Archival authority information consists of information describing the context in which archival records (defined broadly here to include personal papers and records of organizations other than the parent institution of the repository) have been created and used. The recording of this information in archival information tools directly supports both the accurate description of the archival records as well as the provenance approach to retrieval of these records.

A description of archival records sufficient to support the accurate interpretation of the records must include a description of the circumstances which surrounded the creation and use of the records. Primary among these circumstances is an accurate recording of information about the creative responsibility for the records which is vested in an organization or person. That information can include: the name of the organization or person, the functions they performed or activities they participated in, their relationship to other organizations or persons; a classification of the organization or person by various criteria (such as type of organization, ethnicity, nationality), their relationships to geographic locations, and the like. With this information, the user can interpret more completely and accurately the records since he or she will know the context within which the organization or person operated and created records.

Similarly, archival authority information is key to supporting the identification and retrieval of record descriptions and records. User queries must often be parsed initially by determining which organizations or persons were involved with the functions or activities which the user is seeking to retrieve records on (e.g., "what control did the university exercise over student organizations?" = which university offices were responsible for dealing with student organizations and what records did they maintain), or by determining which organizations or persons meet a set of characteristics that the user is studying ("what activities were the first women students at Yale involved in?" = who were the women students at Yale in 1968). These questions cannot generally be answered by searching record descriptions, either in a catalog or in a finding aid, but must be addressed by first consulting reference sources to determine the appropriate search terms to use.

Examples of how archival authority information has been recorded

The profession has long recognized the importance and value of recording archival authority information, although generally not in a structured or content-designated way. The following descriptions identify eight practices, systems, or standards in or by which archival authority information has been recorded. This group is almost certainly not exhaustive and descriptions of their functionality are subject to closer review and information gathering.

1. Finding aids for archival records and personal papers have long included either an administrative history or biographical sketch as an introduction to the user to the life and activities of the organization or person who created the described materials. This information has usually been recorded either in narrative text whose structure and content were left to the archival processor or in chronological lists. (See the finding aid for the Cyrus Vance papers at Yale which has both: http://webtext.library.yale.edu/sgml2html/mssa.1664.sgm.html ). While the encoding of finding aids in EAD makes this information identifiable and searchable - as a body (<bioghist>) - EAD provides no structure within this information and little content designation specific to the type of note.
    
2. Similarly, catalog records for archival records also have contained administrative history or biographical information - often much sketchier than that recorded in finding aids. With the advent of MARC-AMC in the US, this has been somewhat codified by recording in the 545 field, but there is no content designation at the subfield level. (See the sample RLIN bibliographic record for the Yale School of Art at: http://www.library.yale.edu/~rszary/Authority/MARCbib.html )
    
3. Discussion of the particular nature of archival authority information began in the mid-1980s, at least in the US, stimulated to some degree by the development of the MARC-AMC format. In designing the most effective ways of providing description and access tools for archival materials in the context of MARC-based systems, some archivists suggested that the MARC format for authority records might be a suitable vehicle, if enhanced, for recording, linking, and delivering this information. (Hence, the nomenclature of "archival authority information.") The MARC authority record contains fields that provide some of the content designation and linking that would be needed for archival authority information, in particular the see from (4xx) and see also from (5xx) tracings, the history reference (665), the source data found note (670), and the biographical or historical data note (678). The primary use of this format, however, is for vocabulary control of headings and practice, as well as content designation make it inadequate for the full range of functionality needed for archival authority information. In particular, current practice seems to favor recording the minimum amount of information needed to guide use of the heading. (See the sample MARC authority record for the Harvard University A.M. Program in Regional Studies--Russia, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia at: http://www.library.yale.edu/~rszary/Authority/MARCauthority.html )
    
4. Some RLG institutions, recognizing that the same organization often generated many sets of records, each with their own catalog record, and that the administrative history information applied equally well to all of the catalog records, defined a set of standards that allowed them to record an administrative history in a MARC-AMC record. These records are indistinguishable - as a record type - in the RLIN system, but they generally have common elements, such as title = "agency history record." They are often linked, via a 773 field (host item entry), to one or more records describing the records of the agency. (See the sample RLIN agency history record for the Pitts Theology Library at: http://www.library.yale.edu/~rszary/Authority/RLINhist.html )
    
5. Bright Sparcs is a web-based system used by the Australian Science Archives Project. (Gavan, please correct any of my erroneous description or elaborate where you think appropriate.) It includes biographical information about scientists who were Australian or worked in Australia and links from their biographical information to archival and published sources about or by them. A free text search can be performed on both the biographical information and record descriptions; a structured search can be performed on fields in the biographical information. (See http://www.asap.unimelb.edu.au/bsparcs/bsparcshome.htm ). I am not sure if the structure of the record descriptions is specific to Bright Sparcs and information from the range of repositories was modified to fit that structure, or if it represents a standard for record descriptions in Australia.
    
6. PhILS (the Philadelphia Information Locator Service) provides a web-based system for administrative histories and function descriptions for current and discontinued city agencies with links to record descriptions and web sites of current agencies. The agency information is retrieved by consulting an alphabetical list of agency names (either current or obsolete) and clicking on the name to retrieve an agency description and records descriptions. Information within the agency description is fielded by content. Within the agency information, links are generally provided to records for superior, subordinate, predecessor, and successor agencies. Neither the agency information nor the record descriptions are directly searchable. Record descriptions include archival records in the Philadelphia City Archives as well as active records in city agencies. Record descriptions are specific to PhILS and were either keyed in directly from written descriptions in the Archives or extracted from the automated records management system. Fields in the records descriptions are compatible with MARC-AMC. (See http://www.phila.gov/phils/Docs/Inventor/graphics/cityagen.htm ).
    
7. The National Archives of Australia maintains the RINSE database that provides access to the holdings of the National Archives consisting of 67,608 individual series, which were created since 1804 by 7,580 government agencies (departments, statutory authorities, offices etc), 611 individuals, and 116 organizations. The database contains detailed descriptive information about the entire collection. Separate record structures are available for record descriptions, agency information, functions, persons, and other associated organizations. Links are provided between various record types. Access appears to be primarily through selection of a record type (function, agency, organization, or person) and then browsing an alphabetical list of titles or pre-selected keywords. Access is also available by searching a known control number assigned to a record series. The functions records include scope notes and thesaurus-like entries to related concepts; agency, person, and organization records, as well as series descriptions are fielded by content.
    
8. The International Standard for Archival Authority Records (Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families) - ISAAR(CPF) - is not an implementation format, but a content standard for archival authority information adopted by the International Council on Archives (ICA). It arose partly out of reaction to the inclusion of this information in the International Standard for Archival Description (General) standard - ISAD(G). A number of archivists felt that, without a separate standard for archival authority information, the profession was risking reinforcing the commonly practiced mingling of authority information with records description. Following adoption of ISAD(G), the Ad Hoc Commission on Descriptive Standards developed and adopted ISAAR(CPF) as a separate standard. While ISAAR(CPF) starts from and acknowledges the role of authority records for vocabulary control, it also includes information that is not necessarily related to that function but which also allows the recording of information concerning the history, functions, and relationships of a corporate, personal, or family entity that can be used to identify these entities in a retrieval system or to interpret the context in which they created and used archival records. (See http://www.archives.ca/ica/cgi-bin/ica?04_e ) for the ISAD(G) and ISAAR(CPF) documents.)

This sampling of practices and systems demonstrates the value that the profession places on this information since it is so ubiquitous and since all archival descriptive standards and practices make provision for it. It also illustrates the lack of commonality amongst these implementations in terms of structure, content designation, and functionality.