Citing a typescript of transcribed records

By Anonymous on Sat, 07/28/2012 - 15:29

Forums

I am not quite sure as to the best way to cite a typescript of transcribed records that I found at the Maine Historical Society in Portland, Maine.

In 1895 Augustus Freedom Moulton compiled a transcription of the Records of the Second Congregational Church in Scarborough, Maine.

In 1926 Samuel D. Rumery prepared a typescript of the Moulton's transcription. The typesript is titled "Records of the Second Congregational Church in Scarborough, Maine."

I prepared the following citation to use as a footnote: Samuel D. Rumery, “Records of the Second Congregational Church in Scarborough, Maine” (typescript, 1926, Maine Historical Society, Portland, Maine), 132, compiled from transcriptions made by Augustus Freedom Moulton in 1895, entry for Mary F. Tilton.

Is this an appropriate citation or is there a better way to cite this?

Sean

Submitted byEEon Sat, 07/28/2012 - 16:35

Sean (aka FuzzyOldDog):

Obviously, when Old Dogs are fuzzy, they learn new tricks fast. You obviously zeroed in on EE 7.31 "Typescripts of Registers" and did a good job of applying it.

EE would make just two tweaks:

  1. Eliminate the italics for the title. Italics are a signal that the cited work has been published. For manuscripts, we use only quotation marks around the quoted title.
  2. The phrase "entry for Mary F. Tilton" would be better positioned right after the page number; in short, you're specifying what to look for on that page. Then put a semicolon and add the provenance data that you are wisely including.

 

Submitted byBethon Fri, 09/28/2012 - 21:30

I have a perplexing situation which is similar, but with a few added twists.

In 1923 Mr Vosburgh transcribed records from the Reformed Dutch Church (presumably handwritten).

In 1942 Mrs. Fast typed up his transcription.

Afterwards her transcription was donated to the DAR, which then bound the transcription with other similar transcriptions of record sets originally done by Vosburgh and transcribed by Fast. So the actual book which I have seen  at the DAR Library is titled "Church of St. Andrew and Reformed Dutch Protestant Church".

How should this be cited? Even for my own use, I am having difficulty with citation. The page numbers for entries of interest, and the page numbers assigned by Fast, but have no relation to the page numbers of the actual book, which do not exist (ie there was no new page numbering system assigned when they were all bound together.)

The DAR citation is rather hopeless. Here is a link to their catalog entry which a. only mentions one of the churches included in the bound volume as title (b) lists Mr. Vosburgh as author and (c) lists Fast as the publisher. All of which seem incorrect and less than helpful in guiding a future researcher to locate the item. Help!

 

http://library.dar.org/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&LastResult=ItemTitles%26Config=pac%26FormId=-25%26Branch=,0,%26LimitsId=0%26StartIndex=0%26ItemsPerPage=10%26SortField=0%26PeriodLimit=-1%26IdIsDataNumber=0%26DataNumber=550018087%26NotAddToHistory=1%26Count=7%26ItemField=2%26SearchAvailableOnly=0%26PeriodLimit=-1&DataNumber=0&RecordNumber=31687&SearchAvailableOnly=0&FormId=-25&ItemField=2&Config=pac&Branch=,0,

 

 

Submitted byBethon Fri, 09/28/2012 - 21:39

I'm sorry for the typo - I meant to say -

The page numbers for entries of interest that I wish to include in my citation, are the page numbers assigned by Fast when she created her transcription of a specific record set.. So my item may appear on page 47 of the  transcription of record set 2,  but because set 2 is bound together with other transcriptions, it is actually somewhere around page 150 of the bound volume that the DAR smushed together in a hopeless confusing jumble.

I know that tracking down the original transcription by Mr. V would eliminate this problem, but at the moment, Ms. Fast is all I have to go on.

Submitted byEEon Sat, 09/29/2012 - 15:31

Beth,

Some of what you say about this source sounds like one of DAR's "GRC Reports" (EE 4.20, pp. 194-96), but some of it doesn't. That makes a difference.

If so, as 4.20 states: "Citing them can be a particular challenge. Copies held at the local level or in state-level repositories typically carry the title assigned to them by the compiler. Copies held at the national level may have a different title, one assigned to it by the national library in an effort to standardize the whole series."

Your statement that you "have seen" this volume at the DAR Library implies that you used the national-level copy. However, the online cataloging data at the link you sent does not include the series and volume numbers that DAR has assigned to the GRC Reports. 

If we're not dealing with a GRC item, then simpler and more-general rules apply instead of the rules that DAR has created for this particular series. Rather than EE guessing, it would be better to ask: "When you accessed the bound volume, did you collect any other details that might clarify this question?"

 

Submitted byccbrelandon Sat, 09/29/2012 - 21:38

I have a slightly different twist on this topic of transcribed records.  Back in the 1980's, when I was working in the Seattle Public Library, and the Library of Michigan still loaned out their historic newspapers on microfilm (they don't any more), I would order microfilms and read them, transcribing (not printing from microfilm, which may not have been available then) the articles I was interested in.  I copied out these articles, and I still have those original transcripts.  I can't really afford to hire a genealogist in Michigan to go look at these newspapers in order to get page and column numbers, and so would like to cite my transcripts.  Here is an example of what I'm thinking of:

“Some Profitable Hunting,” transcript by Claudia Breland; citing Manistee (Michigan) Times, 12 Dec 1877 (an account of Walter Goodenow's hunting success)

Most of these pieces would probably have been published in the "Local Brevities" or "Local News" column, this one I've taken the title from the first words in the paragraph.

Thanks for your help!

Claudia Breland

 

Submitted byEEon Sun, 09/30/2012 - 13:24

Claudia,

Your dilemma is common for long-time history researchers whose earlier work was done under more-lax standards. Your proposed solution is doable, but it lacks one essential piece of information: How would readers of your work access the source you cite—i.e., your transcripts? Are they deposited in a collection or a library somewhere? Are they published at a website? Would individuals have to contact you personally for your transcription? How would you address this within the framework you propose?

Realistically, most people would wonder why you are citing your transcript, instead of the actual newspaper that you say you have read. Some who know that current standards call for citing page and column might still fault you for not providing them, unless your citation itself provides a reason.

EE would advise one of two approaches for your "working files":

1. In lieu of interlibrary loan of the microfilm, can you locate digital images of the newspaper through an online provider to which you or your local library has a subscription? Might you be able to find them in Google's free historic newspaper project (https://sites.google.com/site/onlinenewspapersite/) that is still maintained online even though new digitization has been discontinued?

2. Until you have access to images, you might construct a normal citation for a normal newspaper article and then, in lieu of page and column, simply state that exact page and column data were not collected when you had access to the microfilmed papers in the 1980s.

If and when you submit a manuscript to a scholarly journal or press, then you would be expected to construct your citation to the standards of that editorial board. Some academic and commercial presses, particularly those that use minimalistic citations to reduce publication costs, are more lenient than others on this particular citation issue.