Forums
Elizabeth,
I have been studying EE citation models for Scotland Archives records. I have a photocopy of a will acquired in 1987. I recently emailed the Archives of Scotland asking for a citation model. This is what was returned.
"The precise reference is National Records of Scotland testament testamentar of William Murray, retired fish curer in Stuartfield, Wick confirmed in Register of inventories and wills, Wick Sheriff Court reference SC14/40/32 pages 305-325."
Stuartfield was the name of Williams home on Francis Street in Wick.
My attempt at Source List entry:
Register of Inventories and Wills. National Records of Scotland. Edinburgh.
My attempt at a citation:
William Murray, Will (testament), 1925; Wick Sheriffs Court, SC14/40/32, p. 305-325; Register of Inventories and Wills; National Records of Scotland (NRS), Edinburgh.
I used the model 3.14 for basic archived document. Please give me your input. Scottish records are weird to me. Teresa
Hello, Teresa,
Hello, Teresa,
Given that you're citing material from an archive, it is logical that you would turn to chapter 3 "Archives and Artifacts." However, that is best used for university-type archives, not governmental ones. You're dealing with a situation in which local records and held in a National Archives. (One you possibly accessed online?) I'll get back to this in a moment.
The issue is confused by the fact that the Archives staffer gave you an incomplete citation and ran it amid a larger sentence--leaving you to deconstruct the sentence and then reassemble parts. SC14/40/32 should be the archival number for the register that is called "Register of inventories and wills," in the Sheriff Court of the town of Wick. If you using a traditional archives-type citation (as Chapter 3 explains) you'll start with the smallest element and work up to the largest. Within that framework, your proposed reference note presents the title of the register as an element larter than the Wick Sheriffs Court and it separates the archival number from the archives that assigned the number.
There's also one other issue. By now, you know that EE is all about citations that users can understand, so we really should consider whether of your work will understand what SC14/40/32 means without an explanation?
Have you seen EE11.68. This is the chapter for records held by national-level archives and agencies. It carries one example to what used to be called the National Archives of Scotland but is now known as "National Records of Scotland." Even though 11.68 treats a deed rather than a will, that matters naught. The issues are these:
So: Have you seen EE11.68 and did you use the NRS website?
Elizabeth,
Elizabeth,
The 1925 will is a photocopy acquired in1987 by my mother-in-law from the Records Office in Edinburgh through snail mail. The reference SC14/40/32 was written at the top of the first page of the will.
I looked at the Archives model in EE you suggested. I was troubled that I could not seem to find any citation information on the NRS website. In frustration I emailed for advice. The response confused me more.
My second attempt:
William Murray, Will (testament), 1925; citing SC14/40/32 (Register of Inventories and Wills), p. 305-325; Wick Sheriffs Court; National Records of Scotland (NRS), Edinburgh.
So then the Source List citation should reflect the Wick Sheriffs Court as opposed to the Register of Inventories and Wills? Or both?
Am I getting closer? I think I understood what you were telling me. I am going to return to the website also. I think I need to study the system used in the Scottish Archives a little more.
Also, In EE I read something about it being acceptable to adjust citations of international records to be similar in arrangement as citations for U.S. records. Being consistent is important. Is that correct?
Teresa,
Teresa,
Given that you're not working with online access, the simplest way to handle this would be the format for a local record book that is now archived off-site. In essence, there are two things to cite:
If we follow 8.20 "Basic Formats: Records Archived Off-site," we'd have something like this:
Wicks (Caithness County, Scotland) Sheriffs Court, Register of inventories and wills (1925), pp. 305–25, Will of William Murray; catalog no. SC14/40/32, National Records of Scotland, Edinburgh.
In this example, I'm not capitalizing the name of the book in the manner in which we would do for a formal title because odds are good that the name given you by the archives is not its exact name. Odds are, in fact, overwhelming that, since record-keeping began at Wicks, there has been created more than one volume of inventories and wills.
This might also be viewed as a layered citation. In one layer, we have all the details that identify the original document and the original record book. The second layer (which begins after the semi-colon) deals with its current manner of access. If we were accessing it online, we would do a citation to the website in that second layer.
I'll address the consistency issue separately.
Dear Editor, thank you very
Dear Editor, thank you very much for the lesson. You added parenthesis around certain information. I gather it is because you are clarifying the record? That information would not be seen on the Inventory book? That may be done in any citation when necessary?
Teresa,
Teresa,
Yes. As when writing a narrative sentence, parentheses in a citation sentence represent parenthetical information that is added for clarity. It says, "I'm not absolutely essential. I could be left out. But I'm here to further explain what has just come before me." Let's look at the two instances, separately.
Creator of record
The creator of the record is the town of Wicks. That name appears in the author field. But many (if not most) people who read your citation would not be sure what "Wicks" means. The first thought that comes to mind for most people would be that it is the surname of a previously cited author. Without some jurisdictional information to clarify the point that it is a place name, many readers would be puzzled.They could eventually parse out its meaning, but anytime we can avoid creating puzzlement in a citation, that's a good thing.
