Field Book Project

Reference Challenges and Opportunities with the Field Book Project

By Ellen Alers, Reference Archivist, Smithsonian Institution Archives

The Smithsonian Institution Archives (SIA), along with the Natural Museum of Natural History, hosts staff from the Field Book Project (FBP) and sometimes helps provide reference for unique field book collections. Field books, however, are not the reference team's only responsibility, and their uniqueness poses special challenges for us. 

The SIA is the institutional archives for the whole of the Smithsonian. It collects, preserves and makes accessible records that document the establishment and ongoing work of the institution—19 museums and galleries, nine research centers, the National Zoo, and administrative offices—you get the picture. It's the largest archives collection within the Smithsonian and, I venture to say, one of the best exposed on the web. SIA made a conscious decision to make its holding’s as accessible as possible to the widest possible audience. Virtually all unrestricted finding aids (4265) are searchable and available online. This, as you may guess, is a blessing and a curse.

Record Unit 7306, box 2, folder 1. Measurements with diagram of the Fenykovi Elephant, provided by Jose Fenykovi, circa 1955, SIA2010-0605.

The volume of requests is high (5000 remote requests last year), international in scope, and the audience diverse—kids, scholars, research scientists, genealogists, etc. So, it is not uncommon for a member of the reference staff—thankfully there are three of us—to hop from researching objects in an exhibition to locating an architectural structures report from the 1970s to investigating the donation of a leather pocketbook in the 1920s to acquiring the skeletal measurements for the elephant in the rotunda of the Museum of Natural History. This makes the team consummate generalists rather than experts in the subtle minutia—think Swiss Army rather than sushi knife.

Because SIA finding aids are well done, a good number of the questions are focused and direct with a fairly clear path to the answer. Field books, however, pose different challenges and make the FBP shine as a reference archivist's dream.

Like any reference request, understanding what a patron hopes/expects us to provide is one thing, and what we actually find is another. Sometimes this shortfall can be disappointing for the researcher. On the one hand, this stems from a researcher's unfulfilled expectation of what they think “should” be there. On the other hand, sometimes the reference staff doesn't have the time to read the notes deeply, copy hundreds of pages from delicate notebooks, or possess the expertise to spot the telltale that solves the mystery.

Page 19 of Paul Bartsch’s journal from the Tomas Barrera Cuban Expedition, 1914. Smithsonian Institution Archives, SIA2012-1778. Read more about this recipe here.

The FBP staff's careful cataloging, digital scanning of the notebooks and blogging make these hard-to-find treasures available to researchers anywhere in the world. They have identified materials in other parts of the institution, expanding the scope of known resources. They have established connections between collectors, identifying possible resources for filling gaps in one field book by looking at a fellow collector's field book from the same expedition. (For more on this topic check out Tammy Peters’s blog post on historical context and connections.)

The focus of the FBP staff allows them more time than the reference team to delve into the details and personalities behind the notebooks and uncover interesting tidbits—cocktail recipes, poetry and sketches (both visual and textual), brow raising stories of collectors—that really bring these records to life. Bottom line, they could dish some dirt in the 1920s.  

In all, the FBP promises a virtual archive that researchers can access from their desks anywhere in the world and that makes this reference archivist very happy. 

How to Run an Expedition

By Lesley Parilla, Field Book Project

Cover of Edmund Heller’s notebook for National Geographic Society Yale University Peruvian Expedition, 1915. Image courtesy of Division of Mammals, National Museum of Natural History.

Many of the collections I’ve cataloged have had extensive correspondence and other types of materials documenting the planning of expeditions. I have sometimes found a year’s worth of materials covering negotiations between institutions, companies, and nations. These types of materials do not fall into the scope of what we catalog, but they can be helpful to us for understanding information we find in field books from a collecting trip. They often include details about where collecting occurred, what circumstances affected collecting, and where documenting materials reside.

"Narciso and Tomas," Peruvian guides and helpers packing the mules to go. The photo was taken by Edmund Heller while on the Peruvian Expedition of 1914-15, which was sponsored by Yale University and The National Geographic Society. Smithsonian Institution Archives. 94-12224.

We often know a lot about the planning before a collecting event, but frequently the more mundane details like meal planning, day-to-day accommodations, and such are not documented except in archival materials created during an expedition. These types of logistics are usually discussed in collector journals or correspondence about shipping specimens to home institutions.

