CMSR Image at National Archives Catalog website

By V P Stroeher on Sun, 01/15/2023 - 12:04

Forums

I have a question about citing an image of a compiled military service record found at the National Archives Catalog website. Unlike at Fold3, there's no database title; instead, the image is described as part of a NARA series and record group. The image is also offered without reference to the microfilm production [M258, roll 85], but it has a unique identifier, used in the URL: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/22028291. Interestingly, the image is from Fold3. 

So, here is an attempt at a reference note citation using 11.32 with a layer for the image:

Compiled service record, William H. Pierce, Pvt., Co. K, 1 Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles; image, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/22028291 : accessed 15 January 2023); Carded Records, Confederate Organizations, Civil War; Record Group (RG) 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records, 1825–1927; National Archives, Washington, D.C.

A source list entry might look like this, but I'm not sure if the placement of the website and URL is the best. I attached it to the series:

Military, Compiled Service Records. Civil War. Carded Records, Confederate Organizations. Images, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/586957). Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records, 1825–1927. National Archives, Washington D.C.

These images are so very handy, but a wee bit of a challenge to think through for a citation.

Submitted byEEon Sun, 01/15/2023 - 16:43

V P Stroeher, you’ve identified a major headache created by digitization. In addition to all the other considerations, such as Which do we want to emphasize, the original document or the online database that delivers it?, we now have to consider this: Two sites may offer the same item, but our citations will be different because the sites differ in their own identifications and organizational structures. 

The bottom line: We cite what we use.  In this discussion, I’ll cover both of the sites you name: the National Archives Catalog and Fold3.

Your draft citation proposes this:

Compiled service record, William H. Pierce, Pvt., Co. K, 1 Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles; image, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/22028291 : accessed 15 January 2023); Carded Records, Confederate Organizations, Civil War; Record Group (RG) 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records, 1825–1927; National Archives, Washington, D.C.

You’ve tried hard to follow the traditional pattern that NARA (as well as similar U.S. archives) has always requested: start with the smallest element (the document) and move progressively upward to the largest element (the archive and location). You've built on the basic pattern for this type of record at EE 11.32. However:

  • (a minor issue) “Compiled service record” is not part of the NARA description on the catalog page that delivers the record. New researchers would not intuitively know to call it that.
  • (a major issue) The citation, structured this way, has 5 layers:
  1. Original file
  2. Website
  3. Series in which the original file appears
  4. Record group in which the series appears
  5. Archive in which the record group is housed

This structure has two obvious problems:

  1. The original file (Layer 1) is arbitrarily separated from the series in which the file appears (Layer 3). The website ID is injected between them.
  2. The original file is imaged at the website. However, the website is not part of the series in which the original file appears. That website is larger than any one series and has many different series within it.

Obviously, we have to rethink this.

To cite the document traditionally (as per EE 11.32):

Compiled military service record, William H. Pierce, Pvt., Co. K., Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles; Carded Records, Volunteer Organizations, Civil War; Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records, 1825–1927; National Archives, Washington, D.C.

However, adapting it for a website delivery creates a couple of problems:

  1. This does not identify the website that delivered the document.
  2. We can’t just add a layer at the end and tack on all the website ID because the citation already has a series of layers that represent a different structure. Following traditional NA guidance for citing its manuscripts, it goes from smallest unit (document) to largest (the archive and city), with each level in the archival hierarchy being a “layer” and with semicolons separating the layers.  The website exists outside that framework.

To cite the catalog following standard EE pattern for citing images delivered by online databases:

U.S. National Archives, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/22028291: accessed 15 January 2023) > Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records > Series: Carded Records Showing Military Service of Soldiers Who Fought in Confederate Organizations > 5 images, “Pierce, William H – Age 22, Year: 1861 – First Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles, O-Y – Raised Directly by the Confederate Government,” image 1. 

This follows the now-standard pattern for citing website materials and it has some advantages:

  • It follows the structure of the website, including the “path” that the website identifies for us above the image.
  • All the details that identify the imaged file are placed within the “specific item” field of the citation to the website, quoting the exact wording of the document label that NARA created.
  • There’s no need for a “citing ...” layer because the path that we’ve copied provides all the needed identification for the series and record group.
  • This also follows the same basic format we’ve always used to cite the microfilmed Compiled Service Records (EE 11.32, p. 595). We’re just substituting a website citation for the microfilm pub citation.

