Tomlinson D. Todd and the Institute on Race Relations

Jennifer Morris
Archivist
Anacostia Community Museum

Tomlinson D. Todd (far right) interviewed this unidentified group of young people on his “Americans All,” radio program, circa 1950s. Henry P. Whitehead Collection, Anacostia Community Museum, Smithsonian Institution.

Issues with race and racial equity have a long history in the United States, and so do interracial organizations forming to combat discriminatory practices and demand social justice for all Americans. The story of the Institute on Race Relations, founded by Tomlinson D. Todd (1910–1987), is an example of a substantive but understudied history of collaborative anti-racist activism in the District of Columbia.

Born in Reading, Pennsylvania, Tomlinson D. Todd grew up in Washington, DC in a middle-class family. Todd’s father, Rev. Williams W. Todd, served as pastor of the Fifteenth Street Presbyterian Church and his mother was a schoolteacher in Virginia before marriage. Both parents were college educated and Tomlinson, similarly, pursued higher education after attending Armstrong High School. He graduated from Lincoln University in 1936, with a Bachelor of Arts Degree before studying sociology at Howard University.

Mr. Todd fought against racial injustice and believed bringing people together across racial lines would assist with harmony and understanding among the races and foster greater economic and political achievement in America. He started the Institute on Race Relations in August 1943 with the aim to establish “true democracy” in the nation’s capital.

One of the organization’s first undertakings was to protest discriminatory practices and Jim Crowism in several restaurants and theatres in downtown Washington, DC. They arranged for interracial groups to enter selected restaurants and request service to test segregation and other inequitable policies, strategically scheduled sit-ins with law enforcement to avoid arrest if managers contacted authorities. The organization also secured letters of support from local restaurants that catered to all people regardless of race. The statements were then provided to other heads of companies to persuade them to adopt non-discriminatory policies.  

A letter of support from Arthur Capper (1865-1951) to Tomlinson D. Todd.  Capper was a U.S. Senator from Kansas whom Mr. Todd interviewed on “Americans All,” broadcast before he retired from the U.S. Senate in 1939. Henry P. Whitehead Collection, Anacostia Community Museum, Smithsonian Institution.

The Institute considered it important to shed light on public spaces that denied service to African American soldiers. In 1945, the group ran an ad in the Washington Star newspaper (February 12, 1945) depicting two wounded war veterans, one black and one white, being refused entry together to DC cafes and theaters. In addition, the ad featured accounts of Black soldiers’ heroic deeds and their contributions to the war effort.

This ad denouncing discrimination in the nation's capital also appeared in the Evening Star newspaper on February 12, 1945. Henry P. Whitehead Collection, Anacostia Community Museum, Smithsonian Institution.

After several months of testing policies of discrimination and publicizing their findings, the Institute on Race Relations began sponsoring a series of activities to gain public support. They organized mass meetings at churches; held interracial parties; international fashion shows; intercultural dances; and banquets. The banquets were community forums led by senators, college presidents, civil rights leaders, and other government officials.

The Institution on Race Relations sold tickets to several of their events to garner financial support for the organization. Henry P. Whitehead Collection, Anacostia Community Museum, Smithsonian Institution.

On March 31, 1946, the Institute started sponsoring Mr. Todd’s weekly Sunday night radio program, “Americans All.” The program aired from 1946–1962 on various Washington, DC radio stations including WOOK, WWDC, and WGMS. The broadcast featured dramas, interviews, addresses, roundtable discussions, and renditions from well-known musical aggregations. The program documented a range of perspectives on race and race relations and garnered a large radio audience, while enlightening the city to the injustices of segregation and racial discrimination.

In the wake of  the Institute on Race Relations’ work to bring racial justice to the nation’s capital, the Coordinating Committee for the Enforcement of D.C. Anti-Discrimination Laws, led by activists Mary Church Terrell (1863-1954) and Annie Stein, brought a lawsuit against the Thompson Restaurant. On June 8, 1953, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the Thompson Restaurant case that restaurants in the District of Columbia must accommodate all people, regardless of race, color, or creed. The decision ended discrimination and segregation in DC restaurants.

In 1952, Tomlinson D. Todd interviewed activist Mary Church Terrell (1863- 1954) on her 89th birthday. 

The activism of Tomlinson D. Todd and the Institute on Race Relations deserves further examination for its role in ending discriminatory practices in Washington, DC, and opening a space for interracial conversation and collaboration on a range of issues that affected the lives of all Americans.     

Help us make the records of the Institute on Race Relations more accessible and searchable through transcription on the Smithsonian Digital Volunteers Transcription Center:  here!

Hattie Meyers Weaver: Life During the Great Influenza Epidemic of 1918

From an early age, Hattie Meyers was fascinated with flight. At first, being a “mere girl,” she contented herself with building models in her Glen Ridge, New Jersey, home with the help of her older brother Charlie, a member of the Aero Club of New York. She recalled her first model, made of cranberry red silk from Scotland, being named the “Red Devil” for the “wicked prohibitive sound and the hope that it would raise the ‘devil’ with the long distance model record held by Percy Pierce.” Hattie’s model shattered the record (and the cellar window)! Hattie’s model success gained her entry into the “boy’s” shop in back of their house, where she was nominally allowed to participate in their endeavor to build a man-carrying glider, often taking the blame for hijinks, all for the promise of a ride in the final product.

