Indiana certificate databases at Ancestry - yet another "source of the source" question

By Anonymous on Mon, 08/15/2016 - 10:21

Forums

I need to cite a death certificate found in the new Ancestry.com database for Indiana death certificates. Of course, Ancestry's source information isn't super helpful, but from what is in its source area for the database and my own analysis of the record and images themselves, I have determined the following:

  • There is no statewide unique death certificate number (that I can find).
  • The Indiana State Board of Health seems to have bound the certificates by year (or partial years) mostly alphabetically by county within volumes that seem to end when the maximum size of a volume is reached.
  • The death certificates are numbered 1-n within each volume.
  • The Indiana Archives and Records Administration either microfilmed the images or somebody else microfilmed them and these microfilms are now held by the IARA.
  • Ancestry.com's database can be browsed by year and roll number.

In order to find the certificate at the State Board of Health (if it still exists there), one would seemingly have to ask either for the name and date of death, or the year, vol., and stamped number of the certificate. I don't see how the latter would be of use unless you already know where it is and wish to access the original, which you may. But it seems redundant if you have the name and deate of death.

In order to find the certificate at the IARA, you'd have to get to the proper microfilm roll and image number, or in this case, perhaps the year, vol., and no. would be of use.

To find it on Ancestry, you can either search for George Kuhn in the database or drill down in the database to browse roll 5 until you find it.

I came up with the following long form citation, but it seems I either have too much information, not enough, or information in the wrong place.

Am I on the right track with the sources within the source?

1. "Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899-2011," Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 15 August 2016), death certificate image, George Kuhn, 18 November 1901, Certificate > 1901 > 05; digital image from Indiana Archives and Records Administration; Indiana State Board of Health, Death Certificates, 1901, vol. 34, no. 125 (stamped).

 

Submitted byEEon Tue, 08/16/2016 - 12:38

eevande, yes: you're on the right track and almost there. The organizational scheme you describe is similar to that of many states in that time period, whereby the certificate details from the various counties were entered into ledgers at the state level. You are right that there is no number assigned at the statewide level. There does exist a certificate number on the document, in the top right corner—representing the number assigned by the county.

EE 9.42 provides a basic format for "Online Databases with Images," which you've undoubtedly used:

"Texas Deaths, 1890–1976," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-25172-124198-11?cc=1983324 : accessed 1 April 2015), certificate image, Walter Preston Morse, 31 January 1942, no. 2908; citing "State Registrar Office, Austin."

Using this format, we might make the following substitutions:

"Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011, database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 15 August 2016), certificate image, George Kuhn, 18 November 1901, Hancock Co., Indiana, Health Officer's Record Number 114; imaged from State of Indiana, "Death Certificates 1901," vol. 34, p.125.

The details in red, above, are obvious substitutions. Let's talk about those in blue.

  • We did not use a long URL, as with the FamilySearch website, because FS's URL is a "permanent" number while Ancestry's is not.
  • It would be helpful to add the county name because, when we use Ancestry's database, it asks for place of death.
  • The county's "Health Officer's Record Number 114" is used here in lieu of the state number. We placed the number after the local office because it was the local office's number.
  • Instead of the phrase "citing ...." we would use "imaged from ..." because we don't have to borrow a citation from the website and trust its accuracy. We can easily scroll back to the start of the volume and cite the exact name that's on the cover—followed by the volume and page number, both of which we can see for ourselves.

Two other miscellaneous thoughts:

  • You'll notice that in the "certificate image" phrase, we dropped the word "death" (which you had used) because it's redundant. The name of the database tells us that we're dealing with death certificates. This is the kind of thing, of course, that no one will rap your knuckles over.
  • This Indiana Death Certificates database at Ancestry has been the subject of a longer discussion here in the forum that you may or may not have seen:https://www.evidenceexplained.com/content/reliability-vital-records-arent-quite-right.

Submitted byeevandeon Tue, 08/16/2016 - 16:16

This all makes sense but for one problem that I see.

There may be some issues with how you suggest using the record numbers for the older certificates. There are certificates that do not include a health officer's record number on the front. The backs of the certificates are not imaged in full, but part of each seems to be available if you go to the next image. It appears the certificate numbers are there even if they are not on the front of the certificate.

