National Archives Catalog images

By LisaGorrell on Sun, 10/04/2026 - 11:36

Forums

It has been wonderful that the National Archives Catalog now has many images online for us, many from previously microfilmed records. It now gives us a new struggle in citing their records.

I am looking at 12.10 in EE4 and see that the first reference note begins with the U.S. National Archives. I prefer to begin first reference notes with the item I'm looking at and then cite where I am viewing it. My attempt for the images from the Records of the Post Office Department is:

Reports of Site Locations, Linder Post Office, Faulkner Co, Arkansas, Ebby Loveless, postmaster, 22 Jan 1901; imaged, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68203545?objectPage=167 : accessed 4 Oct 2026) > NA Identifier (NAID) 60203545: “Arkansas: Faulkner--Fulton,” image 167; RG 28: Records of the Post Office Department 1773-1971; National Archives, Washington, DC. 

Am I missing any information by doing this?

 

 

Submitted byEEon Mon, 10/05/2026 - 09:04

Hello, LisaGorrell. For consistency, Evidence Style would feature the document this way:

LAYER 1

Ebby Loveless, postmaster, Report of Site Location for Linder Post Office, Faulkner County, Arkansas, 22 January 1902;

LAYER 2

imaged, National Archives Catalog (https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68203545?objectPage=167 : accessed 4 October 2026) > image 167 of 978;

LAYER 3

citing file unit NAID: 68203545, Series: Reports of Site Locations, Record Group 28: Records of the Post Office Department, National Archives, Washington, DC.

This follows the EE4 §12.48 example for the National Archives Catalog, but (as you need) reverses the layers to feature the document instead of the online catalog. The two major differences are these:

  • It follows the longstanding practice of beginning a citation with the identity of the source's creator. In this case, it was Ebby Loveless who filled in the site location report for her post office. If we don't place the items in this sequence, then the reader is left wondering Who created this document? 
  • It consolidates all of the catalog's citation details into the "citing ..." layer, which is actually missing from the draft citation.  (If we're at NARA, using the originals, stored in boxes, with all the details on the box, we don't have to say "citing ..." because we can verify for ourselves all the archival details  If we're using an online catalog, we cannot verify anything; we can only copy what we are told and database creators do make errors.)

As for the date, we actually have a discrepancy. The Washington clerk who sent the form to her dated it Jan'y 2, 1901. Ebby dated her response 1/22/1902. Then after it was returned to Washington, it was stamped Jan. 27 1902.  It appears that the original Washington clerk erred, when, on the second day of the new year, he used the year 1901.  Almost certainly, this was a 1902 report, for which the form was sent out from DC on 2 January, filled in by Ebby on 22 January, and then DC stamped on 27 January when received.