Hattie and Charles Meyers, ages five and seven. (Photo is dated 189[9], but is most likely 1903.) NASM 9A16573  

In 1916, Charlie brought home a friend from the Aero Club of Illinois—known only as “Buck.” Hattie immediately noted that he was “a real aviator and not just a model builder” and twenty-one to boot! She also was not a fan of the black and white checkered cap he constantly wore (not knowing that this was the proud symbol of an early aviator). As they courted, Hattie learned his full name was George Weaver. After he turned down an opportunity to fly with Katherine Stinson in Japan, George and Hattie announced their engagement on June 14, 1917, with the specter of the United States’ entrance into World War I looming.

Civilian Flying Instructors, Rich Field, Waco, Texas, January 1918. George E. “Buck” Weaver is the third from the left in the seated row. NASM 9A16576 

George and Charlie registered for the war and went to work at Aeromarine. Already a capable aviator tapped as a civilian flying instructor, George was first sent to the U.S. Naval Reserve School on Long Island then to Dayton and then to Rich Field in Waco, Texas. Hattie left everything she knew in New Jersey to meet his family in Chicago on her way to joining George in Texas. They married on February 12, 1918, with George rushing in from work, washing the castor oil off his face.

George “Buck” Weaver and Hattie Meyers Weaver together in Waco, Texas, March 19, 1918. NASM 9A16575

Hattie settled into life at Rich Field as a wife, impatiently waiting for the war’s end, even as Rich Field was struck by the influenza. George received a doctor’s note for influenza for over a week’s absence in April. Effective as of October 4, all officers and enlisted men were given antiseptic treatment daily as a precaution. Hattie recalled, “The big husky men at Camp MacArthur died faster than burial and when the wind blew from there the odor gave proof.” She noted the other target—pregnant women like herself.

Doctor’s letter, dated April 12, 1918, certifying that George “Buck” Weaver was absent from work due to influenza. NASM NASM.XXXX.0171-M0000127-00300

 On November 11, 1918, Hattie and George joined the Armistice parade in downtown Waco in their Buick convertible: “Flu and babies forgotten.” George obtained a leave of absence so that he could go to Chicago with Hattie to prepare for the baby. By the time they had reached St. Louis, Hattie knew she “had a cold, sneezes and snuffles.” She arrived in Chicago with a fever and full-blown influenza. Although she had “coughs that hurt and would not stop,” Hattie was apologetic that she was a sick nuisance to her mother-in-law.

George E. "Buck" Weaver and wife Hattie Meyers Weaver pose in their Buick Roadster, October 1918. Another version of this photograph was labeled “Mrs. W pregnant, flu epidemic.” NASM 9A16574

George Charles Weaver, nicknamed “Buddie,” was born on December 12, 1918. Hattie noted that the “fever had burned off the weight, the flesh was loose on the 5 lb. 3oz. baby.” She blamed herself and her illness for the premature birth and promised “to do better next time.” George exited the room and only later did Hattie learn he had fainted. He returned to Texas soon after to receive his discharge papers. He had been warned if he was not present, he would not receive the end-of-war separation benefits package.

Hattie convalesced in Chicago under the watchful eye of the Weaver family. Her doctor insisted that she needed to be strong and nurse the baby. Her youngest brother-in-law taught her how to walk again. George wrote often. It was difficult for Hattie to learn that many of the women with whom she had made baby clothes at Rich Field had succumbed to the flu, along with their children. In a January 5 letter, Hattie wrote: “George, that grips me by the heart at nights and when Son is sleeping quietly I have to feel him to be sure he is living. I have tried to write Mrs. Blair but each time I have become deathly sick. I cannot. Oh Georgie how grateful we are.” George returned to Chicago when Buddie was eight weeks old.

After the war, George Weaver took up barnstorming. In 1920, along with Clayton Bruckner and Elwood "Sam" Junkin, he founded the Weaver Aircraft Company. George “Buck” Weaver died on July 31, 1924, from a septic blister. He was eulogized by some of aviation’s greats, including Katherine Stinson: “You [Hattie] have been very dear to and made very happy this boy whom we all loved so dearly.”

Reproduction of July 29, 1924 telegram from Katherine Stinson to Hattie Meyers Weaver regarding the death of George “Buck” Weaver. NASM NASM.XXXX.0171-M0000014-00140

The company was later renamed Advanced Aircraft and, later, Waco (pronounced wah-co, as opposed to way-co). Hattie married Sam Junkin in 1926, but he died shortly afterwards (their daughter Janet was only a few months old). The company slipped out of Hattie’s hands soon after. The Waco Aircraft Company flourished during the interwar period as Waco aircraft were operated by public, private, military and corporate owners in thirty-five countries. During World War II, Waco devoted itself entirely to war production, particularly gliders, but could not adjust to the postwar market.

Hattie and her son Buddie lived long lives. In 1929, Hattie married Ralph Stanton Barnaby, a glider pilot, but the marriage was short-lived. Hattie wrote several versions of the Waco Company history. She was one of the first women to earn a glider class C license. She studied law at the University of Washington (DC), but fell ill before taking the bar.