So I was very surprised to find a bound and embossed notebook from the National Geographic Society Yale University Peruvian Expedition, 1915, with information and directions for participants during the trip. The notebook contains official circulars for the expedition, covering almost all aspects of the expedition preparation and execution. Some are instructions for personnel (including local dentistry options), care and purchase of equipment (including mules), weekly menus with recipes, procedures, expedition updates, contact information, and examples of types of pottery discovered. Circulars are numbered and sometimes dated. Some are even in Spanish for the local staff.

Page providing instructions to expedition members for keeping their journals.	Page discussing daily menus from expedition.

Unfortunately this notebook contains no original documentation about specimens collected, so it is not cataloged, but it a fascinating example of supplementary materials that sometimes exist alongside the field books. It struck me as akin to a modern travel guide. Like many of the materials we find, I don’t know the entire history of the item such as whether members had to update their own copies with new memos or if there was even more than one copy. But, it is a fascinating example of how to handle the day-to-day logistics of an expedition. I find this notebook especially fascinating because it seems so unusual compared to the documentation I’ve found for expeditions of the same time period. The kind of consistency of participant documentation it promotes and the wide range of local information it contains seems to correlate with major collecting efforts I’ve cataloged from the 1960s.

Portion of the notebook providing advice about dentistry.

I have not found the documents instructing participants for the collecting trips of the 1960s, I’ve only seen the results. The similarity in field book and catalog content from projects like Smithsonian African Mammal Project and Smithsonian Venezuela Project indicate that the projects had explicit instructions about the type of information to be collected and how it should be recorded.

It seems that if documents covering day-to-day logistics exist for collecting events, they are not frequently retained; yet these types of materials provide much needed information about what participants look for and what they are to document. They provide details about daily life in the field that in inspire imagination, and I love the glimpse back in time that this expedition guide represents. Besides, if it were not for these documents, I might never have learned about erbswurst (that’s a hint to read the daily menu!).

In Search of Missing Field Books

By Edward Davis, University of Oregon

Original J. Arnold Shotwell Mammalogy field book, 1947. Photo by Lieke Dircks, 2012.

Field books are the lifeblood of a natural history collection. It's hard to conceive of a museum without its field notes, but that's exactly what I found when I arrived at the Condon Fossil Collection of the University of Oregon (UO) Museum of Natural and Cultural History (MNCH) in 2007: close to 100 years of collections without original field notes. Digging into the problem revealed that the notebooks weren't gone (a relief) but had just followed collectors when they left the museum.

Our fossil collection traces its history back to the pioneer geologist Thomas Condon, who began collecting in the area that is now John Day National Monument in the 1860s. Condon amassed almost 6000 specimens, with the majority of his collections from the John Day and Fossil Lake fossil mammal faunas. Upon Condon’s death in 1907, UO acquired his collection, forming the basis of the current MNCH, and in 1918 hired Earl Packard to succeed him.

Original Shotwell Paleontology field book, 1952. Photo by Lieke Dircks, 2012.

Packard had Condon's notebooks transcribed into a new printed catalog, which has been passed down to me through a series of mimeographs and photocopies of mimeographs. While I haven't yet seen Condon's original notebooks, I do have a good record of the provenance of Condon's fossils. I am still hopeful of finding Condon's original notebooks, and as time allows, I plan to visit the UO archives and other appropriate archives in the state.

Earl Packard’s field notes are a more difficult problem, but we seem to have found a solution. Packard oversaw the Condon Collection through the 1930s, when all natural science research at Oregon public universities (including the Condon Collection) was moved to Oregon State University (OSU) in Corvallis. Shortly after Packard retired in 1950, the Condon Collection returned to UO, but Packard's notes have remained in Corvallis, where they are a part of the OSU archives. Elizabeth Orr, our still very active emeritus collections manager, has been instrumental in hunting down Packard’s missing records. While we don't yet have a complete set of Packard's notes, it is reassuring to know they exist and are protected at the OSU archives.

Transcribed Paleontology field notes from Shotwell, 1955. Photoby Lieke Dircks, 2012.

