Appearance
To describe a correspondence series, first establish its arrangement (by correspondent or by date), then write a series-level scope note that names the principal correspondents, the inclusive dates, the main topics, whether the letters are inward, outward, or both, and any notable gaps. For most correspondence this single well-built note plus a handful of person access points does the job — item-level description, letter by letter, is reserved for exchanges with real research weight. The pitfall that sinks more correspondence descriptions than any other is forgetting to say which direction the letters run.
Step 1: Work out the arrangement
Before writing a word, understand how the letters are ordered. Respect the original order if one survives — many archives received correspondence already filed by the creator, and that order is evidence.
If no order exists, you usually impose one of two:
- Chronological — best for an ongoing exchange or a life lived in letters.
- By correspondent — best when a few relationships dominate (a writer and their editor, a politician and key allies).
Document which you found or imposed: "Arranged by the creator alphabetically by correspondent; chronological within each."
Step 2: Sample, do not read everything
You do not need to read every letter. Sample across the series — beginning, middle, end, and the thickest files — to learn:
- Who the main correspondents are.
- The true date span and any bulk concentration.
- Recurring topics and notable events.
- Gaps (war years, a move, a falling-out).
- Whether you have inward letters, outward file copies, or both.
A focused two-hour sample of a metre of letters tells you everything a series note needs.
Step 3: Write the scope and content note
This note does most of the work. A strong one names names and themes:
text
Series 3. Correspondence, 1931-1968
Inward and outward correspondence of Thomas Hartley relating to his
consulting practice and public-works commissions. Principal
correspondents include the Borough Engineer's department (1934-1949),
the contractor Crewe & Sons, and his daughter Margaret Hartley.
Topics include the harbour extension dispute (1934-1937), wartime
material shortages, and post-war retirement planning. Outward letters
survive as carbon file copies from 1940; little outward material
survives before then. Gap, 1942-1943.Notice it states direction, names the people a researcher would search, flags the bulk topic, and is honest about gaps and missing sides.
Step 4: Record dates and extent correctly
Record the inclusive date range of the letters themselves — the date written, not received, unless only a postmark survives. Note bulk dates where the material clusters: "1931–1968 (bulk 1934–1949)". For extent, give the linear measure and the form: "0.4 linear metres; loose letters and bound letter-books".
Step 5: Add person access points
Index the people a user would plausibly search for: principal correspondents and notably discussed individuals. Link them to authority records (ISAAR-compliant) where you maintain them, so "Hartley, Margaret (1908–1991)" resolves consistently across the catalogue. Do not index every name that appears in passing — that is noise, not access.
| What to index | Index it? |
|---|---|
| Principal correspondents | Yes |
| Notable people discussed at length | Yes |
| One-off names in a single letter | No |
| The creator (named in the fonds) | Already covered |
Step 6: Decide if any letters need item-level treatment
Stay at series or file level for routine correspondence. Drop to item level only for letters with standalone significance: a letter from a notable figure, a document with legal weight, a letter central to a known historical event. Even then, item-describe selectively and say so, rather than itemising the whole run.
Common pitfalls to avoid
- Silence on direction. Always state inward / outward / both. This is the single most common omission.
- Over-itemising. Routine letters do not each need a record.
- Topic blindness. A note that says only "personal and business letters" tells a researcher nothing.
- Hidden gaps. Unflagged gaps make users assume the record is complete when it is not.
- Received-date dating. Date by the letter, not the envelope, unless that is all you have.
Key Takeaways
- Establish and document arrangement first — by correspondent or by date, respecting original order.
- Sample the series rather than reading every letter; series-level description is the norm.
- The scope note must name principal correspondents, key topics, and gaps.
- Always state whether letters are inward, outward, or both — the top recurring omission.
- Index the people researchers would search for, linked to authority records, and skip passing names.
- Reserve item-level description for letters with genuine standalone significance.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should correspondence be arranged by correspondent or by date?
Both are valid; follow the original order if one exists. Where you must impose order, chronological arrangement suits diaries-of-events and ongoing exchanges, while arrangement by correspondent suits collections dominated by a few key relationships.
Do I need to read every letter to describe a correspondence series?
No. Sample the series to grasp its main correspondents, date span, topics, and gaps, then describe at series or file level. Reading every letter is item-level work and is rarely justified for routine correspondence.
How do I handle both incoming and outgoing letters?
Note explicitly whether the series contains inward letters, file copies of outward letters, or both. This is one of the most useful things you can tell a researcher, because many collections preserve only one side of an exchange.
What dates do I record for a correspondence series?
Record the inclusive date range of the letters, and note any significant bulk dates or gaps. Use the date the letter was written, not the date it was received, unless only the postmark survives.
How should I index the people in a correspondence series?
Create access points for the principal correspondents and any notable individuals discussed, ideally linked to authority records. Do not index every passing name; index the people a researcher would plausibly search for.
What are the most common mistakes describing correspondence?
The big ones are failing to say whether letters are inward or outward, over-itemising routine letters, missing the topical themes, and not flagging gaps. A good scope note that names key correspondents and themes fixes most of them.