Hattie Meyers Junkin with son George “Buddie” Weaver, age six, January 1927. Hattie noted on the back that she had trimmed her crepe tunic with beaver from an ageing coat. NASM 9A16577 

In 1976, an episode of the hit television show Upstairs Downstairs prompted Hattie to recall her bout of influenza in a letter to Buddie: “The report again in the final chapter of the ‘Spanish’ flu that caused more deaths than the millions slaughtered in [World] War One, naturally brings me agin [sic] to my carrying you, the Armistice, (pic in my album) of my Kewpie doll body as your father was chosen to lead the parade in our Buick convertible….” She revisited the circumstances of Buddie’s birth, adding, “Since then it is remarkable how we have escaped attempts, literally on our lives.” Hattie Meyers Weaver Junkin died in 1990 and George “Buddie” Weaver followed in 1991.

The National Air and Space Museum Archives holds the Hattie Meyers Junkin Papers, the Waco Aircraft Company Records, and the Ralph Stanley Barnaby Papers. The Waco collection includes almost 25,000 drawings on paper, business records (including purchase orders for individual aircraft), and engineering reports. Ralph Barnaby’s collection holds documents from his gliding career and correspondence received late in his life from other aviation pioneers.

Hattie’s papers are digitized, containing materials from every stage of her life. Her diaries and correspondence are especially rich in the World War I and early Waco periods. She saved everything for years, including photos and cards straight out of George “Buck” Weaver’s wallet and satchel, and donated the collection to the Museum in 1983. In fact, the Smithsonian TranscriptionCenter is looking for volunteers to transcribe materials from the Hattie Meyers Junkin Papers!

Elizabeth C. Borja
Archivist
National Air and Space Museum Archives

Bringing to Light the Career and Correspondence of M.R. Harrington

Letter addressed to M.R. Harrington from the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1911.

Museum of the American Indian/Heye Foundation records, NMAI.AC.001, Box 231, Folder 7. 

Though now less well-remembered, M.R., or Mark Raymond, Harrington (1882-1971) was a prominent twentieth-century anthropologist who worked for many of the leading anthropological museums of his day. These included Harvard University’s Peabody Museum, the American Museum of Natural History in New York, the Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation (the predecessor to the National Museum of the American Indian or NMAI) also in New York, Philadelphia’s University Museum, and later, from 1928 until his retirement in 1966 at the age of 82, the Southwest Museum in Los Angeles.

M.R. Harrington dressed in Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) clothing, ca. 1905.
Mark Raymond Harrington photograph collection, NMAI.AC.001.035, P28198.

The Smithsonian’s NMAI Archives Center staff consider themselves fortunate to steward such a great extent of Harrington’s archival materials, consisting of his ethnological field notes, object lists, and personal and professional correspondence. For many years these materials have served as an invaluable resource for Native and non-Native researchers, linguistic and language revitalization scholars, and community groups conducting repatriation work. Now, however, as the NMAI makes digital versions of Harrington’s correspondence accessible on the Smithsonian Online Virtual Archives and the Smithsonian’s Transcription Center, an even greater number of interested users can learn about this individual’s important life from the comfort of their own homes.

Born in 1882 and commencing his first anthropological work while still a teenager in the late 1890s, Harrington’s career spanned more than sixty years and encompassed wide swathes of the U.S. and North America. Well-respected for his collecting prowess, in the two decades alone (1908-1928) that he worked for Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, founder George Gustav Heye, Harrington collected ethnological and archaeological material from Canada in the north to Cuba in the south, and from New York in the east to California in the west.

Harrington’s correspondence in particular reflects his work throughout North America and his sustained relationships with anthropological leaders in the field like Franz Boas, Frederic Ward Putnam, and Frank G. Speck, his personal relationships with fellow anthropological colleagues Alanson Skinner and Arthur C. Parker, and his dependence on the knowledge, advice, and friendship of Native American collaborators and interpreters in the field like Peoria leader Bill Skye and Otoe community member Grant Cleghorn.

Peoria chief, interpreter, and collaborator with M.R. Harrington, Bill Skye, 1908.
Collection still undetermined, likely part of the Mark Raymond Harrington photograph collection. NMAI P23479.

Harrington was a product of his time, and though his collecting of material culture items (now referred to as salvage anthropology) may have “saved” countless objects for future generations to admire in a museum setting, his collecting also inadvertently robbed many American Indian communities of their cultural heritage, creating a void in Native American cultural identity which in some cases still persists to the present-day.

Further, like his fellow turn-of-the-twentieth-century anthropologists Frank Hamilton Cushing, James Mooney, and Alanson Skinner, Harrington adhered to the anthropological practice of participant observation. Thus, he often dressed in Native clothing, spoke in Native languages, and referred to himself by his adopted Native names, even when away from Native communities. Harrington and Skinner, however, tended to blur the lines between participant observation and what Philip J. Deloria terms “playing Indian,” in which non-Native peoples simulate and appropriate the customs, manners, and lifeways of Native groups. Temporally removed and lacking Harrington’s personal thoughts on his actions at the time, it is difficult to label his and Skinner’s actions as intentional cultural appropriation, when they may demonstrate nothing more than the passion of two men of Euro-American ancestry interested in learning about other cultures. Regrettably, while Harrington’s correspondence is a treasure trove of information, it reveals little further insight into these men’s perspectives on matters such as this. Importantly though, Native American people were more than simply a subject of study for Harrington. They were integral to his life, his identity, and over time became intimate members of his family including his wife and Seneca community member, Endeka (Edna) Parker.