One such example is two certificates after George Kuhn - John C. Laden. The front of his certificate has no health officer's record number, but the back (next image) shows a 3. To make it even more complicated for George Kuhn, although his number on the front was changed from 113 to 114, the number on the back is still 113. What to do with these conundrums? Use notation that they don't exist on the certificate? Use whichever exists and note which one it is (front/back) or if they are contradictory, comment on that? Ignore the backs of the certificates altogether (there is no guarantee they will be imaged)?

 

 

 

Submitted byEEon Wed, 08/17/2016 - 09:26

eevande, for those quirky situations you describe, any of the approaches you suggest would work. You've also done a great job of illustrating why those of us who do historical research are not able to rely on a few canned templates in some citation software--as is possible for researchers who use nothing but published books and articles. The variances within original documents--and now within the imaging of those documents--require each of us to think about what we are using and make decisions, in each instance, as to what details or descriptions we need to capture.

Submitted byniteowl1851on Tue, 08/30/2016 - 21:41

I am also citing the Indiana databases from Ancestry and my citation looks much different. I am emphasizing the certificate I guess instead of the database and my attempt came out like this:

 

Indiana State Board of Health, Death Certificate no. 254, Simon Kixmiller, 23 October 1904; consulted as “Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899-2011,” digital images, Ancestry (http://ancestry.com : viewed 17 June 2016); citing Death Certificates, 1900-2011, Indiana State Board of Health, Indiana Archives and Records Administration, Indianapolis.

 

In looking at the suggestion above, I suppose I need to go back and take another look at the database but I don't remember being able to tell volume and page number for example from the image. So I "cited" the collection as a whole at IARA.

Submitted byniteowl1851on Tue, 08/30/2016 - 22:16

OK, the certificate was image no 776, so I went back 254 images and found that this is 1904, Volume 45. However, no stamped page number exists.

Submitted byeevandeon Tue, 08/30/2016 - 22:38

Did you mean that no handwritten record number exists? On the certificate, the stamped page number is 254. Your situation looks exactly the same as mine when it comes to the citation, except for no handwritten number. I have another one without a handwritten number, so I am thinking of doing it this way:

"Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011, database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 28 August 2016), certificate image, Sarah Ann Trees, 23 April 1903, Hancock Co., Indiana, Health Officer's Record Number [n.n.]; imaged from State of Indiana, "Death Certificates 1903,” vol. 29, p. 239.

 

See attached document for certificate. What I don't know is why there is no field for the Health Officer's Record Number, and how I would cite that, so I used [n.n.] for no number. Maybe it depends on what form the health officer was using or who the health officer was, which could mean that for the attached certificate, that number is even irrelevant. In other words, "It depends." Right? 

So perhaps my citation for this certificate should be

"Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011, database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 28 August 2016), certificate image, Sarah Ann Trees, 23 April 1903, Hancock Co., Indiana; imaged from State of Indiana, "Death Certificates 1903,” vol. 29, p. 239.

I think that might do it. Are there any flaws in this?

Submitted byniteowl1851on Tue, 08/30/2016 - 23:24

OK, I see. I do have a stamped number in the upper right, but since it is where the "record number" is supposed to be, that is what I assumed it was. Knowing now that the certificates are bound in a volume I see that it could be a page number in the volume. That being the case, my certificate example has no "Record Number" and in that volume, the backs of the certificates are not imaged. So from a volume perspective, the stamped number could be a page number. However, maybe the state decided to not issue record numbers locally and the stamped number is the record number? Numbers repeat each volume?

Going with the page number use, here is a swing at it:

Indiana State Board of Health, Death Certificate, Simon Kixmiller, 1904, volume 45, entry 254; consulted as “Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899-2011,” digital images, Ancestry (http://ancestry.com : viewed 17 June 2016); citing Death Certificates, 1900-2011, Indiana State Board of Health, Indiana Archives and Records Administration, Indianapolis.

 

Though to be honest, I'm not 100% happy with this. I think I'm going to go back and have a scan through the images again...check out a few different rolls/volumes and then come back to this.

Submitted byeevandeon Wed, 08/31/2016 - 19:33

niteowl1851, There are inconsistencies on these earlier death certificates. In comment #2 from EE, above, she (assuming ESM) wrote to me:

"The organizational scheme you describe is similar to that of many states in that time period, whereby the certificate details from the various counties were entered into ledgers at the state level. You are right that there is no number assigned at the statewide level. There does exist a certificate number on the document, in the top right corner—representing the number assigned by the county."

