Hemsjukvårdscentralen began its work from Tunåsens Hospital in Uppsala in 1962, with the purpose to give conomic support to people who nursed their chronic sick relatives in home. Hemsjukvårdscentralen ended its work in 1987, and delivered its archive to the County council of Uppsala in 1988. About half of the archive consisted of medical records of the patients who had received economical support, and many of the archival records was considered as ”work papers”, non-archival records that could be discarded. Two obvious problems emerge from the organizing of the records. The first problem was the difficulty to keep the principle of provenance while making a access point to the archive, especially when it's common in Sweden to use the double principle of provenance: a fusion between the respect des fonds, the external order, and the strukturprinzip, the internal order. The second problem was to compile a complete history of the Hemsjukvårdscentralen's activities during its active years, and therefor decide which records to save and which records to discard – and which records who had a value for the future. This analysis therefore focus on the series F1 (the medical records) and F6 (the ”work papers”). This is a one year master's thesis in archival science.

This paper has had the purpose of examiniating how the chritical discussion about the well known archival theoretical topic The principle of provenance has been discussed by international researchers. The papper has also intended to examinate the discussion of the priniciple of provenance from the swedish national archives guidelines called Överlämnande av arkiv till annan myndighet. The author of this paper has been searching for answers of two research questions; In which ways are the principle of provenance being discussed by researchers in a chritical way? And, in which ways does the national archives of Sweden discuss the principle of provenance in their guidelines?  The papers results in the first research question shows that there is a lot of research about the problems and chritique about the traditional way of seeing and using the principle of provenance. The conclusion from the author regarding the first resaearch question is that many authors of the research articles found that the classical way of describing archives according to the priciple of provenance and respect des fonds, could use some modernazation. Similar patterns and words has been seen in discussion of research from the used articles of this paper, from 1983 to 2020 regarding the principle of provenance. Some special focus for the word of multi-provenance and a minimalistic and maximalistic understanding has been discussed in many of the articles, which has been analyzed by the author with the chosen theory of the paper. The results of the authors second research question shows that the national archives try to follow the principle of provenance at their best in the case were records and archives are being handled over to a new organization. The conclusion of the paper is that the priciple of provenance is chriticized and many searches for a more modern version of it, including multiprovenance and a broader perspective of the principle. The results from above has then been analyzed from a theoretical point of view with the records continuum model and a problematizized postmodern perspective.