Mrs. Endeka Parker Harrington (Seneca), Don Chiaku (Hopi Pueblo), and M.R. Harrington dressed in Hopi clothing in Arizona, circa 1930. Mark Raymond Harrington photograph collection, NMAI.AC.001.035, P26879.

Harrington worked with more Native communities, at more museums, and for a longer period of time than many of his colleagues in the anthropological world. His Seneca friend, fellow anthropologist, and brother-in-law Arthur C. Parker called Harrington a devoted friend who defended Native peoples from every angle of attack. More recently, present-day scholar and Abenacki museum anthropologist Margaret Bruchac has praised Harrington as a determined researcher with an inclusive and egalitarian bent who advocated for the place of Native men and women in ethnological and archaeological work.

Despite such praise, M.R. Harrington’s name remains relatively unknown to many both within and outside of the museum field. Hopefully by making Harrington’s personal and professional correspondence more widely available to the public, his inspiring and complicated legacy will better be brought to light.

Nathan Sowry, Reference Archivist
National Museum of the American Indian Archives Center

The Smithsonian’s Journey of Computerized Library and Archives (2010-2019)

Read Part I : The First Integrated Library System
Read Part II:  Stepping Outside of the Box 

PART III:   INCREASING ACCESS THROUGH BROADER AND DEEPER REACH

Contributing to the start of Digital Public Library of America (DPLA)

The idea of a national digital library had been circulating among librarians, scholars, educators, and private industry representatives in the United States since the early 1990s.  The DPLA planning process began in October 2010 at a meeting in Cambridge, M.A. During this meeting, 40 leaders from libraries, foundations, academia, and technology projects agreed to work together to create an open and distributed network of comprehensive online resources which are provided by the U.S. libraries, archives, universities and museums.    

The planning team solicited ideas for how this open platform should work and received hundreds of responses from around the country.  Martin Kalfatovic of Smithsonian Libraries approached me for possible ideas. We decided to work with the Library of Congress (LC) and the National Archives Record Administration (NARA) to develop a joint proposal that suggested using the Smithsonian Collections Search Center for DPLA.  We took about 100 MARC records from LC and about 20 MARC records from NARA and, using the Smithsonian Index Metadata model, imported them into the Smithsonian Collection Search Center test system. 

The LC and NARA records worked well among the Smithsonian records in our Collections Search Center without great effort.  This success affirms the importance of developing a system that includes stringent data standards.   We were among the top six submissions selected by the DPLA planning committee for a final open presentation hosted at NARA. 

In December 2010, the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University convened leading experts in libraries, technology, law, and education and began work on this ambitious project. I was part of this meeting and worked among those who contributed their knowledge for a brand new DPLA system.  DPLA was launched in April 2013 with contributions from a small number of universities, libraries and museums.  The Smithsonian contributed tens of thousands of library and archives records in the initial launch and supported the Creative Common CC0 for “No Copyright Reserved” on metadata records.  To expand Smithsonian participation, Library Director Nancy Gwinn reached out to many Smithsonian museum directors for support.  Today, the Smithsonian Institution contributes 3.6 million records to DPLA monthly.  This number is expected to increase over time.

Increasing Access and Public Engagement through the Smithsonian Transcription Center

Two examples of Transcription Page

Even though the Smithsonian had millions of collections and historical documents online, accessibility remained a challenge.  Many digitized materials are view-able but not easily searchable; many handwritten materials are difficult to read and understand and many collections were not online.  By creating a transcription center, we could address some of these limitations and support better discovery across disciplines Smithsonian wide.

We began planning and developing the new software platform in 2012.  We worked closely with several archival unit partners to launch the Transcription Center (http://transcription.si.edu) on June 15, 2013.

The Transcription Center was designed to support various object types and material formats, including those held by not just libraries and archives, but museums as well.  Object types included diaries, field books, correspondence, currency bank notes, sound-recordings, photo albums, botanical specimen labels, cataloging sheets, joke index cards, and more. The project crowdsources both the transcribing and reviewing processes by public volunteers, allowing the Smithsonian staff the option to conduct final approval before posting the record online.  We have discovered that because our digital volunteers produce such accurate transcriptions, some staff find no need to review the work!  Transcribed contents are immediately searchable , displayed online in the Collections Search Center and downloadable as PDF files,. Public participation has been phenomenal, with 13,890 digital volunteers and 496,300 pages transcribed as of December 2019, including creating 130,755 catalog records that were previously unavailable to the public. 

Transcribed Text on display automatically with the corresponding image

A full-time project coordinator is on staff to ensure timely communications between the Smithsonian and the public via emails and social media platforms.  Meghan Ferriter, Andres Almeida and Caitlin Haynes served as the coordinators consecutively. It is very important that our volunteers feel connected to the Smithsonian Institution and that their contribution is recognized and greatly appreciated.  We express our appreciation by crediting the volunteers in the transcribed records and the PDF files.


The Transcription Center is more than a website to transcribe historic documents. It is a platform for us to increase our public outreach and engagement.  Being able to interact with our volunteers was one of the most rewarding aspect of this project.   Many of our dedicated volunteers continue to achieve huge progress day after day.  They not only transcribing thousands of pages, but also going above and beyond sharing knowledge and enhancing Smithsonian collections by entering additional information in the note fields on each page.

The Transcription Center has also become a useful tools to Smithsonian social media managers of individual museums. Many Of them have share stories uncovered from the Transcription Center in their outreach campaigns, and they also want to continue the relationship with the Transcription Center in the future. This digital platform demonstrates how transcription work can not only create and diffuse knowledge, but also develop strong community among digital volunteers  and Smithsonian.   