After Packard retired, the Condon Collection was incorporated into the UO Museum of Natural History under paleontologist J. Arnold Shotwell. Shotwell was a tremendous collector, amassing tens of thousands of specimens over his more than 20 years at UO. Unfortunately, a 1972 disagreement with the UO administration over budget tightening measures lead to Shotwell’s angry departure from the UO; he carried all his field notes with him. In the 2000s, Ted Fremd, then Head Paleontologist at the John Day National Monument, approached Shotwell, and the two developed a friendship. Over the following few years, Shotwell shared many of his notes with Fremd, who in turn has shared copies with us, allowing us to finally fully document Shotwell’s critical paleoecological collections. Unfortunately, Arnold Shotwell died in early 2012, but before he died the paleontologists at UO managed to reconcile with him, even recognizing him with a MNCH lifetime achievement award. His family has graciously agreed to pass on to MNCH the remainder of the notes, photographs, and maps documenting his field collections.

The UO paleontologists after Shotwell are still with the university, either as emeritus or active faculty, and have been contributing their field books to the MNCH archives. For all new collections, we archive digital copies of field books annually and add their printouts to the museum’s physical archives. I hope my story gives you a sense of the frustration I have felt tracking down these notes, knowing that the effort of decades of fieldwork is lost without them. A sense of scientific duty drives my new dedication to the immediate deposit of field notes. As ethical collectors, we must ensure that future workers won’t have to search for our field books; without supporting documentation, the specimens we collect today may as well be paperweights.

A Recipe for Specimen Collecting

By Lesley Parilla, Field Book Project

Portion of A. C. Risser’s field journal (page 89) discussing ingredients for bait. Note in margin defines “ghee.” Housed in Division of Mammals, National Museum of Natural History. Image number risser_a_c_196504-196508-89b.

Last Thanksgiving, I discussed the range of food references we have found in collectors’ field notes. I think food makes a great topic given the traditions of the holiday. This year a new aspect of food presented itself as a topic: bait.

The field notes we catalog frequently include details about collecting methods. If the collector is using traps, they might record the types, quantity, and location of traps in a given collecting area. Sometimes collectors even include hand drawn maps of trap placement or detailed sketches about their construction. Collectors also sometimes discuss the type of bait they use.

My curiosity with this topic was born the day I read the following entry by Caleb Kennerly in Puget Sound with the Northwest Boundary Survey, 1857-1861:

13. Starfish and mouse. Steilacoom, WJ. July 4. The former taken with hook in ten fathoms of water, and it had swallowed the small piece of fresh mutton with which the hook was baited.

I have no idea how he came to use mutton as bait, but I made sure to keep my eye out for more information about bait in field books. I found a few references here and there; the information was often sparse, and what little I did find left me intrigued and confused. A few collectors made notes. Alexander Wetmore listed a recipe for bee bait in his field book for August 1902 - April 1903 when he lived in North Freedom, Wisconsin. Frederick True and Daniel Prentiss, Jr., wrote that they used bait composed of anise, oatmeal, and bacon during summer of 1897 in Hancock County, Maine. So now I had references to using mutton and anise, two ingredients I’ve never associated with bait.

I didn’t find any consistent listings or descriptions of bait until I began cataloging in the Division of Mammals. I found a lot of information in field books on bait choices, especially for two projects during the 1960’s: Smithsonian Venezuela Project (SVP) and Smithsonian African Mammal Project (AMP). After working on these two collections I came up with two theories to explain the mutton and anise.

My first theory is that collectors often use whatever is readily available. I found several references in AMP field books to purchasing bait ingredients at local markets. This might explain Kennerly’s use of mutton to catch a starfish. The second theory developed because, unlike the entries in nineteenth century field books, entries from the 1960’s I have read tend be more expansive about what bait ingredients are used and why.

Choices usually seem to involve some sort of grain, fruit, and/or protein. During AMP, collectors of mammals used combinations like: sundried fish; rice-oatmeal mixture, flavored with sardine sauce; banana; or rice and banana mixture. Frederick True and Daniel Prentiss, Jr., were using the same kind of combination; however their listing of anise probably related to anise oil. A SVP participant listed using fresh ripe banana on some old peanut butter, oats, and anise oil as bait.

Now that I’ve laid the background, below are some bait recipes I’ve found. A lot of these remind me of breakfast. As of yet I have not found one involving desserts, but I’m holding out hope.