We could also have foregone parentheses in that field and written the citation this way:
Wicks, Caithness County, Scotland, Sheriffs Court, Register of inventories and wills, pp. 305-25, will of William Murray ...
However, this creates another punctuation and clarity issue. Standard punctuation rules say that when we have several items in a series (in this case Author/Creator, Book, page) and one of those items in the series (in this case, the author field) itself consists of several items in a series (in this case Wicks, Caithness County, Scotland, Sheriffs Court) then the items in the smaller series are separated by commas and the items in the larger series are separated by semicolons. In this case, the results would be
Wicks, Caithness County, Scotland, Sheriffs Court; Register of inventories and wills, pp. 305-25, will of William Murray; catalog no. SC14/40/32, National Records of Scotland, Edinburgh.
But that punctuation is confusing, because standard punctuation for citations call for a comma between the author and the title of the book.
The solution, in cases such as this, is to use parentheses around the additional and explanatory jurisdictional data:
Wicks (Caithness County, Scotland) Sheriffs Court, Register of inventories and wills, pp. 305-25, will of William Murray; catalog no. SC14/40/32, National Records of Scotland, Edinburgh.
If we were to drop the parenthetical information, then we would be left with
Wicks Sheriffs Court, Register of inventories and wills, pp. 305-25, will of William Murray; catalog no. SC14/40/32, National Records of Scotland, Edinburgh.
In template form:
Author/Creator, Name of book, page, item; archival catalog number, archives, location.
Most often the parentheses around the extra jurisdictional information would occur when citing a church. You'll see a number of instances in Chapter 7. But when we're dealing with a town whose name is not well known, the use of parentheses to identify the city/state/country/whatever is appropriate there also.
Date
Again, the usage means "parenthetical data added for clarity." The archives gave you a generic name for the register—likely the series name, because the town would have created a number of registers of that type. Before we can cite a page number in a register of that name, we have to identify which register of that name; but we don't know the exact title. Placing the year in parentheses, after the generic title, adds enough clarification to find the exact book in most cases.
RE: Consistency
RE: Consistency
Yes, U.S. archives and some international archives use different systems for citing documents in major archives. (EE 3.3) On the other hand, even here in the U.S.—even though we're supposed to have some commonality in form and function—when archives are nice enough to suggest how their materials should be cited, we find significant differences between their suggested formats.
If we faithfully follow the suggestions of each archive (or each website provider of documents) then we'll end up with much inconsistency. We will likely confuse our own readers who don't understand why information is presented one way in one reference note and differently in another—or what each element represents in one reference note versus the other. EE 3.2 discusses the issue this way:
Because each archive has its own preferences for citing its materials, you should ask each facility whether it has a citation guide it would like you to follow. If you choose to use each facility’s recommended style, you can expect to have considerable inconsistencies within your citations. If you prefer to use a consistent style, you will still benefit by studying the format recommended by the archive whose material you have used. From it, you will learn which pieces of information the archive needs you to cite in order to relocate the material.
The ultimate solution, of course, is for us to learn what is important to cite for each type of record, learn why citations to a certain type of record follow a certain pattern, analyze each document as we're working with it, and then adapt the basics as needed.
As a regular user of the
As a regular user of the National Records of Scotland (NRS), my citation would be similar to that suggested:
Wick Sheriff Court, Register of inventories and wills, 1925, volume reference SC14/40/32, pp. 302-325, Will of William Murray, confirmed 20 July 1925; National Records of Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
I would include the volume reference number in the main part of the citation as it is an important element in the UK system of cataloguing and citation. In this case, the reference number will be printed on the spine of the volume, written inside the volume (usually in pencil on the first page) and, as these records are now accessed as digital images, it is the digital reference number used to access the records onsite at the NRS. If you instead access the will via the ScotlandsPeople website the reference number is given in the 'Wills & Testaments' database and printed at the top of each digital image.
When writing source citations for records held at the NRS it is helpful to consult the online catalogue at http://catalogue.nrscotland.gov.uk/nrsonlinecatalogue/search.aspx. Inserting the reference number (in this case SC14/40/32) into the catalogue will produce a description of the record containing the elements needed for a citation. It is also helpful to consult the catalogue in order to understand the arrangement of the records: in this case SC14 is the reference for Wick Sheriff Court, SC14/40 is the reference for the registers of inventories and wills for 1824-1984, and SC14/40/32 is the volume covering 1925.
Thank you, GenealogyGirl, for
Thank you, GenealogyGirl, for expanding upon the discussion. EE would still be inclined to attach the archival number to the identification of the archives that assigned the number, rather than inject it between the ID of the original book and the page/item within that book.
Among the corollaries we might invoke are these:
All of this, of course, is a case at point as to why citation is an art, with flexibility built on basic principles, rather than a rigid science.
Editor,
Editor,
Below is a record transcription I received from the The Sir Duncan Rice Library, Aberdeen University, Aberdeen, Scotland. It was taken from Special Collections. I retrieved what I believe to be the collection ID: GB 0231 University of Aberdeen, Special Collections. This piece of information was not included in the email with the transcription.
email:
We hold the following manuscript volume, which I have checked for any mention of a marriage between a William Murray and a Mary Stephen and for the baptism of a William Murray, their son, about 1844-45.