Smithsonian Online Virtual Archives (SOVA) and ArchivesSpace

Archives by their very nature are different from libraries: Most libraries include individual items such as books and journals, while archival collections contain multiple records that are both unique, interrelated and often arranged in a nested hierarchy structure. A library system cannot adequately support archival needs.  Increasingly, archival staff began calling for a system that specifically addressed the unique needs of archives, To remedy this problem, a Melon Foundation grant started software development of The Archivists’ Toolkit™ system in 2006. It was the first open source archival data management system to provide broad, integrated support for the management of archives.

The Smithsonian began to experiment with The Archivists’ Toolkit™ (AT) software system in 2011.  First, we migrated 7,000 MARC records into the new AT system. This allowed for series, box and folder level information to be managed hierarchically within an information management system.  The AT system was superseded in late 2013 by ArchivesSpace.  Both open source software systems allowed archivists to manage archives using a collection-centric approach.

The Internal Smithsonian ArchivesSpace Collections Management System

A difference between an item-centric management approach and a collection-centric approach is that archival materials need finding aids, which increase accessibility to the collection.  At the time, the Smithsonian’s fourteen archival units had different understandings and approaches to description and management.   Barbara Aikens, Head of Collections Processing at the Archives of American Art, took the lead to eliminate these inconsistencies.  She wrote five internal and external grants totaling $499,900 between 2010 and 2016 on behalf of the Smithsonian archival units. The grants allowed the Smithsonian to conduct a pan-institutional Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Gap Analysis Study and hire EAD Metadata Coordinators to focus on content creation and support.  These coordinators, Mark Custer and Nancy Kennedy, proved essential to this project.  Managed by OCIO LASSB, they developed and managed an EAD implementation plan for each Smithsonian archival unit.  This work included assisting units to convert legacy finding aids to EAD standards, answering all questions, and fixing dilemmas as they occurred throughout the system’s implementation.  Meanwhile, we collaborated among all of the archival units and supported their backlog processing projects. The migration from the Horizon MARC system to ArchivesSpace was a very complex process which required folding 400,000 flat records into hierarchical EAD finding aids.  In the end, archives across the institution created 16,800 new EAD finding aids in ArchivesSpace, and the quality of content description at the Smithsonian improved dramatically.

Record Display Supporting Hierarchy levels of Collection, Series, Box and Folder in SOVA

While the quality and quantity of the archival descriptions grew exponentially, public searching and display remained a challenge.  To remedy this, we focused on developing and launching the Smithsonian Online Virtual Archives (http://SOVA.si.edu) in October 2015.    For the first time, the new systems allowed users to search archival materials at all levels (collections, series and items), enabled the  visual display of the hierarchy of the record and dynamically generated EAD online finding aids for nearly 17,000 collections, many of which contain tens of thousands of individual items in multiple series, box and folders.

Screenshots of the search result page with tabs to browse by collections, sub-series or digital items

The ArchivesSpace and SOVA systems enable a digital workflow that is organized, systematic, scalable, and incorporates the digitization process.  In addition, the Smithsonian Digital Access Management System (DAMS) supports seamless metadata synchronization and media file links among all systems.  These systems guide archivists to catalog, digitize, store, link and share digital images, allowing information systems to keep track of mass amounts of media files every step of the way.  Today, there are over 6.7 million images, sound and video recording electronic resources in SOVA.

In 2019, the Smithsonian received accolades for its SOVA and Collections Search Center (CSC).  An online survey, conducted during a NEA-funded workshop on developing in-house collections management systems and online discovery portals, asked professionals to name their favorite online aggregate search center. The Smithsonian’s CSC and SOVA systems were voted the best among all LAM (libraries, archives, and museums) institutions.


Final Thoughts

It has been a long and rewarding journey in the fields of information management and public service.  Knowing the history of the Smithsonian’s transformative information management systems and efforts gives us valuable insight that we can use as we work towards new goals and solving challenges.  The Smithsonian Institution will continue to push forward to support research, education and public service by increasing its mass digitization efforts.  With tens of millions of collections online already, we look forward to making Open Access our next major milestone in 2020.

Read Part I : The First Integrated Library System
Read Part II:  Stepping Outside of the Box 


Ching-hsien Wang,  Branch Manager
Library and Archives Systems Support Branch (LASSB)
Office of the Chief Information Officer

The Smithsonian’s Journey of Computerized Library and Archives

The Smithsonian Institution, with its 19 museums, 20 libraries and 14 archival units, prioritizes sharing our resources and discovering knowledge with the public.  Today, 15.5 million library, archives and museum objects and 10.4 million images are online to support research, education and public service.  It has been a challenging but rewarding journey to transform a manual and paper-based Smithsonian into the digital Smithsonian of today.  This evolution of automated library and archives systems and the collaboration that made it all possible at the Smithsonian is impressive, and I wrote these three blogs to share this history with you.

PART I : THE FIRST INTEGRATED LIBRARY SYSTEM (1965-1994)

Ahead of Its Time from the Beginning

At its inception, the Smithsonian Institution Libraries (SIL) depended on paper card catalogs.  In 1965, the SIL began to slowly convert from the Dewey Decimal System to the Library of Congress’s cataloging classification system.  Simultaneously, it began to transition from using handwritten catalog cards to computer printed ones.  Smithsonian invested in the latest technology: card punching machines to support the data entry.

