARIANSHIP

DISCUSSION This survey of current practice confirms that the extent to which rare book and special collections departments actually incorporate provenance records into their catalog records is both limited and lacking in standardization. Provenance evidence was recorded only by a disappointing one-third (N~82) of respondents (N~248). Further, the data indicate that collections founded after World War II are less and less likely to maintain provenance records. This may reflect the results of increasing demands for justification of collecting policies and staff allocation in rare book and special collections departments. Further empirical research to determine administrative or scholarly impediments to maintaining provenance files is clearly needed. Or, the data may reflect the disrepute into which the book and its evocative and emotive powers have fallen from the time when Harry B.

TABLE 2 Comparative Provenance File Characteristics

% Medical % General File Entries (N ~70) (N~82) Owner's Signature 93% 91% Personal owner's bookplates 87 90 Recipient of presentation copy 73 83 Presenter of presentation copy 80 83 Personal library stamps o 68 Owner's binding 40 61 Institutional library stamps 60 54

Smith (1860-1936) embraced the collecting of association copies and influenced a generation of collectors with A Sentimental Library. Whatever the data reflect, the critical fact is that they reveal an unfortunate trend that is exactly opposite to advocated practice. "Sentiment" aside, scholarly research-which more often than we care to admit contains a rich element of "sentiment"- often finds in provenance evidence a critical source of information and even stimulation; for example, Fermat's Last Theorem, written in the margin of a book he owned, spurred mathematicians on for centuries to solve a problem that, according to his note, should have been easy to solve. The provenance evidence of this note was crucial in stimulating research for about 300 years. This study's respondents did appear to be fully knowledgeable about provenance evidence in the collection and about its research value, whether or not a provenance file was maintained. Several respondents provided provenance examples from their own or other collections: the at Indiana University, Bloomington, holds a presentation copy of Ernest Hemingway's Death in the Afternoon to Gertrude Stein. The presentation inscription reads in part, "To Gertrude Stein, A Bitch is A Bitch is A Bitch is a Bitch, from her pal Ernest PROVENANCE RECORDS 97

Hemingway." The John H. Percival Collection on Magic, Department of Special Coll ections, Providence holds a copy of Blackstone's Modern Card Tricks (New York: George Scully, 1932) in which the presentation reads, "To John H. Percival, One Horsethief to Another; Harry Blackstone." The presentation is accompanied on the facing by a self-portrait and the signature of Harry Blackstone, dated 5-10-1946. The University Libraries at University of Notre Dame reports that clippings in their copy of Operajoannis Pici.. Mirandule Comitis Concordie.. litterae principis.. novissime accurate revisa (addito generali sup omnibus memoratu dignis regesto) aurumcunxx facultatum projessoribus tam iucunda qx proficua that the book was given to Christopher Columbus by Archbishop Ximenes, and then it was left to the Biblioteca Columbina of the Cathedral of Seville; it was then taken to Peru by missionaries, where it was confiscated by S. T. S. Coralla de la Braganza, who "confessed" to the theft in his presentation inscription, which he ends with a request: "Gentle Reader in your Charity remember me." And the library of the Silverado owns a presentation copy of Rab and His Friends from the , Scottish physician John Brown to Robert Louis Stevenson on his wedding day, May 19, 1880. Although respondents are cognizant of provenance evidence, it must be recognized that this knowledge will be "lost" in those collections where the appropriate provenance records are not maintained whenever the relevent staff is absent or turns over. The problem of access for scholars is compounded by the fact that only half of the 82 respondents incorporating provenance files in their cataloging records do so for the entire collection. The collections' self-imposed decisions on inclusion of only selected formats or names that are reported in this study limit comprehensive access to scholars. These limitations preclude such possibilities as ordinary individuals becoming famous, researchers geographically located well beyond local collections being interested in local individuals (famous or not), and research changing so that it is possible for people to be of historical interest precisely because they are not famous.

RECOMMENDATIONS Given the many digressions that scholarship may take in the future , provenance records should be made for all names of institutions and indiViduals, even those that are illegible, since visiting experts might eventually identify those for the library. The difficulty of knowing which individuals or institutions will be of scholarly import in the future is paralleled by the difficulty of knowing which provenance fo rmats will be of future research interest. Therefore entries should be made for all provenance formats. Such entries should be based on the RBMS thesaurus of provenance evidence. The thesaurus represents professional consensus on a broad list of carefully formulated terms. The thesaurus terms are appropriate for use in local manual files as well as in national databases and should be in far wider use than that reported in this study. Provenance evidence should be entered into national databases using -readable cataloging, the assigned MARC 755 bibliographic record field for physical characteristics, and other appropriate 98 RARE BOOKS & MANUSCRIPTS LlBRARlANSHIP fields and standards so that records a re universall y searchable. This includes using AACR2R to create notes so that name-added entri es can be made. This advice reconfirms the recommendations for standards made by Thomas (see note 3), who provides excell ent examples of the way a lack of standardization , especially the u se of homegrown local solutions, has impeded universal access in the past, and by Adkins (see note 3) in her discussion of automated cataloging.