• September 4, 1962 – Madagascar: traps baited with sun-dried fish
• November 7, 1962 – Madagascar: traps baited with a rice-oatmeal mixture, flavored with sardine sauce.
• January 31, 1963 – Mauritius: traps baited with banana
• April 4, 1963 – Madagascar: traps baited with rice and banana mixture
• July 3, 1965 – West Pakistan: trap baited with white oats, 2 eggs, ghee, parmesan cheese and water. [The collector stated in his journal that he used this combination because he couldn’t find any bananas.]

Whatever food graces your table this year, all of us at the Field Book Project wish you a Happy Thanksgiving!

Cultivating the Next Generation of Field Books

By Nicole Webster, Forensic Anthropology Lab Educator

Selection from the field book of Tho Tran, who interned with the Department of Vertebrate Zoology, Division of Mammal. 2012.

This summer, the National Museum of National History (NMNH) selected 25 local teen interns from underrepresented STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) populations to take part in the YES! (Youth Engagement Through Science) program. Throughout the summer portion of this program, each of the interns was paired with a scientist mentor at NMNH, Smithsonian National Zoological Park, or Smithsonian Gardens. The YES! intern projects ranged from tasks as varied as assisting the Department of Paleobiology with prep for isotope analysis to working as a zookeeper aide for Asia Trail. One of the common threads through all of the internships was that students documented their daily experiences and project research in field books. This day-to-day note taking would assist them by helping to develop their observation and scientific note taking skills and providing a vital record for the end of their summer when their work culminated in a poster showcase for Smithsonian staff at the NMNH Director’s Hall.

The YES! interns first delved into the world of field books by learning from the examples of Smithsonian scientists, both past and present. They worked together to identify key aspects of what should be included in daily notes by comparing sample field books from different departments in the museum and visiting the National Museum of Natural History Main Library to explore historic field books from the Department of Botany. Armed with this basic knowledge, and new personal field books, they first took to the public floor of NMNH to test their observation and note taking skills by using the museum as the "field".

Zeidy Cardoso’s notes from the “Using the Museum as the Field” activity. 2012.	Portion of a daily entry by Abram Shaw, who interned as a keeper aide at the Small Mammal house at the National Zoo. 2012

After the YES! interns had built and demonstrated a baseline of practical and historical knowledge about field books, their scientist mentors took the lesson to the next level by sharing their personal field books and helping the interns to tailor their note taking to the students’ individual projects. Throughout the summer, their progress was tracked by weekly field book check-ins, making sure the students were recording data and experiences to the best of their abilities.

Selection from the field notes of William Guzman Jr., who interned at the NMNH Insect Zoo/Butterfly Pavilion.

At the end of the summer portion of the program, the interns turned in their field books for review and shared their thoughts on the process. I was thrilled by both the openness and honesty in their writing, and the effort many of the students had made to record their experiences in their entirety. Those who committed themselves to the experience gained a newfound respect for the importance of field books in science.

Notes and sketches from the field book of Jennifer Cruzl, who interned in the Department of Botany. 2012.

YES! interns were asked to anonymously provide feedback at the end of the program. The comments below from two participants illustrate just how important the students' field books became over the summer:

"It was a good use of my time during my internship, because I could reflect on my work and experience everyday. I was also able to write down any idea that came to me."

"I liked my field notebook because it has made me feel official and professional. It helped me keep things organized and updated. In addition, I recorded my ideas for future experiments and projects."

Every YES! intern adopted their own personal style for recording their experiences. From the botany intern that selected a specimen daily to describe in further detail because it had “caught their eye,” to the Insect Zoo intern that recorded not only the behavior of the invertebrates he was caring for, but also those of the museum visitors. Students approached the design of their field books differently, some structuring their field notes for systematic entries, others using more of a diary format. It was intriguing to see how students took their training and remodeled what they had learned to fit their individual project, providing a unique window into the work that encompassed all their summer experiences.

Learn more about YES!

Enjoy the Journey

By Tad Bennicoff, Reference Archivist, Smithsonian Institution Archives

James A. Peters field notes, Mexico, 1949: Notes on Eleutherodactylus occidentalis specimen. Smithsonian Institution Archives, Record Unit 7175, Box 49, Folder 4, Image SIA2012-6364.

 One of the joys (and perhaps frustrations!) of conducting historical research is the mystery of what might be found upon reviewing original, archival materials.  Quite often, one enters into such research with anticipation, hope, and a level of expectation regarding the information being sought.  If the focus of consulting a particular historical resource lies solely in unearthing details to further one’s own theory, or confirm an expectation, it can become easy to overlook the fascinating materials encountered along the way, and the destination becomes more important than the journey.  Such was the case as I commenced with this article. 