Starting in 1975, SIL began working towards in-house automation for library operations and joined OCLC (Ohio College Library Center) as a member in 1976. 

In 1980, under the leadership of Director Robert Maloy, SIL envisioned a unified electronic system that would link the ordering, accounting, receiving, indexing, circulation and inventory control functions into one data flow. Mr. Maloy and others also began advocating for making information in libraries, archives, and museums accessible in Smithsonian computers for public access.  This vision proved to be very challenging to accomplish since SIL was still using random manual and semi-automated systems for its daily business. Even though this seemed to be an impossible goal at the time, it set the Smithsonian on its path for our accomplishment 30 years later.

In 1980 Stephen Toney,(the first system librarian at SIL),  began to work closely with the Smithsonian central IT office, OIRM (Office of Information Resource Management), for stronger computer support.  OIRM and SIL worked to purchase a dedicated computer system that was intended to support not only the needs of the library, but also of the archives and museum research offices.  An RFP (request for proposal) was sent out in February 1983 to library system vendors. The proposals were reviewed by staff from the SIL, OIRM, Smithsonian Institution Archives(SIA), National Museum of American Art (NMAA) and others.  In September 1983, a GEAC system was selected and named SIBIS (Smithsonian Institution Bibliographic Information System).

Implementing the First Library System

The GEAC system contained multiple modules to support Acquisition, Cataloging, Circulation and Email functionality.  It was based on supporting data in MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging) format. The mainframe GEAC computer was installed in the basement of the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH), the museum in which most of the SIL staff worked.    At the time, there was no Local Area Network (LAN) at the Smithsonian, so computer terminals could only be connected to the mainframe computer by long wires from within the building.

SIL was successful in importing the catalog card data from OCLC to the SIBIS system via computer tapes.  The new automation system brought a change in the library’s work culture: many staff were surprised that automation didn’t reduce their amount of work; instead, it needed different types of work.  The automated system required more accurate data, identified mismatched inventory lists and shelving issues, identified missing or unreturned books, and produced lists of records for enhancement.  The inconsistent data from pre-automation days caused inaccurate search and display problems; therefore, top priorities following the implementation focused on data clean up, problem tracking, data standardization and enhancement work for many years to come.  

The library also transformed its departments and workflow to integrate the automated system which allowed copy cataloging from records in OCLC.  The head of the newly formed SIL Systems Office, Tom Garnett, learned to program on GEAC to produce reports for new title list, inventories, acquisition orders, etc.  Marcia Adams (A systems librarian) focused initially on automating the circulation system that tracks book check-ins, check-outs, borrower records, and circulation reports.    Even with much more work, everyone agreed that the automated system increased work efficiency and the quality of library management .

A GEAC Computer Room in 1980s

OIRM provided critical operational support for this groundbreaking endeavor.  The GEAC system required 24-hr coverage of computer operators and was composed of proprietary hardware and software, oversized mainframe CPU chassis, disk storage units and tape drives for 10.5-inch magnetic tape reels.  Computer operation support included regular magnetic tape loads for OCLC records, daily batch jobs that helped to maintain databases, the generation of reports and printouts, and daily backup and restore during the midnight shift.   

Adapting Existing Standards for Non-Bibliographic Content

Soon after installing the GEAC system, the Smithsonian began installing CO-LAN modems, which served as the primitive predecessor of the computer network.  This allowed connections from GEAC mainframe to computer terminals in different buildings.  The American Art Museum Research and Scholar Center and the Archives of American Art were the first museum and archives to use a library management system for automation. In the early 1980s, there were no established data standards for non-library materials undergoing computer automation. Among existing standards, there were two that came closest to fitting the Smithsonian’s needs: 

1.       UNIMARC (Universal MARC) format): Although most of these existing standards relate more closely to library materials than to archival ones, the general approach and specific guidelines was still relevant.

2.       AMC (Archival and Manuscripts Control) format: Developed by the Society of American Archivists in 1985, the instruction manual provided standards that were specifically for archives.

With the standard selected, the immediate challenge was to map the data into the MARC format and enter the data into the library system. The GEAC system was implemented in three separate databases:  Library, Archives and Art Inventory.   Archives of American Art began creating descriptions (mostly collection level) for their collection in the Archives database.   A couple of thousand descriptions were entered in just two years.  However, the limitations of using a library system as an archival system soon became apparent: record size and field occurrence limitations caused major frustration among archivists for years.

I joined the Smithsonian OIRM in 1988 as the system administrator and a technical lead and became part of this exciting project.  We worked hard to push the software vendors to fix these limitations, but the necessary technology was not available to address these issues at that time. However, several more archives joined SIBIS and continued to add records with greater complexity.  Early implementers included the Smithsonian Institution Archives, National Museum American History Archives Center, National Anthropological Archives, and Human Studies Film Archives. The Smithsonian grew to become the institution with the largest archival electronic records online.

