Citing a named certificate in a family archive

By History-Hunter on Sun, 08/08/2021 - 18:44

Forums

Dear Editor;

I'm finding it difficult to come up with a good first layer for citing one of my "unusual" family artifacts and could use some advice on how to handle it.

I have an original document for Patrick Jean André Morel, which is titled, “Extrait des minutes des actes de Décès du 14e Arrondissement de Paris.” The word. "Décès" is over-stamped in blue with the word "NAISSANCE."The document, signed 20 September 1961, is a typewritten extract of the minutes of the "Actes de Décès" of the 14th arrondissement [administrative district] of Paris, France. The over-stamping is unusual but critical, since the prefecture has used a death-register extract form and over-stamped it in order to use it for a birth.  In essence, an English-speaking person could call this a certified extract from the birth registers of the 14th administrative district of Paris, France.

I've tried to contstruct the first layer of the citation, using what I could glean from the EE book, but it seems a bit long and clumsy.I have other artifacts that pose similar issues and would like to be able to tackle them on my own. What could I do to improve the following first layer?

Patrick Jean André Morel “Extrait des minutes des actes de 'Décès' [over-stamped 'NAISSANCE'] du 14e Arrondissement de Paris,” issued 20 September 1961, Gauthier Family Papers; privately held ...
 

Submitted byEEon Mon, 08/09/2021 - 14:34

History-Hunter, the words in quotation marks are a good way to handle the issue. However ...

  • If you put Patrick Jean André Morel's name in the author/creator field, you leave an erroneous impression. The name of the office that issued the certificate should be in that author/creator position. The name of the person being baptized, should follow the identification of the document, with that name sequential with the date. (EE's Velcro Principle: Things that go together ought to stick together.)
  • The semi-colon separating the layers should go after the document's identification. It is the Gauthier Family papers that are privately held by you, no?

For example, see the QuickCheck Model on p. 111 (4th ed. rev.) "Private Holdings: Legal Document, Unrecorded Family Copy."

Submitted byHistory-Hunteron Mon, 08/09/2021 - 15:51

I see the issue now...

This document should have been cited using the example, "Private Holdings: Legal Document, Unrecorded Family Copy." I was styling it after "Private Holdings: Artifact," because it was not secured directly by me. This explains some of the confusion as to the layers involved and their content.

Does the 3rd ed. revised, p. 111, "QuickCheck Model, PRIVATE HOLDINGS: LEGAL DOCUMENT UNRECORDED FAMILY COPY, Collection as lead element in Source List," have the same format as the EE version you noted?

If so; I believe the resulting citation would look like the following:

Source List Entry

Gauthier Family Archives. Privately held by Gary D. Gauthier, [address for private use,] Calgary, Alberta.

First (Full) Reference Note

Mairie du 14e arrondissement, Paris, France, “Extrait des minutes des actes de 'Décès' [over-stamped 'NAISSANCE'] du 14e Arrondissement de Paris,” referencing "acte" no. 1648, certified extract, issued 20 September 1961, citing the birth of [name of person-of-interest], born [birthdate]; original, family copy, Gauthier Family Archives; privately held by Gary D. Gauthier, [address for private use,] Calgary, Alberta. Provided to G.D. Gauthier by Jessie C. (Murison) Gauthier, ca. 1978.

Subsequent (Short) Note

Mairie du 14e arrondissement, Paris, France, certificate, 1961.