早期社会的记录制作和记录保存

IF 1.4 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE College & Research Libraries Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.5325/libraries.7.2.0220
Bradley J. Wiles
{"title":"早期社会的记录制作和记录保存","authors":"Bradley J. Wiles","doi":"10.5325/libraries.7.2.0220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much of contemporary scholarship in the archival studies field grapples with the problems of today and tomorrow—how archivists might structure their work methods, institutional operations, and conceptual framings for immediate and long-term solutions in preserving and making available archival collections. As such, theoretical and practical approaches within the archives profession tend not to delve too far into the past for inspiration or direction, both because of the increasingly technology-focused nature of archival work and because of growing consensus around which usable histories and modern conceptual lenses ought to inform the profession going forward. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies, by Geoffrey Yeo, feels exceptional in this regard, as it wisely avoids such presentist filters in offering a detailed and comprehensive analysis of records production across several premodern societies.As an internationally recognized scholar, the University College London–affiliated Yeo has long been an authority on archives and records management in contemporary and historical contexts. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies shows that humans have always had limited biological capacity for memory but could usually muster the wherewithal to innovate and gain new abilities commensurate with the growing complexity and changing needs of our societies. As Yeo illustrates, this occurred all over the world among different cultures at various points in history, sometimes as part of a chain of regional cultural diffusion and at other times in relative isolation. But Yeo is careful not to conflate current understandings of record making and keeping that suggest a perennial “urge to record” or compulsion to organize and find meaning; instead, early records activity “probably arose from relatively short-term needs” in providing evidence and supporting individual and collective memory (182).Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies is organized into eight thematic chapters that offer examples from around the ancient world, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, China, and the Americas. Yeo begins in the distant preliterate Neolithic era, when marks and seals were employed as symbols of ownership, property, and accounting in predominantly herding and farming communities. As such, these precursors to records should be understood as “persistent representations” of activities and events of that time, rather than in how they may have been collected or utilized beyond their immediate sociomaterial context (x). Yeo demonstrates that the creation of any recording device or system from this time was tied to its effectiveness at facilitating contemporaneous business functions, and any longevity it held was contingent on its adaptability to shifting social and cultural realities. For example, in what is now Syria, from about 6000 to 4600 BCE, the ubiquitous presence of family seals on pottery, containers, and other durable items found in homes indicates the role of the household as the primary economic unit and corresponded to a decline in communal property ownership (34).Many “persistent representations” of memory prior to the development of writing took the form of pictographic symbols similar to what later became more formalized systems such as cuneiform and hieroglyphics. But the use of physical objects, including bone tallies, clay tokens, and knotted cords, for tracking quantities was instrumental in developing numerical systems, which led to further innovations in conveying abstract and complex information, particularly in Mesopotamia (47). According to Yeo, by about 2500 BCE, “Mesopotamian record-makers were experimenting with a new approach to writing that sought to represent the words used in spoken language,” where cuneiform symbols “came to be linked with the pronunciation of words and parts of words, in such a way that the signs took on phonetic values” (52). Yeo shows that the challenges of encoding language, recording precise dates, and applying security measures to communications media and transactions were being addressed throughout the ancient Near East and beyond.By the second millennium BCE, records creation and recordkeeping were integral to administering the increasingly complex and expansive functions of state bureaucracies. During this time records primarily were not “driven by the needs of individuals” but rather by the “requirements of institutions or rulers” (87). Organized states became the primary actors in defense and empire-building, food production and distribution, and religion and cultic practice. Decision-making was increasingly centered in urban agglomerations of commercial activity, within broader social and economic networks that spanned continents. Literacy and cultural production were mostly relegated to a ruling elite. Communications technologies and methods (including records creation and recordkeeping) were essential in consolidating and maintaining that elite power, especially in the religious, economic, and political systems that would come to define civilizations around the globe for centuries onward (138).Throughout the book, Yeo analyzes in great detail many practical matters related to records in the ancient world that archivists still grapple with today, albeit from a very different perspective. The problems of media, fixity, reliability, authenticity, storage, and preservation all factored into premodern