That certificate number she is talking about was the handwritten 114 on my George Kuhn death certificate. My Sarah Ann Trees one, and your Simon Kixmiller one, do not have that number.

I would like to ask the editor, EE, if I wanted to pursue a more in-depth study of one of these death certificates and see it in person – the original – rather than a photocopy, electronic copy, or microfilmed copy, would my citation (like the one below) give me enough information on how to do that?

“Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011,” database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 15 August 2016), certificate image, George Kuhn, 18 November 1901, Hancock Co., Indiana, Health Officer's Record Number 114; imaged from State of Indiana, "Death Certificates 1901," vol. 34, p.125.

Also, EE, doesn’t saying “Death Certificates 1901,” vol. 34 suggest that there are at least 34 volumes named “Death Certificates 1901”? There are! Many more. It seems that one could write a thesis on how to evaluate the Indiana vital record books.

Submitted byniteowl1851on Thu, 09/01/2016 - 12:29

eevande, you posted:

if I wanted to pursue a more in-depth study of one of these death certificates and see it in person – the original – rather than a photocopy, electronic copy, or microfilmed copy, would my citation (like the one below) give me enough information on how to do that?

I think the question would be who has the originals? The IARA page says that "unofficial" copies of death records are available thru Ancestry or the Indiana State Archives and directs that death records are available through the State Department of Health. So, does that mean that the originals reside at the State Department of Health? Or, is the actual original the one held at the local health department office instead of at the state level? 

 

IARA: https://secure.in.gov/iara/2497.htm

State Department of Health: http://www.in.gov/isdh/20444.htm

Submitted byeevandeon Sun, 09/04/2016 - 00:31

EE,

I didn't ask about a short form of one of these citations. I don't know where to fit the Health Officer's Record Number or the vol. and p. numbers in the short citation, or if I even need to.

Long form:

     41. “Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011,” database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 15 August 2016), certificate image, Mark Coon, 28 October 1899, Hancock County, Indiana, Health Officer’s Record Number 5; imaged from State of Indiana, “Death Certificates 1900, Hancock County,” vol. 34, p.40. Father K. Coon, mother Barbra Redinbow.

Is this an acceptable Short form?

     42. “Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899–2011,” database with images, Ancestry.com, certificate image, Mark Coon, 1899, Hancock County.

 

Submitted byEEon Mon, 09/05/2016 - 14:08

Niteowl and eevande, you've obviously had fun with this while I was off conferencing. 

Eevande, your shortform works well, given your focus on the database. EE 9.32 offers other short-form options. The one caveat I might make about identifying the record as just "Mark Coon, 1899, Hancock County" is that—since you are not citing volume:page or exact date—you would need to be sure there was no other Mark Coon who died in that county in that year.  The name is uncommon enough that he's the only one the database shows for that year. If the name were a common one, more specificity would be needed.

Submitted byeevandeon Mon, 09/05/2016 - 15:45

Took me 4 captchas to log in!

EE, I am sure you had much more fun, and I would have liked to have been there!

Given that the closest thing we have to a unique identifier at the local and state levels for this death is Mark Coon's name and exact date of death, I will add the full date to the short note.

I do like using the database format. It's is straightforward and consistent with the others in the article. Thanks!

Submitted byEEon Tue, 09/06/2016 - 08:36

Sorry about the captcha woes, eevande. It just took me three tries to get in, myself. Every time I grumble to my site administrator about how difficult the captcha is and he gives me an easier one, I end up with postings by somebody selling wedding dresses or pills. Then when I gripe about the spam postings, he gives me back an obnoxious captcha. :)

Submitted byeevandeon Wed, 09/07/2016 - 01:01

Woo hoo! Got that one on the first try. It's much easier on my laptop than on my phone.

Thanks for commiserating.

Submitted byniteowl1851on Mon, 09/19/2016 - 22:54

I wanted to come back and post on how I tweaked my reference/footnote. Since you must provide the county information for pre-1917 deaths, and since I know now that you can determine the volume number when viewing the images on Ancestry, the following is how my citation current stands.

 

Indiana State Board of Health, Certificate of Death, Simon Kixmiller, Knox County, 23 October 1904; consulted as "Indiana, Death Certificates, 1899-2011," digital images, Ancestry (http://ancestry.com : viewed 17 June 2016); citing Death Certificates, 1904, vol. 45, entry 254, Indiana Archives and Records Administration: Indianapolis.

 

Comments?