,
6 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Historians are rightly throwing up red flags about this. To me the better question is where will the actual records be. When I was a working historian my period was all before there were presidents. So it didn’t matter to me. But for historical purposes I’ve always questioned ...
2/ the logic of having a separate archive/shrine for each President in some place they used to live. Certainly it would be better to have them all houses in one place. I’m pretty sure the national archives is actually in charge of the docs at the various presidential archives ...
3/ So if the real stuff is in DC AND there are archivists there then great. I suspect the issue is that in practice they don’t do that stuff in DC anymore and the records of O’s presidency are kind of caught betwixt and between, with no trained cohort of archivists ...
4/ on site dedicated to that collection.
5/ To be clear on one point, I'm not saying they don't have archivists at the Nat Archives in DC. Of course they do. I mean more specifically that there might not be archivists specifically dedicated to the collection because this decision departs from the practice of ...
6/ recent decades, actually going back almost a century at this point.