practices, but a major conceptual leap seems to have occurred when records gained a sort of formal authority unto themselves and their purposes became more similar to what we are now familiar with in terms of usage, access, and availability (114–15). Yeo further explores the theoretical implications of this shift in the final two chapters, which focus on the influence of oral traditions and literacy on records production and how the social roles of records have functioned over time. At a high level, things have not changed that much; records creation did not and does not attend most everyday activity conducted informally and personally, but when important matters are at stake, the creation and keeping of records “would help ensure that the obligation was remembered and difficult to repudiate” (157).The steady movement away from orality and toward written language in late antiquity meant that records would gain a foothold in “establishing rights, responsibilities, and social relations,” but this was not truly transformational until much more recent times with the spread of popular literacy, the further refinement of recording technologies, and the growth of expansive communications networks that attended other civilization-shaping trends (165). In other words, Yeo cautions against “claims of continuity between ancient and modern practice,” even if similarities can be found in records creation and recordkeeping along that temporal continuum (170). In this vein, Yeo specifically calls out Ernst Posner’s 1971 study, Archives in the Ancient World, and refutes other claims in more recent archives disciplinary writing that seem mostly interested in finding historical antecedents that somehow justify or explain contemporary professional values and practices.Yeo’s offering certainly is written for an archives professional audience, but it is largely sourced from archaeology, anthropology, classics, linguistics, and other disciplines outside of (and thus not restrained by) the archival studies field. Yeo does a wonderful job synthesizing all of this disparate research, which was most certainly not conducted or published with any consideration for how it might illuminate records creation, recordkeeping, or archival practices. Crucially, Yeo goes even deeper into the past than other recent works that primarily focus on analyzing different aspects of the “library culture” in the ancient Near East, as opposed to the production of recorded information objects and systems before libraries were even a consideration. As such, Yeo contributes significantly to the body of literature on this general topic and should be read alongside such works as Libraries before Alexandria by Kim Ryholt and Gojko Barjamovic (2021), Ancient Libraries by Jason König, Katerina Oikonomopoulou, and Greg Woolf (2013), The Idea of the Library in the Ancient World by Yun Lee Too (2010), The History of the Library in Western Civilization by Konstantino Staikos (2004), and Libraries in the Ancient World by Lionel Casson (2001).","PeriodicalId":10686,"journal":{"name":"College & Research Libraries","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies\",\"authors\":\"Bradley J. Wiles\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/libraries.7.2.0220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Much of contemporary scholarship in the archival studies field grapples with the problems of today and tomorrow—how archivists might structure their work methods, institutional operations, and conceptual framings for immediate and long-term solutions in preserving and making available archival collections. As such, theoretical and practical approaches within the archives profession tend not to delve too far into the past for inspiration or direction, both because of the increasingly technology-focused nature of archival work and because of growing consensus around which usable histories and modern conceptual lenses ought to inform the profession going forward. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies, by Geoffrey Yeo, feels exceptional in this regard, as it wisely avoids such presentist filters in offering a detailed and comprehensive analysis of records production across several premodern societies.As an internationally recognized scholar, the University College London–affiliated Yeo has long been an authority on archives and records management in contemporary and historical contexts. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies shows that humans have always had limited biological capacity for memory but could usually muster the wherewithal to innovate and gain new abilities commensurate with the growing complexity and changing needs of our societies. As Yeo illustrates, this occurred all over the world among different cultures at various points in history, sometimes as part of a chain of regional cultural diffusion and at other times in relative isolation. But Yeo is careful not to conflate current understandings of record making and keeping that suggest a perennial “urge to record” or compulsion to organize and find meaning; instead, early records activity “probably arose from relatively short-term needs” in providing evidence and supporting individual and collective memory (182).Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies is organized into eight thematic chapters that offer examples from around the ancient world, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, China, and the Americas. Yeo begins in the distant preliterate Neolithic era, when marks and seals were employed as symbols of ownership, property, and accounting in predominantly herding and farming communities. As such, these precursors to records should be understood as “persistent representations” of activities and events of that time, rather than in how they may have been collected or utilized beyond their immediate sociomaterial context (x). Yeo demonstrates that the creation of any recording device or system from this time was tied to its effectiveness at facilitating contemporaneous business functions, and any longevity it held was contingent on its adaptability to shifting social and cultural realities. For example, in what is now Syria, from about 6000 to 4600 BCE, the ubiquitous presence of family seals on pottery, containers, and other durable items found in homes indicates the role of the household as the primary economic unit and corresponded to a decline in communal property ownership (34).Many “persistent representations” of memory prior to the development of writing took the form of pictographic symbols similar to what later became more formalized systems such as cuneiform and hieroglyphics. But the use of physical objects, including bone tallies, clay tokens, and knotted cords, for tracking quantities was instrumental in developing numerical systems, which led to further innovations in conveying abstract and complex information, particularly in Mesopotamia (47). According to Yeo, by about 2500 BCE, “Mesopotamian record-makers were experimenting with a new approach to writing that sought to represent the words used in spoken language,” where cuneiform symbols “came to be linked with the pronunciation of words and parts of words, in such a way that the signs took on phonetic values” (52). Yeo shows that the challenges of encoding language, recording precise dates, and applying security measures to communications media and transactions were being addressed throughout the ancient Near East and beyond.By the second millennium BCE, records creation and recordkeeping were integral to administering the increasingly complex and expansive functions of state bureaucracies. During this time records primarily were not “driven by the needs of individuals” but rather by the “requirements of institutions or rulers” (87). Organized states became the primary actors in defense and empire-building, food production and distribution, and religion and cultic practice. Decision-making was increasingly centered in urban agglomerations of commercial activity, within broader social and economic networks that spanned continents. Literacy and cultural production were mostly relegated to a ruling elite. Communications technologies and methods (including records creation and recordkeeping) were essential in consolidating and maintaining that elite power, especially in the religious, economic, and political systems that would come to define civilizations around the globe for centuries onward (138).Throughout the book, Yeo analyzes in great detail many practical matters related to records in the ancient world that archivists still grapple with today, albeit from a very different perspective. The problems of media, fixity, reliability, authenticity, storage, and preservation all factored into premodern practices, but a major conceptual leap seems to have occurred when records gained a sort of formal authority unto themselves and their purposes became more similar to what we are now familiar with in terms of usage, access, and availability (114–15). Yeo further explores the theoretical implications of this shift in the final two chapters, which focus on the influence of oral traditions and literacy on records production and how the social roles of records have functioned over time. At a high level, things have not changed that much; records creation did not and does not attend most everyday activity conducted informally and personally, but when important matters are at stake, the creation and keeping of records “would help ensure that the obligation was remembered and difficult to repudiate” (157).The steady movement away from orality and toward written language in late antiquity meant that records would gain a foothold in “establishing rights, responsibilities, and social relations,” but this was not truly transformational until much more recent times with the spread of popular literacy, the further refinement of recording technologies, and the growth of expansive communications networks that attended other civilization-shaping trends (165). In other words, Yeo cautions against “claims of continuity between ancient and modern practice,” even if similarities can be found in records creation and recordkeeping along that temporal continuum (170). In this vein, Yeo specifically calls out Ernst Posner’s 1971 study, Archives in the Ancient World, and refutes other claims in more recent archives disciplinary writing that seem mostly interested in finding historical antecedents that somehow justify or explain contemporary professional values and practices.Yeo’s offering certainly is written for an archives professional audience, but it is largely sourced from archaeology, anthropology, classics, linguistics, and other disciplines outside of (and thus not restrained by) the archival studies field. Yeo does a wonderful job synthesizing all of this disparate research, which was most certainly not conducted or published with any consideration for how it might illuminate records creation, recordkeeping, or archival practices. Crucially, Yeo goes even deeper into the past than other recent works that primarily focus on analyzing different aspects of the “library culture” in the ancient Near East, as opposed to the production of recorded information objects and systems before libraries were even a consideration. As such, Yeo contributes significantly to the body of literature on this general topic and should be read alongside such works as Libraries before Alexandria by Kim Ryholt and Gojko Barjamovic (2021), Ancient Libraries by Jason König, Katerina Oikonomopoulou, and Greg Woolf (2013), The Idea of the Library in the Ancient World by Yun Lee Too (2010), The History of the Library in Western Civilization by Konstantino Staikos (2004), and Libraries in the Ancient World by Lionel Casson (2001).\",\"PeriodicalId\":10686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"College & Research Libraries\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"College & Research Libraries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/libraries.7.2.0220\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"College & Research Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/libraries.7.2.0220","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