My experience working with the Smithsonian’s collection of field books is rather limited, as I am not assigned to the Field Book Project, but rather am a Reference Archivist at the Smithsonian Institution Archives.  My chief responsibility is to reply to the inquiries we receive related to our holdings.  Thus, I do not have the luxury of becoming intimate with a particular collection and spend considerable time breezing past materials that may be of personal interest, but unrelated to a specific research request.  This very “businesslike” approach is similar to James A. Peters's style of note taking found in Record Unit 7175: James A. Peters Papers, and Records of the Division of Reptiles and Amphibians, 1927-1973 (Papers), 1927-1966 (Records).

James A. Peters field notes, Mexico, 1949: Tracing of Hyla smaragdina specimen. Note the source of the tracing is cited. Smithsonian Institution Archives, Record Unit 7175, Box 49, Folder 4, Image SIA2012-6426.

James Arthur Peters (1922-1972) was trained as a biologist.  He spent time as a member of the Brown University faculty (1952-1958) and served as Professor of Biology at San Fernando State College (1959-1964) prior to accepting the position Associate Curator in the Division of Reptiles and Amphibians at the United States National Museum (now the National Museum of Natural History) in 1964.  He became “supervisor and curator” of the division in 1967, a title which he held until his untimely passing in 1972.  His field notes are very professional, his handwriting quite legible.  Each entry includes careful details, such as the date, location, and circumstances under which a specimen was observed.  It is obvious that Dr. Peters valued his field notes, as he added typed pages expressing conclusions formed after extensive observations in the field.  His field notes also include tracings of specimens from published works wth citations.   Upon reviewing just a few pages, it becomes clear that the field notes of James Arthur Peters would be a valuable resource for an aspiring or established Herpetologist. 

Conducting research on another’s behalf can be challenging, especially when you happen upon interesting or curious materials unrelated to the request.  This happens quite frequently, as it did upon preparing this post.  I was reviewing the field notes of George Sprague Myers (Record Unit 7317: George Sprague Myers Papers, circa 1903-1986 and undated,) a Herpetologist, Ichthyologist, and former Assistant Curator in Charge, Division of Fishes, United States National Museum.  Professor Myers left the United States National Museum in 1936 to accept a professorship at his alma mater, Stanford University.  Myers was a prolific writer and educator, with more than 600 published papers to his credit (a well-written memorial resolution for George Sprague Myers is available online.) 

High School notebook of George Sprague Myers. Smithsonian Institution Archives, Record Unit 7317, Box 57, Folder 1.	High School notebook of George Sprague Myers. Pages containing History notes, as well as drawings of fish. Smithsonian Institution Archives, Record Unit 7317, Box 57, Folder 1.

The Myers Papers are rich with correspondence, research notes, and scientific manuscripts.  Included among his papers is a notebook labeled “Period 4 English, Room 307, D.H.S.” (Box 57, Folder 1: High School Notebook).  It sparked my curiosity, so I had to have a look.  The notebook contains Myers notes on Homer’s Odyssey, long a standard study of a high school English class.  Flipping through the pages you will find notes on Greek gods and characters represented in the epic, as well as notes on fish!  Adjacent to a page full of notes on the Helvetians (Myers must have used this notebook for a History class one particular day) are drawings of fish!  There are similar notes and drawings present throughout the notebook.  Thus, even in high school, while others were daydreaming of summer vacation or perhaps their Friday evening hangout, Myers, who had found his calling as an Ichthyologist, was daydreaming of fish!

The field books held by the Smithsonian Institution may be viewed as a microcosm of the Institution itself; there is a little something for everyone, whether it be the seasoned scientist seeking very specific data, a student of history interested in reviewing primary sources, or a researcher hoping to develop a human profile of a field book author who seemingly gathered and processed data with machine-like precision.  One of the goals of the Field Book Project is to digitize many of the field books and make them available with only a few strokes of your keyboard.  If you are interested, and take the time to review the pages and enjoy the journey, I believe you will find the field books to be much like the totality of the Smithsonian Institution: Seriously Amazing!

