A STUDY OF THE THEORY OF APPRAISAL FOR SELECTION By ...

ecords through a structural analysis of the creating unit.
Sante suggested that archivists choose
only those agencies of greater significance
which form the supporting framework of the
administration, so to speak, and not just the
mere stuffing, and which set themselves apart
by their creative activity. Only such
agencies are valuable for archival purposes
and shall be called upon to submit their
records.29
Sante adds that the process of appraisal must begin with a
functional analysis of an organization, and then logically
proceed to an assessment of the significance of the function of
an agency, or an administrative division within an agency.30
Rohr attempts to construct a more exact measure by imposing a
hierarchical standard of value on an administrative structure.
He cites a central state archives as an example, in which the
most valuable records would be
those of the constitutional bodies at the
highest levels of government . . ., then the
office of foreign affairs, for which of
course all documents that do not relate to
higher politics would have to be severely
extracted from the whole. Next follow,
through a number of stages of declining
importance, the registries of the other
ministries, and within these, the central of
ministerial offices are the most important. .
. . Subordinate agencies . . . will usually
not survive the filter of selection.31
29 Georg Wilhelm Sante, "Behorden--Aktn—Archive.^Alte
Taktik and neue Strategle," Archivalische Zeitschrift 54 (1958):
93; quoted in Rlumpenhouwer, "Value," 134.
30 Mid, 95.
31 Wilhelm Rohr, "Zur Problematik," 79; quoted in Booms,
"Society," 90.
44