档案研究领域的许多当代学者都在努力解决今天和明天的问题——档案工作者如何构建他们的工作方法、机构运作和概念框架,以便在保存和提供档案收藏方面获得即时和长期的解决方案。因此,档案专业内部的理论和实践方法往往不会深入研究过去的灵感或方向,这既是因为档案工作日益注重技术的性质,也是因为关于哪些可用的历史和现代概念镜头应该为职业发展提供信息的共识越来越多。Geoffrey Yeo的《早期社会的记录制作和记录保存》在这方面感觉很特别,因为它明智地避免了这种现代主义的过滤,对几个前现代社会的记录制作进行了详细而全面的分析。作为国际公认的学者,伦敦大学学院附属的杨荣文一直是当代和历史背景下档案和记录管理的权威。早期社会的记录制作和记录保存表明,人类的生物记忆能力总是有限的,但通常可以聚集必要的资金来创新和获得与我们社会日益复杂和不断变化的需求相称的新能力。正如杨荣文所阐述的,这种情况发生在世界各地不同的文化之间,在不同的历史时期,有时是作为区域文化传播链的一部分,有时是相对孤立的。但杨很小心,没有将当前对记录制作和保存的理解混为一谈,这种理解暗示了一种长期的“记录的冲动”或组织和寻找意义的冲动;相反,早期的记录活动“可能是出于相对短期的需要”,以提供证据和支持个人和集体记忆(182)。《早期社会的记录制作和记录保存》分为八个主题章节,提供了来自古代世界的例子,包括埃及、美索不达米亚、希腊、中国和美洲。Yeo始于遥远的新石器时代,当时标记和印章被用作所有权、财产和会计的象征,主要用于放牧和农业社区。因此,这些记录的前体应被理解为当时活动和事件的“持续表征”,而不是它们如何被收集或在其直接的社会物质背景之外被利用(x)。Yeo证明,从那时起,任何记录设备或系统的创建都与其促进当时业务功能的有效性有关。它的寿命取决于它对不断变化的社会和文化现实的适应能力。例如,在现在的叙利亚,从公元前6000年到4600年,家庭印章无处不在地出现在陶器、容器和其他家庭耐用物品上,这表明家庭作为主要经济单位的作用,与公共财产所有权的下降相对应(34)。在文字发展之前,许多记忆的“持久表征”采用了象形文字符号的形式,类似于后来更加形式化的系统,如楔形文字和象形文字。但是,使用物理对象,包括骨计数、粘土记号和打结绳,来记录数量,对于发展数字系统是有帮助的,这导致了在传达抽象和复杂信息方面的进一步创新,特别是在美索不达米亚(47)。根据Yeo的说法,大约在公元前2500年,“美索不达米亚的记录者正在试验一种新的书写方法,试图表现口语中使用的单词”,楔形文字符号“开始与单词的发音和单词的部分联系起来,这样符号就具有了语音价值”(52)。Yeo表明,在整个古代近东及其他地区,对语言进行编码、记录精确日期以及对通信媒体和交易应用安全措施的挑战都在解决。到公元前第二个千年,记录的创造和记录的保存是管理国家官僚机构日益复杂和扩大的职能不可或缺的一部分。在这一时期,记录主要不是“由个人的需要驱动”,而是由“机构或统治者的要求”驱动(87)。有组织的国家成为国防和帝国建设、粮食生产和分配、宗教和宗教活动的主要参与者。决策越来越集中在商业活动的城市聚集区,在跨越各大洲的更广泛的社会和经济网络中。扫盲和文化生产大多被归为统治精英的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies
Much of contemporary scholarship in the archival studies field grapples with the problems of today and tomorrow—how archivists might structure their work methods, institutional operations, and conceptual framings for immediate and long-term solutions in preserving and making available archival collections. As such, theoretical and practical approaches within the archives profession tend not to delve too far into the past for inspiration or direction, both because of the increasingly technology-focused nature of archival work and because of growing consensus around which usable histories and modern conceptual lenses ought to inform the profession going forward. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies, by Geoffrey Yeo, feels exceptional in this regard, as it wisely avoids such presentist filters in offering a detailed and comprehensive analysis of records production across several premodern societies.As an internationally recognized scholar, the University College London–affiliated Yeo has long been an authority on archives and records management in contemporary and historical contexts. Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies shows that humans have always had limited biological capacity for memory but could usually muster the wherewithal to innovate and gain new abilities commensurate with the growing complexity and changing needs of our societies. As Yeo illustrates, this occurred all over the world among different cultures at various points in history, sometimes as part of a chain of regional cultural diffusion and at other times in relative isolation. But Yeo is careful not to conflate current understandings of record making and keeping that suggest a perennial “urge to record” or compulsion to organize and find meaning; instead, early records activity “probably arose from relatively short-term needs” in providing evidence and supporting individual and collective memory (182).Record-Making and Record-Keeping in Early Societies is organized into eight thematic chapters that offer examples from around the ancient world, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, China, and the Americas. Yeo begins in the distant preliterate Neolithic era, when marks and seals were employed as symbols of ownership, property, and accounting in predominantly herding and farming communities. As such, these precursors to records should be understood as “persistent representations” of activities and events of that time, rather than in how they may have been collected or utilized beyond their immediate sociomaterial context (x). Yeo demonstrates that the creation of any recording device or system from this time was tied to its effectiveness at facilitating contemporaneous business functions, and any longevity it held was contingent on its adaptability to shifting social and cultural realities. For example, in what is now Syria, from about 6000 to 4600 BCE, the ubiquitous presence of family seals on pottery, containers, and other durable items found in homes indicates the role of the household as the primary economic unit and corresponded to a decline in communal property ownership (34).Many “persistent representations” of memory prior to the development of writing took the form of pictographic symbols similar to what later became more formalized systems such as cuneiform and hieroglyphics. But the use of physical objects, including bone tallies, clay tokens, and knotted cords, for tracking quantities was instrumental in developing numerical systems, which led to further innovations in conveying abstract and complex information, particularly in Mesopotamia (47). According to Yeo, by about 2500 BCE, “Mesopotamian record-makers were experimenting with a new approach to writing that