Loose apprenticeship records, archived off-site

I'm trying to cite two loose records, the first a "master's obligation" and the second the "apprentice's indenture." These were moved from the Gilmer County, Georgia, Probate Court to the state archives in Morrow some years back. At the archives, both of these papers are in the same file folder in a box with many other files. The archivist I spoke with (when I photographed the documents) said I should include the Record Group (RG) and another number (RCB-17201; no idea of its purpose; the archivist didn't explain what it was or why it was important) in the citation, but not the box series or number.

The section (9.25) on indentureships in EE (2nd ed., 2009) refers only to bound volumes. I thought sections 8.19 and 8.20 might be ok to modify for the purpose of citing these loose records, the latter in particular since the records have been moved out of the originating office. I need only a first reference note. This is what I have so far:

For the master's obligation: Gilmer County, Georgia, Master's Obligation, 1856, William Hill; Folder: Gilmer County Apprenticeship Records, 1854, RCB-17201, RG 161-2-16; Georgia Department of Archives and History, Morrow.

For the apprentice's indenture: Gilmer County, Georgia, Apprentice's Indenture, 1856, Matilda Plemmons; Folder: Gilmer County Apprenticeship Records, 1854, RCB-17201, RG 161-2-16; Georgia Department of Archives and History, Morrow.

I'm not certain about a couple of things, like the location of the RG and RCB numbers within the citation. Also, the title of the folder began with "Gilmer County Apprenticeship Records" so I didn't think I needed to repeat that after the date (which I concluded was part of the title, since the other folders were similarly labeled). There are many, many other loose records at the Archives for this county (such as court case files), and I wasn't sure if I needed further distinguishing features in the citation. Finally, I'm not certain I have the elements in the correct order for the first third of the citation. In fact, I believe I'm more confused now than when I began...

Any guidance or hand-holding would be dearly appreciated!

Dawn Watson, Rabun Gap, GA

Submitted byEEon Tue, 08/07/2012 - 11:13
EE's picture

Dawn,

No handholding's needed!  Let's just walk through the issues.

Your first and last paragraphs deal with the same core issue. The state archives has given you a couple of different number sets, you aren't sure what they represent and, consequently, you aren't sure of what order the elements should go in.

The basic thing to know here is that most state archives in the U.S. are set up the way the National Archives is set up. So, even though you have logically sought an answer in the two chapters that deal with "local and state records," it would help to read the first few pages of Chapter 11, "Federal Records."  There, at 11.1, for example, you'll see the hierarchy that is followed in these archives. I'll summarize things here

  • Item of interest (usually the document)
  • File unit name/number (typically the file)
  • Series or collection name/number
  • Subgroup name (used by National Archives, but not as often at state level)
  • Record group name/number
  • Archives
  • Location

As you can see, these citations start with the smallest and work up to the largest. Your two sets of numbers represent the record group (the RG, which you recognized to start with) and the series number, which you have also deduced.

You've correctly honed in on 8.20 as a comparable pattern to use (loose county-level records at the N.C. State Archives). You've also done a perfect job of figuring out what elements should go where.  The only tweak that EE would suggest is that you spell out the initialism RG (i.e.: Record Group 161-2-16) to help others better understand your citation.

Submitted bydncresearchon Tue, 08/07/2012 - 12:55

In reply to by EE

Thank you so much! Your response has helped tremendously. I will go back to Chapter 11 of EE and read it thoroughly. Perhaps that will trigger my memory in the future and I won't need to ask for help again with these loose records.

It is my fault entirely that I don't understand this particular archives' system. When I went into the reading room, the archivist on duty hovered over me, made me nervous as all get out, and just generally intimidated me (unintentionally, I'm certain) to the point that I lost my focus and neglected to ask why the RCB number was important, but the box and series number were not. It's not the first time I've used records stored at the Georgia Archives, but it is the first time I've had to cite loose county records held there. (Bound volumes don't seem to be nearly as hard to cite as unbound records. Actually, I don't think I've had to fully cite bound volumes stored there, either, since many of their bound volumes are microfilmed and I tend to use those instead, when possible.) The whole experience left me discombobulated to the point that I didn't even know where to start.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to answer. I deeply appreciate it.

Dawn