NMAA’s Art Inventory project also joined SIBIS as an early museum adaptor to a library system.  The highly specialized Art Inventory Database, which compiled and cataloged artworks created by American artists, was one of the leading online reference resources. The dataset documented sculptures and paintings with many data elements outside of traditional MARC format.  Eleanor Fink, (Chief of the office of Research Support, NMAA), advocated to adapt and test the flexibility of the MARC Visual Material format for three dimensional objects.  OIRM SIBIS customized the GEAC system to accommodate the unusual data fields to support indexing, searching and display purposes.  This strong collaboration between NMAA and OIRM created the first successful large-scale art project adaptation in a library system.   This implementation had early success with 16,000 sculpture records successfully imported in just a couple of years.  It also pushed the GEAC system to its limit, unable to support many customized data fields and special search indexes.

Raising Expectations and Improving Automation

Encouraged by the initial success of SIBIS in 1989, The Smithsonian Castle formed a SIBIS Management and Planning Committee with the purpose of elevating its performance, increasing funding to OIRM, and expanding its usage to more Smithsonian units.  The funding structure was a “Cost Center” model where units would transfer funds annually to OIRM.  Ross Simon, (An assistant to the Smithsonian Secretary), became the first chairman for this management committee.  In 1992, SIBIS was renamed SIRIS (Smithsonian Institution Research Information System) to match the broader goal of the committee.  The SIRIS board decided to look for a new generation of library information system.   In December 1993, the NOTIS system was purchased and records were migrated to it.  This new system ran on IBM 4381 mainframe computers.  Computer terminals were on Zenith PCs which were booted with floppy disks to emulate IBM 3270 terminals.  Later, the PCs were upgraded to PS2 computers, which had local disk drives that could hold the terminal emulating software.  Floppy disks were retired.

Before the Smithsonian joined the World Wide Web (WWW), there was WAN, Gopher, and WAIS, which allowed internet access beyond the Smithsonian network. One of the first to do so, SIRIS successfully implemented remote Telnet connections.  The NOTIS system supported TCP protocol with a TAG machine (IBM RISC server) for internet searching capability. George Bowman, the main library system administrator, was the key technical staff to take advantage of the latest technology.

In 1994, OIRM SIRIS team successfully implemented a PACLINK function which allowed the SIRIS computer to remotely access online catalogs from several remote institutions such as the Harvard Library, Yale Library, and WRLC Consortium (of George Washington University, Catholic University, American University and George Mason University) on the SIRIS terminals for the first time.  We also made the Smithsonian Catalogs (Library, Archives and Art Inventories) available to many other libraries around the US and Canada in 1994.   The PACLINK function was based on Z39.50 protocol for searching and retrieving information from a remote database using TCP protocols.  These services predated the WWW at the Smithsonian and the first desktop PC web browser; it was cutting edge! 

Read Part II:  Stepping Outside of the Box

Read Part III:   Increasing Access Through Broader and Deeper Reach

Ching-hsien Wang,  Branch Manager

Library and Archives Systems Support Branch (LASSB)

Office of the Chief Information Officer

Soaring through the Archives of Air and Space with Transcription Center

Have you ever wondered what you should pack for a trip to the moon? Or what female aviator clubs were like in the 1930's? How about the history of grape soda and its relationship to America's first transcontinental flight?

                             Inflight Coverall Garment, Jacket, Apollo,                     Items taken aboard Apollo 11, NASM Archives.
                                 D19791187000, National Air and Space Museum.

Well you're in luck! The answers to these questions -- recorded in the pages of diaries, letters, and scrapbooks held in the Archives of the National Air and Space Museum (NASM) -- are now more easily discoverable thanks to volunteer transcription.

Vin Fiz Art Poster, Armour & Co., 1911,  A1935044000, National Air and Space Museum.

Since 2015, staff in the NASM Archives have launched (pun intended) over 200 projects in the Smithsonian Transcription Center--including stowage lists from six different Apollo missions, records from Calbraith (Cal) Perry Rodgers' 1911 transcontinental flight (which was sponsored by the makers of the popular grape soda, the Vin Fiz), and the scrapbook of female pilot, Manila Davis Talley, containing multiple photographs and  news articles on twentieth century women's aviation clubs and flying competitions. 

Page from Scrapbook of Manila Davis Talley, NASM.XXXX.0041, National Air and Space Museum.

The Archives' collections span the history of flight, from ancient times to the present day, and include materials from military officers and personnel, NASA astronauts, Smithsonian staff, civilian pilots and engineers, astrophysicists, nineteenth-century balloonists, flight attendants, and more. Over the past four years 1,062 volunteers (or 'volunpeers' as we say here in TC) have transcribed close to 13,000 pages from the archival collections at NASM. These TC projects only constitute a small portion of NASM's archival collections, yet the work of digital volunteers transcribing and reviewing these materials increases accessibility and awareness of the rich information held within every page. (Want to learn more about how volunteer transcription makes Smithsonian collections accessible and text-searchable? Head to our About page and follow us on Twitter for ongoing updates, discoveries, and behind-the-scenes sneak peeks!)

Here's some highlights from NASM TC Projects:

Apollo 11 Flight, Crew, Training, NASM Archives.

• Sound recordings from the Apollo 11 launch. 
• Correspondence, flight logs, and notes from Orville and Wilbur Wright. 
• Materials from the Papers of General Benjamin O. Davis, Jr.- Commander of the 99th Fighter Squadron, the first unit of the "Tuskegee Airmen" during WWII and the first African American General in the U.S. Air Force (1954). 
• The World War I diary of U.S. Army Air Service Officer Arthur Raymond Brooks
• William J. Eck's scrapbook, "To Europe By Air," documenting his trip on Pan American Airways' (PAA) first transatlantic passenger flight in 1939.
• Scrapbook of Velma Maul Tanzer, Stewardess and Chief Stewardess for American Airlines, 1933-1936.