More James A. Peters field notes on our blog

More herpetology field notes on our blog

Images on Flickr Commons, November 2012

Two notebook pages with rubbing from Foshag's San Agustín Acasaguastlan notebook. Acc 91-144, Box 1, Field Notebooks (Re: Jade); Two notebook pages with rubbing from Foshag's San Agustín Acasaguastlan notebook, rubbing from sample 4734 of a jade carving SIA 2011-0945. http://nmnh.typepad.com/fieldbooks/2011/06/foshag.html

By Lesley Parilla, Field Book Project

In September of 2012, we launched a series of Flickr sets to highlight the wonderful visual content of our blog posts. These images document the wide variety of field books we catalog here at the Field Book Project, and were kindly digitized for us by the Smithsonian Institution Archives Digital Services. Being on Flickr gives us a chance to share content with a wider audience and users the chance to interact with images more directly (e.g. tagging and commenting) than is possible in the blog format.

This is the third installment in the series, available to through the Smithsonian’s Flickr Commons stream. The set includes 27 images that accompanied blog posts from 2011. These come from scrapbooks, journals, photographs, drawings, and logbooks, and document field work completed around the world, over the course of two centuries.

So take a look, comment, follow the url in the caption to the related blog post to learn more. We hope you enjoy the images as much as we do.

See Flickr Set

Why Are You Cataloging in Rare Books?

By Lesley Parilla, Field Book Project

Smithsonian Institution Libraries. Online exhibit, "The Art of African Exploration".

Last year, I cataloged part of a unique collection at the Joseph F. Cullman 3rd Library of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution Libraries—the Russell E. Train Africana Collection. This blog post was inspired by a series of conversations about descriptions of the collection materials that already existed and how Field Book Project catalog records would utilize and add to them. If you have the chance to look at the Train Collection exhibition website, “The Art of African Exploration”, you might ask the question I used to entitle this post. If the materials are already described, why was I there cataloging them? When I first looked at the existing item descriptions, I began to wonder. However, when I started looking at the items themselves, I realized that the way we catalog would indeed add new descriptive information to what already existed.

A collection like this, which includes archival materials, objects, and print materials, is a challenge for any institution to house and catalog. Each of these types of materials is usually associated with a specific type of institution. Primary documents usually go to archives, objects to museums, and published materials to libraries. Each type of item comes with its own challenges for description and housing; each type of institution has developed their own ways of meeting these challenges.

Cover page of Sir John Kirk’s “Butterflies collected in the Shire Valley, East Africa.” Russell E. Train Africana Collection at the Joseph F. Cullman 3rd Library of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

Four types of descriptions for items within the Train collection existed before I began cataloging.

1. Book description: tailored to published works, this describes items as self-contained, stand alone works.
2. Archival description: developed specifically for unpublished works, this emphasizes contextual information and relationships among parts of the collection.
3. Conservation description: intended for items in need of conservation, this notes physical deterioration and possible conservation treatments.
4. Booksellers description: created to sell items, this focuses on physical description, history (historical significance), and value.

Verso of page 22 from Volume 2 of the 8 journal set by N. C. Cockburn. Part of the Russell E. Train Africana Collection.	Page 23, volume 2

Given these four types of descriptions you’re probably wondering what my cataloging added to the mix. The Field Book Project cataloging structure is a mixture of library and archival approaches, which fits well with some of the cataloging challenges in the Train collection. In addition, we include information specific to natural history researcher needs.

Portion of page 80, discussing Cockburn journals, from catalog compiled for Russell E. Train. Courtesy of Joseph F. Cullman 3rd Library of Natural History.

For many of the items I cataloged, I started by using portions of existing descriptions to which I added relevant information. Here is where an example probably helps. Above is a description taken from page 80 of the catalog compiled for Russell E. Train. It describes the 8 volume set of journals written by N. C. Cockburn. Below is the bookseller’s description for the same set of journals.

Bookseller’s description of Cockburn text. Courtesy of Joseph F. Cullman 3rd Library of Natural History.

When I catalog, I focus on the following:

• reason the person is at a location
• type of collecting
• dates of the collecting event
• types of information recorded about the collecting event (e.g. weather, terrain, vegetation, collecting method)

Often the pre-existing descriptions include limited or no information like that types listed above, thus being enhanced by the field book specific cataloging methods I used.

The field notes within the Train collection are a good illustration of the inspirations and challenges for the Field Book Project. The wide variety of field book materials means they can be described as library materials or as archival collections. In the case of the Train collection, the field books had descriptions that were not specific to researcher needs. Our Project has worked with museum and archive professionals to develop a cataloging system to address the wide variety of formats and diverse information field books document.