SUMMARY The professional stance on the importance to scholarship of recording all provenance evidence in national databases in standardized form and location is well established. Unfortunately for scholars, implementation of these recommendations is not widespread. Collections maintaining provenance fil es should be comme nded for their contributions to scholarship. We hope that this article's documentation ofthe dearth of such files and of the variability of methods of creating them will encourage more coll ections to facilitate scholarl y access by compiling these files and modifying povenance file practices to meet cu rrent standards.

NOTES 1. Frederick B. Adams Jr., The Uses 0/ Provenance (Los Angeles: School of Library Service, 1969); John Ca rter, ABC/or Book Col/ect01·S. 5th ed. (London: Rupert Hart­ Davis, 1972); Salvatore J. Iacone, "Inscribed Books and Literary Scholarship," in A Miscellany/or Bibliophiles, ed. H. George Fletcher. (New York: Grastorf & Lang, 1979); Oumership of Books: An into Provenance ([oronro: Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto, 1994); F. B. de Marez Oyens, "ISTC and Provenance," in Bib/iograpby and the Study of 15th-Century (London: British Library Occasional 5, 1987); John Sparrow, Association Copies (Los Angeles:Jonathan Hill, 1978); Lawrence C. Wroth, "A Negation and Some Affirmations, " Library Trends 5 (1957): 422- 25. 2. David Pearson, Provenance Research in : A Handbook (London: British Library, 1994)j Kathleen Scott, "Caveat : Ownership and Standardization in the Illustrati on of Fifteenth-Century English Manuscripts," in English Studies 1100-1700, ed. Peter Beal and Jeremy Griffiths (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989); Robert Alan Shaddy, "A World of Sentimental Auachments: The Cult of Collecting, 1890-1930," Book Collector 43 (1994): 185-200; Roger E. Stoddard, Marks in Books (Ca mbridge, Mass.: Houghton Library, 1985); Tbis Is My Book: The Brown Provenance Exhibit (ProVidence, RI.: John Carter Brown Library, 1989). 3.John B. Thomas HI, "The Necessity of Standards in an AU[Qmared Environment," Library Trends 36 (J987): 125- 39; Susan A. Adkins, "Automated Ca taloging of Rare Books: A Time for Implementati on, " Collection Management 16 (1992): 89-102. 4. AACR2R, Descriptive Cataloging o/RareBooks, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1991); Provenance Evidence: Thesaurus/or Use in Rare Book and Special Collections Cataloging (Chicago: Association of College & Research Libraries, 1988). 5. Roderick Cave, Rare Book Librarianship, 2d ed. (London: Clive Bingley, 1982), 33. 6. Judith A. Overmier and Lilli Sentz, "Medical Rare Book Provenance," Bulletin of the Medical LibrUlY Association 75 Qanuary 1987): 14-18. PROVENANCE RECORDS 99

APPENDIX: QUESTIONS FROM SURVEY INSTRUMENT

What year was the library's rare book/special coll ections unit established? Please estimate how many tirles _____and /or voiumes, _____ in the unit. Does the rare book/special collections unit have a provenance file? yes no, ___ If no, please return this lette r in the enclosed . If yes, please a nswer the following questions. Does your fil e include entries yes no for personal owner's bookplates? for owner 's bindings? for owner's signature? for recipient of presentation copy? for presenter of presentation copy? for institutio nal library stamps? for personal library stamps? for other' (please specify)

Do YOll make a record of illegible marks of ownership? Is your provenance card a standard catalog card? Is your provenance card a special format? Do you make the provenance card at the time of cataloging the book? Are your prove nance records kept online? If yes, do YOll use MARC field 755? do you use the provenance evidence terms • prepared by the RBMS Standards Committee' • other terms? (please specify) do you put the former owner names in name-added e ntry fields along with relator terms? do you put provenance info rmation in the • local note fi elds? • record-level note fields? do you put provenance information elsewhere in the online record' (please specify) ______Are provenance records made for the e ntire rare book/ special coll ections unit? If no, please specify the portions for which provenance records are made

What year did the unit begin mai ntaining provenance records? ______

THE GREAT BIBLE A facsimile of the 1539 Originally belonging to the Fry collection in the Bible House Library of England Gold stamped Gilt top with Pull-Case Size 28cm (wide) x 42cm (high) Limited Edition ISBN4-900394-09-2 Price US$ 2500 _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.- BISHOPS' BIBLE A facsimile of the 1568 edition Originally belonging to the Fry collection in the Bible House Library of England Cloth-Binding, with Pull-Case Size 28cm (wide) x 42cm (high) Limited Edition To be published in April 1997 Price US$ 2210 Please correspond with FAX or

tit e I piS CO., L TO.

c/ o Sanyo Building. 7, Kanda Nishikicho 2-chome, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, Japan Fax 03-3291-1344 (From U.S.A. & Canada 011-81-3-3291-1344)