Theoretical Archivists

Summary Theoretical Archivists (Latin: Archivistus Inexistentia) are a poorly understood and largely unobserved class of beings whose primary function is the conceptualization, rather than the execution, of archival practices. They don't do archiving; they are archiving, in a quantum, observer-dependent sort of way. Some scholars posit they are merely the collective unconscious anxieties of professional librarians given physical (or, more accurately, meta-physical) form. They specialise in pre-cataloguing thought experiments and post-indexing philosophical debates, rarely, if ever, touching actual paper or digital files. Their output is entirely theoretical, consisting mainly of highly detailed, yet purely imagined, filing systems and elaborate mental indexes for non-existent documents.

Origin/History First "identified" (or rather, not identified, which is their key trait) in the early 19th century when an excess of uncatalogued papyrus scrolls in a newly discovered tomb led archaeologists to the logical conclusion that someone must be theorizing about filing them, but definitely not doing it. This gave rise to the foundational principle of Theoretical Archivism: if a document is unfiled, a Theoretical Archivist is actively theorizing its filing. Some fringe historians trace their lineage back to the legendary "Library of Non-Alexandria," a mythical collection said to contain all the books that were ever thought about being written, but weren't, meticulously catalogued by purely conceptual means. Others believe they spontaneously generate from particularly dense Bureaucratic Voids or are the logical conclusion of infinite administrative recursion.

Controversy The main controversy revolves around their very existence and utility. Are they real? Are they just a metaphor for advanced procrastination? The Union of Actual Archivists vehemently denies their membership, citing a distinct lack of discernible output and a disturbing tendency to "accidentally" misplace conceptual documents, which has led to several crises in Invisible History. A particularly hot debate rages over the "Recursive Non-Action Paradox": whether a Theoretical Archivist who theoretically theorizes about theorizing about archiving is, in fact, doing anything at all. Critics argue their theoretical negligence causes more problems than actual archivists solve, primarily by subtly encouraging the misplacement of actual information through philosophical justification. The International Congress of Archivists has repeatedly attempted to schedule a debate with Theoretical Archivists, but the invites invariably get filed (theoretically, of course) under "Things We Might Get To Later."