Velma Maul Tanzer, NASM.2005.0036, NASM Archives.

• World War II diaries and scrapbooks from Harold Raskin (Army Airways Communications System, 7th AACS Wing Ground Control Approach (GCA) unit), William Jones (aerial photographer in the Army Air Corps), and a Japanese man named Yamada (much information on him is still unknown). 

                           General Benjamin O. Davis,                                   William Jones, NASM.2006.0067,  NASM Archives.
                          NASM.1992.0023, NASM Archives.                                              

Click here to explore all of the completed and ongoing Transcription Center projects from NASM. And keep an eye out for more projects coming soon, including a letter from astronaut John Glenn, Jr., diaries from WWI Pilot Zenos Miller, and collections documenting the groundbreaking work of female aviators Rubye Berau, Mary Charles, and Helen Richey.

-Caitlin Haynes, Transcription Center Coordinator

Transcribing Deaf Folklore from the 1981 Smithsonian Folklife Festival

Promoting Accessibility through Transcription

Young visitors learn some American Sign Language at the 1981 Smithsonian Folklife Festival. Photo by Jeff Ploskonka, Ralph Rinzler Folklife Archives.

In 1981, the Smithsonian Folklife Festival included programming about folklore from the Deaf community—often represented with a capital D. Presentations featured Deaf theater, poetry, “signlore,” puns, and many other forms of Deaf folklore. Participants recalled experiences from their childhood, what it’s like to be “deaf in a hearing world,” and some of the challenges they face daily. Overall, the Festival provided attendees with a glimpse into what it’s like to live as a deaf or hard-of-hearing American.

Until now, the audio recordings of discussions and presentations at the Folklore of the Deaf program have been archived in the Ralph Rinzler Folklife Archives and Collections but inaccessible to non-hearing people. Now, the Smithsonian Transcription Center is working to caption the audio recordings so that everybody can learn from and enjoy these resources.

Since the launch of the Transcription Center’s “#TCSound” project in June 2019, online “volunpeers” have been hard at work transcribing these valuable Festival recordings. However, audio files present some unique transcription problems that those familiar with transcribing text documents might not encounter. One of the biggest hurdles in transcribing audio files is correctly identifying speakers. Unless a speaker is explicitly introduced, it’s hard to know who is talking when. And if a sudden new voice you don’t recognize enters the recording, it can seem impossible to identify it.

With the Folklore of the Deaf audio projects, this issue is compounded by the fact that many of the speakers are deaf, so the voice we hear is actually an American Sign Language interpreter. It can certainly make your head spin trying to keep track of each interpreter’s voice while simultaneously inferring who they’re interpreting for. We want to make sure that we’re preserving everybody’s contributions to Deaf programming at the Folklife Festival, and that means crediting both the speakers who were signing to the audience as well as the interpreters who provided the voices we hear on the recordings. But with so many names to keep track of and sometimes unclear transitions between speakers, it can seem impossible to make sure you’re crediting the correct speaker and interpreter.

The answers aren't always conveyed in content of the audio recordings. The Rinzler Archives also holds in its collections supplementary text documents, called audio log sheets, recorded by Festival volunteers about each presentation. These detailed notes reveal specifics about who participated in each event and other specifics about what took place on the National Mall. For the Folklore of the Deaf sessions, these notes are especially helpful because they detail not only the presenters’ and interpreters’ names, but also, in many cases, which presenter signed which portion of the program. These log sheets are often the key needed to correctly identify speaker and interpreter names, allowing our transcriptions to be as accurate as possible and properly credit people for their contributions.

 
Example audio log sheets and can also be found here.

But how can we ensure that these connections between audio files and text documents are made? How can we make sure that volunpeers have easy access to supplemental information that will make their transcription job much easier? For us at the Rinzler Archives, this meant first having volunpeers transcribe the log sheets, then providing a link to these documents within the description of each audio project posted by the Transcription Center. That way, all the relevant information about who that mysterious speaker is in the “Deaf Theater: Kaleidoscope” recording is just one click away! Having trouble spelling a presenter’s name? (Does the linguist from Gallaudet University spell her name Barbara Kanapell? Or maybe Kannapell? Or even Canapell? Ahh!) Take a look at the audio log sheets to see how the audio documentation volunteers spelled each presenter’s name. While these notes aren’t always perfect or comprehensive, the information they contain is still invaluable for creating accurate transcriptions.

Connections between materials like this exist all over the Smithsonian’s collections. Transcribing documents and audio recordings to make them more searchable will aid users in making these connections themselves as well. Finding that connection that makes everything clear is one of the great joys of using archival materials, whether you’re a professional researcher, a history buff, or a first-time Smithsonian collections user.

Lastly, be on the lookout for more upcoming #TCSound projects from the Smithsonian Folklife Festival, including more Folklore of the Deaf recordings. The Rinzler Archives thanks you for every contribution that makes our materials more accessible! Click here to start transcribing today.

*Note: this blog uses both “Big D and little d” spellings of the word “deaf.” The lowercase “d” refers to those who are audiologically deaf, while the uppercase “D” tends to refer to those who identify both culturally and linguistically with the Deaf community.

Sammy Strootman, Archives Intern
Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage, Ralph Rinzler Folklife Archives and Collections