My recent readings point to archivists moving into a much more visible position as mediators between the content and the public. Many archivists are historians and educators who publish regularly. Outreach and curation are archival functions also but with different materials. Methods in historical representation and cultural (perhaps ethnographic) interpretation have evolved differently, so the question may also be how far archivists can go to interpret history on the basis of material in the archives?

A basic factual narrative is already provided in archival finding aids with biographical or organizational history, but most of the data and information is raw and needs to be contextualized, analyzed, and interpreted by researchers, and their thesis presents the framework for their scholarly approaches.

Is there room for archivists to contribute to scholarly work? I would think, most certainly, but I respect the position adhering to the fundamental curation of manuscripts and institutional records. You can say, there is a range within which archivists see their role as mediators of the historical and/or cultural record, depending on the collecting scope of the archival institution.