Journal of the Japan Society for Archival Science
Online ISSN : 2434-6144
Print ISSN : 1349-578X
Volume 26
Displaying 1-11 of 11 articles from this issue
Article
  • A case of the University of Tokyo
    Satoshi KATO
    Article type: research-article
    2016Volume 26 Pages 4-25
    Published: December 31, 2016
    Released on J-STAGE: February 01, 2020
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

    This paper provides an empirical description of the process of document transfer as prescribed by the rules for records management that were to be followed by national universities before the Information Disclosure Law was passed. In 1988, the University of Tokyo, the first national university, specified that the documents should be transferred to the History Office in the rules that were laid down for records management.

    However, this system of document transfer did not function properly because of two main reasons. The first is that the universityʼs secretariat kept avoiding the task of specifying appraisal procedures in detail. Second, the university archives in-charge did not appraise the transferred documents. As a result of this, the transfer of documents at the national university did not function efficiently before the Information Disclosure Law was passed.

    Download PDF (1097K)
Research Note
  • Interactions with Warnerʼs List
    Yayoi TSUTSUI
    Article type: research-article
    2016Volume 26 Pages 28-46
    Published: December 31, 2016
    Released on J-STAGE: February 01, 2020
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

    During World War Ⅱ, Ernst Posner who escaped Nazism to settle in the United States, worked eagerly to list archival repositories in areas affected by the war. Dr. Takahiro Sakaguchi has provided detailed descriptions of these lists, which include the “Archival Repositories in Japan, Korea, and Japanese-occupied China”in his recent book.“Tentative List of Archival Repositories and Accumulations of Records in Japan” was found among the Posner papers that were held in NARA Ⅱ. This paper introduces the tentative list comparing it with published lists and reports; it presents the status of these records in addition to their interactions with Warnerʼs list that designate cultural properties that were to be protected.

    Download PDF (954K)
Research Trends
Book Reviews
Introductions
feedback
Top