MS 3320/33/1 – St Drostan, Old Deer Register of :- Mariages 1829-1905
Baptisms 1767-1900
There is no entry for a marriage between persons with the surnames Stephen and Murray but an entry on page 167 in the baptisms section gives the following information on a William Murray.
Murray - William – illegitimate son of William Murray Shoemaker in Old Deer, and Ann Stephen in Stuartfield – born 8th November 1842, and baptized 30th of same month, by Rev. Arthur Rankin, Presbyter at Deer – James Smith, House carpenter in Old Deer sponsor – Witnesses, John Keith, Mrs Keith in Stuartfield, Lilias Forsyth & Caroline Fearnside at the Parsonage, etc. etc.
Arthur Rankin, Presbyter.
So my attempt at this citation is as follows:
St. Drostan Church (Old Deer Parish, Aberdeenshire, Scotland), " Register of Marriages 1829-1909, Baptisms 1767-1900," MS3320/33/1,
p. 167, entry for William Murray baptism, 30 November 1842; GB 0231, Special Collections; Sir Duncan Rice Library; Aberdeen University, Aberdeen.
I have not asked this library for a citation model yet. I am waiting on a digital image of the record and the cover of the register. I did look at the catalogue. It confused me a bit. Could I have your input?
Editer,
Editor, I used EE Chapter 7 as a guide.
Teresa,
Teresa,
You've done a great job. The only tweak that EE would make would be to place the manucript number in the second layer, where you identify the archive that assigned that manuscript number. We would not place it between the title of the register and the page within that register. If that manuscript number were part of the actual title of the register--the same title we would find if we were using, say, a local copy instead of the copy that is archived--then it would be cited as part of the title number. But when a manuscript register is assigned a number by a specific archives, then the number is archival ID number, not part of the title.
You'll note that this pattern appears in all comparable examples for archived materials, across all the chapters. For instance:
p. 95 QCM for Vaudreuil Papers, MS no. LO 377 at Huntington Library
p. 97 QCM for Cape Girardeau County record books, series C3676 at University of Missouri
p. 101 QCM Rennell's journal, MS no. 19299 at British Library, London
p. 326 Second Congregational Church records, MS 836E at Newport Historical Society (chapter 7)
p. 376 QCM Maryland Court records, MS no. S381-4/683-6, Maryland State Archives
p. 442 Militia rolls for Cass County, MS no. 4/0226/11, Illinois Reginal Archives
This pattern follows the long-standing principles that we also see in CMOS (e.g.: 16th ed., 14.233, n. 38; 14.240, n. 50)
I use ScotlandPeople website
I use ScotlandPeople website quite a bit. I am able to look at the original documents. There are more than one EE example for census. I am a little confuse about which to use. Should I strictly use online digital image from commercial site model? ScotlandsPeople is sort of an Archives online, but is also a commercial site. I am leaning towards digital image from commercial site model versus online archives model(France is example used). Teresa Mills
Editor,
Editor,
I asked citation questions about a photocopied will, from the NRS, Scotland, in the possession of my mother in law in May 2015. She has had the document since the late 1980's. I did get the citation arrangement ironed out fine but one question remains. How should a document such as this, which is a photocopy I am using it for research, be correctly listed in my source entry list?. Is this an artifact because it is in the hands of my mother in law? Should the entry used be classified as a basic document artifact?
T. A., is that photocopy from
T. A., is that photocopy from your mother-in-law accompanied by, say, a letter from the archives or a researcher who cites the collection, etc.? Is there a citation that your mother-in-law penned in the margin of the document or on its back? Or is it a photocopy that is devoid of any source identification--as "just a document in her files"?
It is a will. It is the will
It is a will. It is the will we previously discussed from Wick, Caithness County. There is a copy of correspondence in her files in which she requested the document. Also, responding correspondence accompanied the photocopied will. The will has a handwritten record ID upon it also. She has more than one document which she requested copy of by snail mail. So, it is very important to me that they are correctly categorized for citation purposes.
Teresa, if this were EE's
Teresa, if this were EE's problem, we would cite the document using the details worked out above. Then add a note saying that the photocopy was supplied by [identify the archives and/or staffer] to [ID of your mother-in-law] on [date]. That will document the authenticity of the photocopy and eliminate the possibility that it may have been something circulating among many unnamed researchers, any one of whom could have altered it to suit a specific purpose. (If you have the electronic version of EE, you can run a search for "supplied" and see a number of examples in which this situation is illustrated.)
EE,
EE,
Should this information be in both the source list and citation then?
If you wish. It's your source
If you wish. It's your source list. You can put anything thereon that will help you with your research and evaluation. At publication time, comments of that type are rarely included, unless we are doing an annotated bibliography. But, of course, source lists/bibliographies are rarely used in historical publications other than books, so that issue seldom arises.