Family Papers Collection vs. Individual Documents

By Anonymous on Fri, 04/29/2016 - 15:51

Forums

I have number of photocopies of original records.  The originals are documents of my grandfather's and in the possession of my aunt.  She made the copies for me a number of years ago, I don't remember when.  They include a variety of documents including delayed marriage and birth certificates (both civil and church), a Familienstammbuch, motorcycle license, a military discharge, to name a few. I started citing each item individually based on the type of record (such as section 7.24 for the delayed certificates).
 
Now I'm wondering if this would be the best approach, or should I group them as a collection (section 3.25), something like Family Papers of [grandfather's name].  Any thoughts on pros and cons or tips of each approach.
 
Either way, I expect to cite that I have photocopies and my aunt holds the originals.
 
I hope that was clear.
Thanks,
Trish :)

Submitted byEEon Fri, 04/29/2016 - 19:14

Trish, creating a collection called "Family Papers of [....]" is usually the simplest way to handle this. Any collection of family papers typically has a variety of materials from loose documents. If you were to use these at an archive, you would cite the document, then the collection, then the repostiory (and possibly a few intervening layers such as "series" or "record group").  If you're citing a collection in the custody of your aunt, then you would cite the document, then the collection, then the repository. If you and your aunt want to divide the collection into groups or series of related materials, for better organization, then you would just add that "layer" to the heirarchy that you're citing. Concluding the citation with a statement that you have a photocopy of the collection would be helpful to others.

If you have EE3, then you'll find, in the QuickStart Guide, a basic format for citing manuscripts in collections, whether it involves a personal collections or a formal archive. Or check EE 3.1 in any edition.

Submitted byStumpfGarciaon Sat, 04/30/2016 - 21:00

Dear Editor,

 
Thank you for your response and insight. I have been working with EE1, so glad to hear there's further info in the new edition. Here is what I came up with for the source reference (for all the the various papers) and a full reference to a marriage certificate in the collection.
 
Source Reference:
 
Family Papers of Grandfather's Name. Privately held by Aunt's Name, [ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE,] California. 2000. Photocopies privately held by My Name, [ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE,] City, California. Documents in the possession of Grandfather's Name were inherited by his daughter, Aunt's Name, who made copies for My Name.
 
First (Full) Reference Note to marriage certificate:
 
Ehre Maria Himmelfahrt [Assumption of Mary] Catholic Church (Bulgăruș,Romania). Michael Stumpf and Katharina Hof marriage certificate, (1917 marriage); issued 1940, citing Vol. V, p. 52, no. 300; Family Papers of Grandfather's Name, privately held by Aunt's Name, [ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE,] California, photocopy privately held by My Name, [ADDRESS FOR PRIVATE USE,] City, California. Certificate form in Romanian, German, and Hungarian and filled out by hand mostly in German.
 
Subsequent Reference Note:
 
Ehre Maria Himmelfahrt [Assumption of Mary] Catholic Church (Bulgăruș,Romania), Michael Stumpf and Katharina Hof certificate, 1917 marriage, issued 1940, Family Papers of Grandfather's Name.
 
Am I close? Thanks in advance.
Trish :)

Submitted byEEon Sun, 05/01/2016 - 13:25

Trish, great job.  The only nits I might pick are these three:

  • Once you have translated foreign language words in a citation, you don't have to make that translation in every subsequent citation. Similarly, once you've cited a church and said where it is, you don't have to repeat the location in every subsequent citation—unless you have multiple churches of that name in different locales.
  • In your own personal research notes, the phrase "address for private use" would actually contain the address, of course.
  • In the phrase "marriage certificate, (1917 marriage); ..." drop the comma before the parentheses. Commas don't come before parentheses, although they may come after. A parentheses encloses material that is further explanation for what just came before it. A comma splices something from what came before. You don't want your "further explanation" to be spliced from what it is supposed to be attached to.