Field Notes from a Termite Lady

By Emily Hunter, Field Book Project

I’m not a scientist. I appreciate nature, but I’m not someone who has dedicated my life to studying it. Maybe it is because I’m an outsider to the discipline that I’m absolutely fascinated by the range of topics that the fervent scientist pursues. Whatever you can think of… someone out there probably has a near-fanatical devotion to understanding it. And I mean really, think about it! What’s the most boring, uninteresting animal, plant, or rock you can imagine? I am willing to bet that someone somewhere finds it riveting. And thank goodness for that! If I were a scientist, I’d probably study something cute and furry, but I sure am glad that there are good people out there studying the worms and the not-so-cute things.

Photograph panorama showing collectors on the beach where termite infested driftwood was found. Little Cayman, Cayman Islands, February 17, 1995. SIA Acc. 01-038, Box 1, Folder 13. No negative number.

I just couldn’t fathom the motivation for entomologist Margaret Collins’s passion for termites. Margaret Collins was so enthralled with termites that she observed them, wrote about them, collected them, even ate them. I just so happened to read all about it in her field notes, part of the collection “National Museum of Natural History (U.S.) Dept. of Entomology, Curatorial Records, 1959-1996” (SIA Acc. 01-038).

Why was I surprised that Margaret Collins was obsessed with termites? Maybe part of it was that what I learned about Margaret Collins herself made me see quickly that she was a fascinating woman! Logically it would follow…fascinating person, must be studying fascinating things. And so, with an open mind, I read her field notes.

Dr. Margaret Collins

Image of Dr. Collins, printed in “National Trust for the Cayman Islands 1992 Annual Report”. SIA Acc. 01-038, Box 1, Folder 13. No negative number.

First, some background on Collins. Margaret Collins, affectionately known as “the termite lady” to friends and colleagues, was declared the first African-American female entomologist by the Entomological Society of America (Peters, 2010, p. 654). She was born in 1922 in Institute, West Virginia, where she grew up in a well-educated family. Collins was interested in nature from a young age, observing and collecting small animals in the creek near her house. She was extraordinarily gifted and graduated from high school early in 1937. Margaret Collins was just 14 years old when she enrolled in college.

Collins studied zoology at West Virginia State University and went on to earn her PhD in 1949 from the University of Chicago. Her accomplishments are many, including discovering Neotermes Luykxi. She held professorships of zoology at Howard University, Florida A&M, and Federal City College. In the late 1970’s Collins came to the National Museum of Natural History as a Research Associate where she worked to organize the termite collection.

I can only imagine what Collins faced as an African-American and a woman scientist through the decades, including the struggle for civil rights and equality during the 1950s-1970s. In an interview with Black Women Scientists in the United States author Wini Warren, Collins said, “Because of my family and our community I had a unique childhood. I never learned what I couldn’t do—as a child, as a woman, or as a Black person.” (p. 52).

Collins felt most at home in the field. She traveled to Belize, Dominica, Guyana, Cayman Islands, Suriname, Bahamas, and British Virgin Islands collecting and studying termites. She did not allow age to slow her down, continuing to work in the field into her 70s. In 1996, on a field trip to the Cayman Islands, Margaret Collins passed away.

The Fascinating Termite

Photographs taped together to show termite-infested driftwood, Little Cayman, Cayman Islands, February 17, 1995. SIA Acc. 01-038, Box 1, Folder 13. No negative number.

In her field book, Collins wrote with admiration about the termite’s ability to digest wood. I decided to investigate termites a little more.

It turns out that despite their bad rap as destructive pests, termites are ecologically beneficial in some ways: they recycle nutrients, clear up organic debris (rotting limbs and leaves), and create hollowed spaces that other animals might call home. They also have pretty interesting social structures. Termites are eusocial animals that, like ants, have societies with various roles like soldiers, workers, and queens. Termites build complex nests using a mixture mud, feces, and saliva. Have you seen a termite cathedral mound? Just take a look at the sophisticated engineering of this structure.

Cathedral Termite Mound, home to a colony of grass eating termites, Nasutitermes triodiae. Litchfield National Park, Northern Territory, Australia. Photo by J Brew, via Wikimedia Commons.	Eastern subterranean termite soldiers (Reticulitermes flavipes KOLLAR). Photograph is in the public domain. Via United States Department of Agriculture on Wikimedia Commons.

