Ethnographic Terminology Working Group
Late in 2000 MDA reconvened the Ethnography Terminology Working Group, which had previously been dormant for some years. The Group met and discussed the preparation of ethnographic terminology lists for ethnographic museums and other museums with ethnographic collections.
The reason why museums want standard terminology lists within their own organisations are obvious. Without such lists searching computerised (or even manual) databases becomes much more time consuming. With standardised terminology lists searching for specific objects becomes much simpler and they make it much easier to maintain high standard data entry. Other subject areas have felt that the production of standardised terminology lists, which could be used by any museum with objects of that type, are helpful. The Group argued, however, that it should explore another route instead. In ethnography the areas which can be covered by terminology lists are as follows:
- Geographical provenance;
- Cultural group;
- Class or type of object;
- Specific name of object;
- Material(s) from which the object is made;
- Process by which the object is manufactured.
The Group thinks that all ethnographic museums have particular problems in preparing and updating two of these terminology lists - geographical provenance and cultural group - because the 'correct' current terminology for these changes so constantly and rapidly. For this reason providing fixed terminology lists for these areas is impossible, but it is in just these areas that most museums want help. Many group names, if they have not fundamentally changed, have had four or five different spellings over time. To take an example, the group is now correctly spelt as Arrernte, in the past it has been spelt as Arunta, Arunda, Aranda etc. Whilst these changes when spoken are not particularly important, once written they make a comprehensive search for all objects obtained from this group virtually impossible unless they are standardized.
At the Pitt Rivers Museum this problem is tackled by trying to keep as up to date on both group and geographic terms as possible. This is done by using the best sources that can be found (including verbal reports from 'experts', hard copy publications and, increasingly, web publications). When it is learnt that a term has changed, a member of documentation staff has to update the current terminology list and all the related records. Providing such changes are always tracked throughout the system, and themselves documented, this seems to provide the best of all worlds.
Some museums in the UK have collections from across the whole ethnographic field, others have some ethnographic objects in a wider collection. The Group suggests that any terminology list should be produced to be specific to that particular institution's needs. It agreed that, rather than providing definitive lists, they gives access to sources from which such terminology lists can be compiled. There are also sample ethnographic terminology lists prepared by a number of museums. Thus the ethnographic museum community has a format to share its expertise, continually update its information and hopefully achieve best possible standards in evolving, institution-specific lists.
The submitted terminology resources now form part of SPECTRUM Terminology.
Contact Details
Chair: Alison Petch, Registrar, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford
E-mail: alison.petch@pitt-rivers-museum.oxford.ac.uk
