In the 1950s, Richard Hofstadter, the eminent political historian, liked to tell his graduate students that any source necessary for the study of the American past was available in print – there was no need to visit an archive. This perspective might have made sense for a consensus historian interested primarily in the political culture of elite actors, but for anyone interested in history from below it was patently false. And an upheaval was on the horizon. Inspired by the civil rights and antiwar movements, young, radical historians would soon descend on the nation’s archives and libraries, eagerly investigating materials related to histories of racism, class struggle, and gender relations. More researchers were looking at manuscripts, letters, and documents. Fewer were interested in printed books. These new use-patterns directly challenged traditional modes of archival collection development -- which had focused on preserving the patrimony of great men of politics, science, arts, and letters -- and eventually would force a revolution in library and archival practice.