Maybe Margaret Collins was right about termites! By the end of the collection, I have to admit, I was starting to think termites were pretty cool. Fortunately, Margaret Collins studied these creatures, learned about them, wrote about them, and most importantly, paved the way for others to do the same. Thank you, Termite Lady!

--

References:

Peters, J. G. (2010). Bill Peters and Entomology at Florida A&M University. Florida Entomologist, 93(4), 654. Available online at: http://journals.fcla.edu/flaent/article/view/76176/73834

Termite Expert Margaret Collins Dies During Trip. (1996, May 5). The Washington Post, p. B9.

Warren, W. (1999). Black Women Scientists in the United States. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Learn more about termites!

The Incredible Termite Mound (PBS)

Faster than a Speeding Bullet (Smithsonian Magazine)

Termite Bellies and Biofuels (Smithsonian Magazine)

Older Termites Blow Themselves Up to Protect Their Colony (Smithsonian Magazine)

Discovering the Artistry in Field Notes: Intersection of Art and Science

By Emily Hunter, Field Book Project

Recently, I had the opportunity to present on visual field notes at Revealing Hidden Treasures: the Smithsonian’s Archives Fair 2012, a day inspired by the month of October--American Archives Month. In case you missed it, here’s a recap:

Heteropogon near Masaya, Nicaragua. SIA Acc. 11-093, Box 1, Mary Agnes Chase Photograph Album 1898-1903. SIA2012-4623.

We’ve talked quite a bit on our blog about the variety of formats that field books may take, including photographs, sketches, maps, correspondence, journals, specimen lists, and more. I wanted to take a moment to discuss why visual field notes are important. Lists and diaries contain information like collector numbers, geographical names, specimen binomials, and all sorts of information for which it’s easy to see the use potential. They can be cross-referenced with the actual specimen labels, or offer missing or supplemental information. But what about visual materials? What can they offer that is useful or unique? Among other things, they can tell us specifically about specimens, the environment, and the collecting event.

Specimens

Photographs and sketches can give us important information about specimens that were collected or observed in the field. Together, words and sketches can give a fuller, richer description of specimens. As mentioned in a previous blog post, specimens, especially fish, can lose color and pattern information shortly after they are preserved—sketches can relate those details to us.  Similarly, images of live or just-collected plants can give us information about the living individual that pressed plants can not. In a world before photography, sketches were critical for illustrating specimens (and also field work and the environment). When photography became more popular, it also became a tool for capturing this information.

Environment

Sketch of Kanab Canyon by Charles D. Walcott during his field work for the US Geological Survey, October 15 - November 3, 1879. Smithsonian Institution Archives. RU007004, Box 32, Folder 1. SIA SIA2012-9643.

Sketches, photographs, and maps can give us important information about the environment surrounding a collecting site; they can, quite literally, paint us a picture of a certain place as it existed at a certain time. We can use photographs and drawings from the field to answer questions such as:

What did the landscape look like?

What species were thriving?

What was missing or scarce?

How has this location changed?

Maps can also give us clues as to what the world looked like at a past time. They can illustrate old routes that existed before modern roads did, and indicate locations where specimens were observed or collected. Some maps preserve information about a past landscape or historical political borders. In a past blog post, Eleonore Dixon-Roche discussed how the landscape has changed since Joseph Rock visited and created his hand drawn maps.

Constantine S. Rafinesque's Notes N. 17, pages 86 and 87, 1818. Smithsonian Institution Archives. RU 007250, Box 1, Folder 3. SIA2012-6086.

Collecting event

Vernon Orlando Bailey on horseback in Rabbit Hole Basin, Nevada, 1898. Smithsonian Institution Archives. RU 007267, Box 5, Folder 12. SIA2011-1382.

Visual field notes can illustrate fieldwork for us in a way that textual documents simply cannot. Photographs show us what fieldwork looked like. We begin to see things like who was there, how a specimen was obtained, how it was transported, and the cultural context surrounding the collection.

Through images, we get a sense of what it might have been like to be a part of an historical expedition. Images like these speak to us; they illustrate scientific explorations, and communicate to us in a very human way so that we can relate to these past stories. They make it real!

--

Slides of this presentation are available on Slide Share. You may see a webcast of the presentation on YouTube.