Multi Level Confusion

By Paul J Harris on Mon, 12/31/2018 - 09:55

Forums

In the past, I have consulted a source on a FHL microfilm, from which I must have attained the following information about the source:

Records of the Methodist Episcopal Church, New York, New York, 1785–1893, v. 7, Greene Street marriages, 1832–1869 (transcript), p. 308, Ward-Martin marriage (1855); New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, New York, New York; FHL microfilm 17780.

I had added the '(trascript)' to denote that this did not appear to be an original register. In an effort to bring this into Evidence style, I have gotten so wrapped around the axle that I can no longer see the forest for the trees and am seeking guidance out of the woods.

Placing the church and location as lead element is relatively straightforward...

     Greene Street Methodist Episcopal Church (New York, New York), 

But how to go about listing the other 'levels' is a bit confusing to me. Some models seem to dictate that since I consulted the film I need not include the repository of the original 'derived' book. However, I think it should be included for information's sake. A nudge in the right direction would be helpful.

Best,

Paul

Upload a document
U-NY-NEW-ChuM-1855-07-25 Ward - Martin.jpg

Submitted byPaul J Harrison Mon, 12/31/2018 - 10:51

Additional information extracted from the FHL Catalog Description: Notes Microfilm of handwritten transcripts (13 v.) at the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, New York City. v.7. ... Greene Street (now Asbury, One Broadway Hall) marriages 1832-1869. In many cases records from the various Methodist churches in New York City were preserved in the same book. In numerous other cases ministers kept their own records. These transcripts contain records from all sources.

Submitted byEEon Mon, 12/31/2018 - 12:15

Paul, you make another point that you did not specifically state. Trying to improve upon a citation we made years ago creates new problems, even when we have the image to work from. We have to make assumptions and assumptions are always risky. 

Before we alter the citation we created while we were eyeballing the source, accuracy requires us to go back and view that source again. Cataloging data offered by the provider is helpful in understanding the source, but using it to create a citation without actually viewing the image in context can create new problems.

In this case, you probably cannot quickly access the register from which you took the image. Although the FHL microfilm has been digitized by FamilySearch, it carries the lock-and-key image in the catalog, signaling that you have to go to a nearby LDS Family History Center to use the source. So would I, so I’m speaking blindly.

When I view the citation against the cataloging data, I see a problem with your effort to turn the citation around to place the creator of the record (the church) as the first element in the citation—that is, the standard position for “author/creator.”  The cataloging data tells us that Roll 7 includes two different churches. I quote:

“v. 7. Willett Street marriages 1838-1866; Greene Street (now Asbury, One Broadway Hall) marriages 1832-1869”

That raises questions from at least two different standpoints:

  1. How is the volume itself organized? When you cite “p. 308,” would that be page 308 of volume 7? Or page 308 of the Greene Street section of volume 7? Or, considering that you identify the register as a derivative (and it clearly arranges entries in semi-alpha order by first letter of surname, while an original church register will add entries in the sequence in which they happen), does the register represent a consolidated “index” to both churches? The latter often happens when one church is a “mission” or “branch” of another—or when two churches consolidate. Do you know the history of these two churches, so you can answer the latter question?
  2. Can we actually say that Greene Street Church is the creator of that semi-alphabetized “index”? Considering that the entire filmed collection covers some two-dozen churches and that FHL’s cataloging data identifies the whole collection as “transcripts,” it appears possible that this set of indexes may have been created by a district-level entity that would be identified on the filmed registers but is not identified in the cataloging data.

Submitted byPaul J Harrison Tue, 01/01/2019 - 10:33

In digging into my original notes on the subject I found some interesting information: I had recorded that Book 7 was all marriages and the following: Willett Street 1838–1866, pp. 1–173 Asbury (Greene Street) 1832–1863, pp. 174–311 H-Z Asbury (Greene Street) 1832–1863, pp. 312–360 A-G So the answer to question 1 is that page 308 is the page number of the volume. Additionally, while not on the film, I had printed a copy of an article from the website of the New York Genealogical and Biological Society (www.newyorkfamilyhistory.org) by Harry Macy, Jr. titled, "Methodist Records of New York City in the NYG&B Library. In this article, Macy states, "...Samuel A. Seaman who just over a century ago made the meticulous handwritten transcripts which form the NYG&B collection of Methodist Records. ... Rev. Samuel A. Seaman transcribed these records while they were still in the custody of the individual churches. Some registers were subsequently placed at the Methodist Historical Society, formed in 1892, which later transferred them to their present home in the Rare Books and Manuscripts Division of the New York Public Library (NYPL). The NYPL collection is not identical to that at NYG&B. Each collection covers some churches that are not in the other. Also, where both have records of the same church, the NYG&B transcripts end abount 1890 and are limited to marriages and baptisms, while the registers at NYPL often extend into the early 20th century and include membership and other records." The answer to question two is Rev. Samuel A. Seaman, but I would have to review the film images to see if he is mentioned there. Boy, have I opened a can of worms, or what? Might be easier to see if the original Greene Street register exists, and cite that. Otherwise, the index is all there is.

Submitted byEEon Tue, 01/01/2019 - 16:11
Paul, isn't it wonderful when our past thoroughness continues to help us appraise what we are using--and points us to deeper work that we can do?

On further investigation I find that the original volumes of the transcripts made by Rev. Seaman have been gifted from the New York Genealogical and Biological Society to the New York Public Library (NYPL), and are available for viewing. The collection description does credit Rev. Seaman as the author.    

Description: 13 v. ; 36 cm.

Note: Handwritten transcripts (13 v.) by Rev. Samuel A. Seaman of the records of the Methodist Society and Methodist Episcopal Church in New York City. Includes transcriptions of selected church records including baptisms, marriages, and deaths.

I still should go to a Family History Center and see if I can get to the filmer's target at the start of that register for more complete titling information.

Given what I know now, would something like the following be appropriate?

Rev. Samuel A. Seaman, “Records of the Methodist Episcopal Church, New York, New York, 1785–1893,” v. 7, Greene Street marriages, 1832–1869 (handwritten transcripts), p. 308, Ward-Martin marriage (1855); New York Public Library, New York, NYGB AZ+ Loc 09-526; FHL microfilm 17780.

Submitted byEEon Thu, 01/03/2019 - 10:05

Great job, Paul. Given your current data, EE would make just one tweak.

Rev. Samuel A. Seaman, “Records of the Methodist Episcopal Church, New York, New York, 1785–1893,” v. 7, Greene Street marriages, 1832–1869 (handwritten transcripts), p. 308, Ward-Martin marriage (1855); NYGB AZ+ Loc 09-526; New York Public Library, New York; used as FHL microfilm 17780.

Citations to manuscript material, American style, starts with the smallest element and work up to the largest. (EE 3.1) In this case, we have

  • Manuscript identification: cited in standard form for a multi-volume manuscript
  • Collection identification: NYGB AZ+ Loc 09-526
  • Repository & Location
  • Medium through which you consulted it.

Logically, in a smallest-to-largest arrangement, the identification of the collection would come before the identification of the repository.