MARKS OF PROVENANCE AND THEIR CONCEPTUAL AND INTERDISCIPLINARY CHALLENGES

A FOCUS ON INFORMATION SCIENCE

Abstract

Provenance marks, understood as material and symbolic records and traces present in documents—whether visual or textual—appear in the literature in various forms, such as ex-libris, stamps, seals, handwritten notes, bindings, among others. However, the concept of provenance marks still faces theoretical and conceptual challenges, especially when it goes beyond the boundaries of Archival Science and is discussed in library, museological, and historiographical contexts. Its understanding requires a broadened approach capable of recognizing the diversity of documentary supports, the different concepts and definitions, as well as the varied informational contexts in which these marks circulate. This study aims to analyze the interdisciplinary perspectives of the concept of “provenance marks” within the field of Information Science. Accordingly, it is guided by the following research question: how does the complexity of interdisciplinary interactions of the concept “provenance marks” manifest in the domain of Information Science? The research is justified by the academic relevance of the debate surrounding provenance marks. It also seeks to contribute with a contextualized and enriching perspective that incorporates sociocultural and economic dimensions of the items. Methodologically, the study adopts the Content Analysis approach proposed by Bardin (1977), aiming to systematize the concept of provenance marks based on literature available in the Information Science Database (BRAPCI) and the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SCIELO). The analysis of 49 publications from BRAPCI and SCIELO revealed the interdisciplinary nature of the concept of provenance marks in Information Science, highlighting its relationship with Library Science, Archival Science, Book History, and Computer Science (digital preservation). The most frequent typologies—such as ex-libris, stamps, and handwritten notes—reflect the diversity of material and symbolic traces, while terminological variations, such as “provenance” versus “origin,” challenge conceptual systematization. The analysis also showed that the concept of provenance marks is explored in both Library and Archival Science with distinct approaches: while Library Science emphasizes material traces and the history of items, Archival Science focuses on respect for origin. A wide variety of typologies and broad terminology were observed, which complicate conceptual standardization. Furthermore, there is a growing dialogue with other fields, such as Book History, Museology, and digital preservation, reinforcing the interdisciplinary nature of the topic. Finally, the conceptual systematization based on the dimensions of intension and extension proved to be an effective strategy for organizing the statements attributed to the term, contributing to the consolidation of a more coherent vocabulary and to the strengthening of Information Science as an integrative field focused on the preservation and organization of knowledge records.