Loose probate records & Reunion 9

Cormac,

Advice on how to create a citation using a specific software program is best given by the user-group for that software. However, EE will happily address the principles involved here.

FORMAT:

Is there a special reason why your "citation" is a source list entry rather than a reference note?  In historical research and writing, the reference note is the key format. Source list entries are generic entries. It's the reference note that fully identifies what we use. (EE 2.38 discusses the differences between reference notes vs. source lists. If you don't have a copy of EE, you'll find this under the free "Sample Text Pages" tab at the top of your screen.)

FILE NUMBER:

Because source list entries are generic, the smallest unit is typically a record group or collection--not the specific items in the collection.  If you include a file number in a source list entry, then you might have to create 10 or 100 source list entries for the same collection, depending upon how many files you use from that collection.

FILE I.D. & LOCATION:

If you have 72 pages from the county clerk's office and you have another 7 from FamilySearch.org, then you have two sets of materials from two different locations. Each should be cited to the place where you found them.  EE 10.31 gives the basic format for citing county-level probate files ("loose papers"). EE 10.33 gives a basic citation format for probate packet images supplied by an online provider such as Family Search.

EE

Thanks for explaining your situation more fully, Cormac. EE will address your several issues in separate messages.

SOFTWARE LIMITATIONS:

While Legacy, RootsMagic, FTM, TMG and other software have embedded EE or Evidence formats, Reunion has a different vision. EE, as you will have deduced, has long since decided that working within GEDCOM's parameters has two serious negatives: (1) we are working within an antiquated IT framework; and (2) we are working to the lowest common denominator insofar as source identification and evidence analysis are concerned. In the meanwhile, users of some software who want to meet 21st-century standards but fear difficulties in transmitting data via the long-antiquated GEDCOM, often suggest creating freeform citations following Evidence Style, rather than using the software's built-in template. Would that work for you?

NEW USER OF EE:

Cormac, skim back through the Citation Issues Forum to 6/22/12 and look for the posting "How does one eat an elephant (or digest an 885-page book)?"  Most new users find this 4-step guide helpful.

The natural inclination in a citation manual is to look up a record type and copy the format. But many Americans today have  minimal exposure to research principles in their secondary and higher education years. Without that grounding, researchers can feel like they're trying to work an algebraic formula without ever having algebra. That's why EE begins with two chapters of basic principles—one for citations and one for evidence analysis. If you digest these two chapters, you'll be equipped to understand virtually everything you encounter.

You specifically state: "I didn't understand in the example that I used what the breakdown was for the format. That is, what each part stood for."  That's understandable, Cormac. That's also why each records chapter of EE begins with a set of "QuickCheck Models" (on gray pages) that diagram the parts of typical citations for records of that type. The first gray page in each chapter provides a list of the QC Models. Checking that first gray page for Chapter 10 (Local & State Records: Property & Probate), under "Image Copies," you'll see that there's a diagrammed model for online images on p. 494. Does this help?

CITING "FILE NUMBER"

You state: "NO file number associated with the 72 pages. All the paperwork was filed under the deceased's name. A lot of pages have no file number at all. The only "sequence" is the order in which I received them from the researcher. Looking at QC model on pg. 487, I guess since that there is no file number associated with the 72 pages that when I get around to make the First (Full) Reference Note that I would leave that part empty or not included at all. I'm probably wrong there too."

Nope. You're right! If a record set does not have an element that is common to its type, then you leave that field empty. In this case, the identification of the file would be simply the name—exactly as given in that county-level file (when citing the 72 pages) or in the FamilySearch online images (when citing the other 7 pages). If the files are arranged alphabetically in either or both locales, it's usually helpful to record that point in your working notes.

SEQUENCE:

It is also commonplace, with loose probate records, that there is no neatly ordered sequence. They are simply loose papers in a packet that have been shuffled and rearranged by everyone who used the packet. What we do in these situations, when we need to reference specific information from one or another page, is to appraise the document, decide what it is we're using, create an I.D. for the document (if it doesn't have a formal title) and add the date. For example:

• Merchant's invoice, Jones & Co., 2 February 1854
• Letters of Administration to Peter Pumpernickle, 7 January 1854

(Note that if the document does not have a formal title and you create the ID yourself, you don't put quotation marks around the ID you created, because you aren't quoting an existing title.)

When one of these records is a multi-page document, then we might need to cite the specific page within that document. If the pages aren't numbered, we might say, for example:

• Judge's homologation of creditor's requests, 13 March 1854, 2nd page.

Any time you have trouble working through an issue, don't hesitate to ask. One person's questions always help many others.