sought to represent the words used in spoken language,” where cuneiform symbols “came to be linked with the pronunciation of words and parts of words, in such a way that the signs took on phonetic values” (52). Yeo shows that the challenges of encoding language, recording precise dates, and applying security measures to communications media and transactions were being addressed throughout the ancient Near East and beyond.By the second millennium BCE, records creation and recordkeeping were integral to administering the increasingly complex and expansive functions of state bureaucracies. During this time records primarily were not “driven by the needs of individuals” but rather by the “requirements of institutions or rulers” (87). Organized states became the primary actors in defense and empire-building, food production and distribution, and religion and cultic practice. Decision-making was increasingly centered in urban agglomerations of commercial activity, within broader social and economic networks that spanned continents. Literacy and cultural production were mostly relegated to a ruling elite. Communications technologies and methods (including records creation and recordkeeping) were essential in consolidating and maintaining that elite power, especially in the religious, economic, and political systems that would come to define civilizations around the globe for centuries onward (138).Throughout the book, Yeo analyzes in great detail many practical matters related to records in the ancient world that archivists still grapple with today, albeit from a very different perspective. The problems of media, fixity, reliability, authenticity, storage, and preservation all factored into premodern practices, but a major conceptual leap seems to have occurred when records gained a sort of formal authority unto themselves and their purposes became more similar to what we are now familiar with in terms of usage, access, and availability (114–15). Yeo further explores the theoretical implications of this shift in the final two chapters, which focus on the influence of oral traditions and literacy on records production and how the social roles of records have functioned over time. At a high level, things have not changed that much; records creation did not and does not attend most everyday activity conducted informally and personally, but when important matters are at stake, the creation and keeping of records “would help ensure that the obligation was remembered and difficult to repudiate” (157).The steady movement away from orality and toward written language in late antiquity meant that records would gain a foothold in “establishing rights, responsibilities, and social relations,” but this was not truly transformational until much more recent times with the spread of popular literacy, the further refinement of recording technologies, and the growth of expansive communications networks that attended other civilization-shaping trends (165). In other words, Yeo cautions against “claims of continuity between ancient and modern practice,” even if similarities can be found in records creation and recordkeeping along that temporal continuum (170). In this vein, Yeo specifically calls out Ernst Posner’s 1971 study, Archives in the Ancient World, and refutes other claims in more recent archives disciplinary writing that seem mostly interested in finding historical antecedents that somehow justify or explain contemporary professional values and practices.Yeo’s offering certainly is written for an archives professional audience, but it is largely sourced from archaeology, anthropology, classics, linguistics, and other disciplines outside of (and thus not restrained by) the archival studies field. Yeo does a wonderful job synthesizing all of this disparate research, which was most certainly not conducted or published with any consideration for how it might illuminate records creation, recordkeeping, or archival practices. Crucially, Yeo goes even deeper into the past than other recent works that primarily focus on analyzing different aspects of the “library culture” in the ancient Near East, as opposed to the production of recorded information objects and systems before libraries were even a consideration. As such, Yeo contributes significantly to the body of literature on this general topic and should be read alongside such works as Libraries before Alexandria by Kim Ryholt and Gojko Barjamovic (2021), Ancient Libraries by Jason König, Katerina Oikonomopoulou, and Greg Woolf (2013), The Idea of the Library in the Ancient World by Yun Lee Too (2010), The History of the Library in Western Civilization by Konstantino Staikos (2004), and Libraries in the Ancient World by Lionel Casson (2001).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
College & Research Libraries
College & Research Libraries INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
22.20%
发文量
63
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: College & Research Libraries (C&RL) is the official scholarly research journal of the Association of College & Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association, 50 East Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611. C&RL is a bimonthly, online-only publication highlighting a new C&RL study with a free, live, expert panel comprised of the study''s authors and additional subject experts.
期刊最新文献
Designing and Implementing a Community-Engaged Research e-Library: A Case Study for Adapting Academic Library Information Infrastructure to Respond to Stakeholder Needs. Welcome from the Editors “Neighborhood Library Modernization”: Public Library Development and Racial Inequality in Milwaukee during the 1960s LHRT’s Two Communities The Library: A Fragile History
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1