Probate Citation

Eventide, you have three things to cite:

1. The probate record, following standard format for probate records;
2. The online provider, following standard format for citing databases and websites;
3. The source-of-our-source data that the provider gives you.

Your draft roughly follows this 1-2-3 pattern, but there are points that need tweaking for clarity and some missing information that needs to be filled in.

Your first layer gives the details for the original document; the second identifies the website. However, your Layer 1 begins by citing the database that belongs to the website in Layer 2. All details for one layer should stay in that layer; details from one layer should not be mixed into the other.

Your last layer cites the archives and its location (Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington, New Zealand) but it doesn't tell us where in the archives to find that set of records.  EE 3.1 (the Archives and Artifacts chapter) describes how archives are typically organized and the basic types of information that need to be recorded. EE 11.1 also covers this from the standpoint of how national-level archives typically organize their records. While you are not citing the NZ national archives directly, understanding how archives are organized will help you pick out the needed bits of data from more general catalog descriptions that providers give us.

Your last layer also cites "Blenheim, Marlborough," but it's not clear to your reader what that represents, given that you say the archive is in Wellington.

Before we go further to sort this out, let me ask: What EE model are you following for probate records (section number or page number)? Have you read our "QuickLesson 25: ARKs, PALs, Paths & Waypoints (Citing Online Providers of Digital Images)"?

Great sleuthing, Eventide, to come up with that identification of the record set as organized by the archives. Let’s put together your three layers and see what we have:

Blenheiem, Marlborough, New Zealand, "Consent of beneficiaries under the above will to discharge of executor and appointment in his place," for John Ewart, 27 October 1894, record no 202, series 17543, item ID R19878567; “New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate Records, 1843-1998,” digital images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939J-5SP3 : 21 February 2019), Blenheim Court > Probate records 1959 P231, P212, P198-P238 > image 137 of 634; Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington, New Zealand.

LAYER 1:

As you say, the document you cite is part of a packet that represents a probate file. Normally, when we cite a document from a file (whatever the archive or whatever the type of file), this is the basic set of details we need to provide (EE 10.33, City of St. Louis example):

Creator/Jurisdiction, type of file, file name/number, specific document, date

Following that pattern for your case, would give us this:

Blenheiem, Marlborough, New Zealand, probate file [Personal name/number needed], "Consent of beneficiaries under the above will to discharge of executor and appointment in his place," for John Ewart, 27 October 1894,

Your sleuthing at the website also provided “record no. 202, series 17543, item ID R 19878567.”  However, the images don’t tell us all this. If we want our citation to emphasize the imaged record, rather than the database, then anything we put in that layer's identification of the record should be details we can see and confirm for ourselves. When we eyeball the image at the URL you give, this is what we see:

Specifically we're told this:

No. 202  folio 157, Dated 28^th July 1891, Will of John Ewart

R. McCallum, Solicitor, Blenheim

Nowhere do we see the rest of the details that appear in Layer 1 above.  When we study the images that follow this one, we see that we have an extensive probate file for John Ewart, with the first image in the file being the wrapper on the will.  This analysis of justifies our identifying the file this way

Blenheiem, Marlborough, New Zealand, probate file for John Ewart, No. 202, folio 157, for “Consent of beneficiaries under the above will to discharge of executor and appointment in his place,” 27 October 1894 …

This is all we can determine by eyeballing the imaged records. The cataloging description that you bring in from elsewhere should not be part of this layer.

LAYER 2:

Your second layer is in perfect form, but it does present another problem. It specifically says “image 137,” but the cited URL leads to image 106.  Obviously you are trying to direct the reader to the start of the file, but readers will be confused if the image delivered at the URL does not have what you are citing. One way to handle this would be …

“New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate Records, 1843-1998,” digital images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939J-5SP3 : 21 February 2019), Blenheim Court > Probate records 1959 P231, P212, P198-P238 > images 106–154 for the probate file, specifically 137 for the “consent”;

LAYER 3:

Layer 3 is where we report what the provider tells us about the source of this record. As your citation indicates, the provider tells us only that it is from “Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington.” You went the proverbial extra mile and tracked down the additional detail needed to locate the record in that archive. When you report that information, it’s best to do it in a fashion that clearly separates what the provider says from what you have identified elsewhere:

; citing Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington. A search of that archives’ online catalog indicates that the file is cataloged as item ID R19878567, Record Series 17543: Blenheim probate files; Agency ADBY: Blenheim High Court.

Altogether, we’d have this:

Blenheiem, Marlborough, New Zealand, probate file for John Ewart, No. 202, folio 157, for "Consent of beneficiaries under the above will to discharge of executor and appointment in his place," 27 October 1894; “New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate Records, 1843-1998,” digital images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939J-5SP3 : 21 February 2019), Blenheim Court > Probate records 1959 P231, P212, P198-P238 > images 106–154 for the probate file, specifically 137 for the “consent”; citing Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington. A search of that archives’ online catalog indicates that the file is cataloged as item ID R19878567, record series 17543: Blenheim probate files; agency ADBY: Blenheim High Court.

ALTERNATIVE:

When we use the FamilySearch database, we also see that FS offers us a citation:

"New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate Records, 1843-1998," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939J-5STB?cc=1865481&wc=4BZB-7PB%3A1045247201%2C1588900898 : 15 October 2015), Blenheim Court > Probate records 1959 P231, P212, P198-P238 > image 137 of 634; Archives New Zealand, Auckland Regional Office.

FamilySearch has chosen to emphasize the database rather than the probate file. It does provide a shorter citation, but it also provides less detail than needed to fully identify what you are citing. The suggested citation could be amplified this way:

"New Zealand, Archives New Zealand, Probate Records, 1843-1998," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939J-5STB?cc=1865481&wc=4BZB-7PB%3A1045247201%2C1588900898 : 15 October 2015), Blenheim Court > Probate records 1959 P231, P212, P198-P238 >images 106—154, probate file of John Ewart, particularly image 137 for "Consent of beneficiaries ...," 27 October 1894; citing Archives New Zealand, Auckland Regional Office.

The FS citation also raises another issue yet to be resolved. Your draft cites "Archives New Zealand, National Office, Wellington." FS cites "Archives New Zealand, Auckland Regional Office."