Open Forum

Hi all,

Learning a lot from this forum, thank you!

I'm looking to learn from folks who have experience with retroactive numbering / accessioning.

I'm a former museum registrar and now a curator, sited within a very large art collection housed at a major city library. We oversee prints, drawings, photographs, paintings, sculpture. Basically we're a  museum within a public library system. My colleagues within the special collections department include rare books, maps and archives.  Hoping to streamline our processes and documentation methods, in 2020, we created an accession numbering system (tripartite) for all new acquisitions into special collections across curatorial departments.

The arts department, that I oversee, is about to create our first (ever) collection management database.  We have no accession numbers at the item or collection level for anything prior to 2020. No call numbers either. Occasionally we'll find a tripartite number on an object from long ago, but that is very rare. As we head into database work, I'd like to learn from others how they managed thousands (upon thousands) of items, acquired across decades, unnumbered.  Do we simply bulk assign upon migration of items into the new database as if a new collection? I'm used to working in very old collections with a variety of numbers, and adapting as necessary the few outliers, or with tidy modern & contemporary collections.

I might be overthinking this, so I turn to this group for wisdom and experience.

Many thanks in advance,

Kristin Parker
Lead Curator of the Arts
Boston Public Library
kparker@bpl.org

Hi all,

Learning a lot from this forum, thank you!

I'm looking to learn from folks who have experience with retroactive numbering / accessioning.

I'm a former museum registrar and now a curator, sited within a very large art collection housed at a major city library. We oversee prints, drawings, photographs, paintings, sculpture. Basically we're a  museum within a public library system. My colleagues within the special collections department include rare books, maps and archives.  Hoping to streamline our processes and documentation methods, in 2020, we created an accession numbering system (tripartite) for all new acquisitions into special collections across curatorial departments.

The arts department, that I oversee, is about to create our first (ever) collection management database.  We have no accession numbers at the item or collection level for anything prior to 2020. No call numbers either. Occasionally we'll find a tripartite number on an object from long ago, but that is very rare. As we head into database work, I'd like to learn from others how they managed thousands (upon thousands) of items, acquired across decades, unnumbered.  Do we simply bulk assign upon migration of items into the new database as if a new collection? I'm used to working in very old collections with a variety of numbers, and adapting as necessary the few outliers, or with tidy modern & contemporary collections.

I might be overthinking this, so I turn to this group for wisdom and experience.

Many thanks in advance,

Kristin Parker
Lead Curator of the Arts
Boston Public Library
kparker@bpl.org

Hi all,

Learning a lot from this forum, thank you!

I'm looking to learn from folks who have experience with retroactive numbering / accessioning.

I'm a former museum registrar and now a curator, sited within a very large art collection housed at a major city library. We oversee prints, drawings, photographs, paintings, sculpture. Basically we're a  museum within a public library system. My colleagues within the special collections department include rare books, maps and archives.  Hoping to streamline our processes and documentation methods, in 2020, we created an accession numbering system (tripartite) for all new acquisitions into special collections across curatorial departments.

The arts department, that I oversee, is about to create our first (ever) collection management database.  We have no accession numbers at the item or collection level for anything prior to 2020. No call numbers either. Occasionally we'll find a tripartite number on an object from long ago, but that is very rare. As we head into database work, I'd like to learn from others how they managed thousands (upon thousands) of items, acquired across decades, unnumbered.  Do we simply bulk assign upon migration of items into the new database as if a new collection? I'm used to working in very old collections with a variety of numbers, and adapting as necessary the few outliers, or with tidy modern & contemporary collections.

I might be overthinking this, so I turn to this group for wisdom and experience.

Many thanks in advance,

Kristin Parker
Lead Curator of the Arts
Boston Public Library
kparker@bpl.org

Hi all,

Learning a lot from this forum, thank you!

I'm looking to learn from folks who have experience with retroactive numbering / accessioning.

I'm a former museum registrar and now a curator, sited within a very large art collection housed at a major city library. We oversee prints, drawings, photographs, paintings, sculpture. Basically we're a  museum within a public library system. My colleagues within the special collections department include rare books, maps and archives.  Hoping to streamline our processes and documentation methods, in 2020, we created an accession numbering system (tripartite) for all new acquisitions into special collections across curatorial departments.

The arts department, that I oversee, is about to create our first (ever) collection management database.  We have no accession numbers at the item or collection level for anything prior to 2020. No call numbers either. Occasionally we'll find a tripartite number on an object from long ago, but that is very rare. As we head into database work, I'd like to learn from others how they managed thousands (upon thousands) of items, acquired across decades, unnumbered.  Do we simply bulk assign upon migration of items into the new database as if a new collection? I'm used to working in very old collections with a variety of numbers, and adapting as necessary the few outliers, or with tidy modern & contemporary collections.

I might be overthinking this, so I turn to this group for wisdom and experience.

Many thanks in advance,

Kristin Parker
Lead Curator of the Arts
Boston Public Library
kparker@bpl.org

Hi all,

Learning a lot from this forum, thank you!

I'm looking to learn from folks who have experience with retroactive numbering / accessioning.

I'm a former museum registrar and now a curator, sited within a very large art collection housed at a major city library. We oversee prints, drawings, photographs, paintings, sculpture. Basically we're a  museum within a public library system. My colleagues within the special collections department include rare books, maps and archives.  Hoping to streamline our processes and documentation methods, in 2020, we created an accession numbering system (tripartite) for all new acquisitions into special collections across curatorial departments.

The arts department, that I oversee, is about to create our first (ever) collection management database.  We have no accession numbers at the item or collection level for anything prior to 2020. No call numbers either. Occasionally we'll find a tripartite number on an object from long ago, but that is very rare. As we head into database work, I'd like to learn from others how they managed thousands (upon thousands) of items, acquired across decades, unnumbered.  Do we simply bulk assign upon migration of items into the new database as if a new collection? I'm used to working in very old collections with a variety of numbers, and adapting as necessary the few outliers, or with tidy modern & contemporary collections.

I might be overthinking this, so I turn to this group for wisdom and experience.

Many thanks in advance,

Kristin Parker
Lead Curator of the Arts
Boston Public Library
kparker@bpl.org