It also has one major disadvantage:

  • When someone reads the citation, they must plow waaaaaay into the citation to identify what it is that is being cited: “Carded Records ... Pierce, William H.”

We could reverse our emphasis and cite this as an original document, with limited info in Layer 1 (black, below); then cite the website in Layer 2 (green, below).

William H. Pierce (Pvt., Co. K, Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles, Civil War), compiled military service record; U.S. National Archives, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/22028291) > Record Group 109: War Department Collection of Confederate Records > Series: Carded Records Showing Military Service of Soldiers Who Fought in Confederate Organizations > 5 images.

Your reference to Fold3 (which did the imaging of these records as a NA partner) introduces another wrinkle:  The citation above would not work if we use the Fold3 website, because Fold3 has a different structure.  Among other things:

  • Fold3 has a database title that National Archives Catalog doesn’t use.
  • Fold3 assigns a different URL to each of the five images in Pierce’s file, while NA assigns a single URL to the whole file.
  • The Fold3 citation would require a “citing ...” layer, whereas NA’s website uses a path that identifies the series and RG.

A Fold3 citation, emphasizing its database (which most researchers would do if they had multiple files from this database), would be this:

“Civil War Service Records (CMSR) – Confederate – Confederate Government (CSA)” (https://www.fold3.com/image/121158130 and 4 subsequent images : 15 January 2023), William H. Pierce, pvt., Co. K, 1 Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles, specifically image 121158134; citing Compiled Service Records of Confederate Soldiers Who Served in Organizations Raised Directly by the Confederate Government, microfilm publication M258 (Washington, DC: National Archives, n.d.), roll 85.

Alternately, if we wanted to emphasize the person and his record, we would create three layers: Layer 1 for the person/document; Layer 2 for the database; and Layer 3 for the source-of-the-source data.

A Fold3 citation, emphasizing the record/person could be handled this way:

William H. Pierce, (Pvt., Co. K, 1 Choctaw and Chickasaw Mounted Rifles, Civil War), compiled military service record; imaged in “Civil War Service Records (CMSR) – Confederate – Confederate Government (CSA)” (https://www.fold3.com/image/121158130 and 4 subsequent images : 15 January 2023), specifically image 121158134; citing Compiled Service Records of Confederate Soldiers Who Served in Organizations Raised Directly by the Confederate Government, microfilm publication M258 (Washington, DC: National Archives, n.d.), roll 85.

Submitted byV P Stroeheron Sun, 01/15/2023 - 17:30

Dear EE,

Thank you for your – as ever – brilliant analysis of a knotty citation problem involving digitization. This was a great lesson. Just when you think you have citations for digitized records understood, some other monster rears its head in challenge.

I see what you mean by the "compiled service records" minor mistake for the NA catalog image. "I" know what they are and why I called it that, but the site says nothing of the sort.

To be honest, the NA catalog site for the image and the series was quite flummoxing as it had few of the patterns that one would expect of this particular record group, so I "Frankensteined" it, trying to cobble what I "know" about this record group with what I thought I "saw" (and have now learned my lesson about doing that).

My thinking on the placement of the website in my attempt was that the image it presented needed to be tied to the file itself, and that putting it elsewhere would be like putting the scarf that goes with the blouse onto the coat. But, in my version that website does interrupt the archival layers rather horribly. 

Finally, it never occurred to me that this (archival/library) catalog could be treated as the equivalent of an online database with a wider purpose, which means that I need to learn a new habit of thought that gets through my in-hand document-wired brain. Onward, through the fog!

All best,

V P 

Submitted byEEon Mon, 01/16/2023 - 09:09

V P, your last paragraph sums it up well: an online archival/library catalog is, in essence, a database. The main difference with this one, as far as citation structures go, is that the catalog can be treated as a standalone website, rather than "just one of many" databases at a website that has a different name. Thus, one less title to cite.