Marriage Allegation - Diocesan Archives

Niteowl, given that it's pure folly to tell someone how to cite a source, sight unseen, can you upload to this thread (a) a sample image; and (2) the FindMyPast entry? While I've used counterparts for this in other dioceses, there are differences between how the materials are organized, bound, etc., at one diocese vs. another. Seeing the actual image and data we're working with will help to insure there's not some special quirk we need to deal with.

Thanks, Niteowl. I've also logged in at FindMyPast to read the background that it provides on this record set. In your draft citation, you begin by citing "Marriage Bonds & Allegations."  Your link to the Borthwick catalog is even more helpful. Thanks for thinking to include that.

Several issues are involved here. I'll start with the easiest.

You begin your draft citation with emphasis on the originals at Borthwick, which is appropriate given that you have obtained from them an image of the original. However, you begin with what seems to be a collection name that you place in quotes:

"Marriage Bonds and Allegations," Matrimonial Records ...

Quotation marks mean that we have copied something exactly. The Borthwick catalog does identify a series called "Matrimonial Records," but I don't see a collection that carries the exact title you've quoted. I'm assuming (although that's a risk) you are referring to the collection that Borthwick identifies as "Marriage bonds (to 1823) and allegations [MB] 1660-1998."

If this assumption is correct, then any words that appear in our quotation marks should be the exact words assigned to the collection by the archives. If we aren’t quoting the exact title, then we don’t use quotation marks. However, as you'll note from Chapter 3's discussion of citing achived material, we use quotation marks around titles of documents, when those documents have a title, but we don't use quotation marks around names of collections, series, or record groups at an archive.

A second issue is the placement of the data for the specific record. By longstanding practice, an American citation to a manuscript record is handled two ways (EE 3.1):

• Source List Entry: cites to the collection.
• Reference Note Entry: begins with the actual document, then the collection, series, etc., following a smallest-to-largest path that concludes with the location of the archives.

Conversely, most European style guides start with a citation to the largest and work down to the smallest. If we are European, we will typically follow European customs, even when citing American sources. If we are American, we will typically follow American custom, even when citing European sources. Settling on one practice or the other creates consistency.  (EE 3.3)

The issue here is that your draft citation for reference notes doesn’t follow either practice. You start with the collection, then work up to the largest entity, then drop back to the smallest: the document itself.

“Marriage Bonds and Allegations,” Matrimonial Records; York Diocesan Archive, Borthwick Institute, York, England; marriage allegation of John Hunter and Elizabeth Wardell, 03 August 1835.

A traditional American-style citation (drawing from the cataloging data at Borthwick) would handle the details this way:

Source List Entry:

Marriage bonds (to 1823) and allegations [MB] 1660-1998, Matrimonial Records. York Diocesan Archive: Records of the Archbishop: Ecclesiastical Courts. Reference group GB 193EC,Borthwick Institute for Archives, University of York. Heslington (York), England.

Full Reference Note:

Marriage allegation,  John Hunter and Elizabeth Wardell, 03 August 1835, record sequence number 14, page 180; Marriage bonds (to 1823) and allegations [MB] 1660-1998, Matrimonial Records; York Diocesan Archive: Records of the Archbishop: Ecclesiastical Courts; Reference group GB 193EC, Borthwick Institute for Archives, University of York; Heslington (York), England.

Short Reference Note:

Marriage allegation,  John Hunter and Elizabeth Wardell.

You'll also note one other thing above: passages flagged with red. Here, I've added the identification of the record group, a full identificatin of the archives, and a more-precise physical location for the archives.

Regarding your placement of the details about the document: apparently you are deviating from the norm because of your software—i.e., so that your software can start with the collection name.  In this vein, you write:

The following would be the "master source" that would be shared: "Marriage Bonds and Allegations," Matrimonial Records; York Diocesan Archive, Borthwick Institute, York, England;

So a citation for a different couple would be: "Marriage Bonds and Allegations," Matrimonial Records; York Diocesan Archive, Borthwick Institute, York, England; marriage allegation of groom and bride, date.

This, of course, reminds us of the longstanding principle that (a) software is a tool, (b) tools exist to make our work easier, and (c) longstanding customs should not have to be altered to fit each particular piece of software. That, of course, is an issue between you, your software’s developer, and its other users.

Fifteen to thirty years ago, this was a major issue for anyone who used software to create citations to archival material. Software developers assumed that once we created a “master source,” then their program could automatically populate the citation every time that source was chosen, and that any deviation for specific data could just be tacked onto the end.

Within the past 15 or so years, however, most software used for historical citations have become sophisticated enough to allow for variables wherever needed--including the start of a citation to manuscript material, so that we can arrange information appropriately and consistently. (Here at EE, we also avoid giving advice for specific software, given that that is the domain of the user-groups for each specific software.)

As for citing FindMyPast:  If you use only the data in the database, then it would be appropriate to cite the FMP database created by Borthwick. However, whenever we use an index or an archival catalog to locate the original and then access the original, a reference-note citation does not normally include the index or the catalog. However, the bibliography (or source list) for our project would include an entry to the index or the catalog, to acknowledge its value as a research tool.

Niteowl, when you start to post, look at the bottom of the message window and you'll see an option that says "Text Format." The default is "Filtered HTML." Click it to get "Full HTML." Then you should have no formatting issues.

As for your software woes, we know your pain well. The solution, in my case, has been to live without GEDCOM--and it's been a quite productive life. Trying to cope with GEDCOM is just letting the tail wag the dog.