Forums
In the QuickCheck Model for Private Holdings: Interview, Tape & Transcript citations there is a place to record both the name of the person interviewed and the date the interview happened.
In my situation, I was eleven when I started "collecting" information about my family, which mainly ended up being written on notebook paper, the occastional napkin, back of a paper plate, or written on the back of my hand, and for which no "transcript" survives. The information about birth, marriage and death, maiden names, etc. all came from interviewing my family members, like my parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles all of whom in later years had reviewed my Famly Group Sheets with the promise to tell me if I had made any mistakes.
With all of this being said, it leads me to my question. I know certain information I have is correct as it came from either the parties involved (grandma telling me the names and birth dates of her children) or was vetted by them at some time (Uncle John and Aunt Shirley looking over their Family Group Sheet and confirming everything looked right), yet I cannot image how I'd ever cite the information I have.
Now, at age 48, I could never say for certain who told me what, or when I acquired the information, and now most of the people questioned are deceased and cannot be "re-interviewed" for a proper citation.
It makes me wonder whether I'd want to use a version of "Personal Knowledge" but call it "Family Knowledge" instead.
Of course some of the information I collected, I've been fortunate enough to document properly, but other information still remains in this nebulous "family knowledge" category. Yes, I could order records for all of these numerous people (probably hundreds of people involved), but until I could afford this avalanche of records, I'm trying to figure out what I could use for a citation.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Dpslager, it is easy to see
Dpslager, it is easy to see why you would be tempted to fall back on the generic statement, "Family Knowledge," but doing so is likely to cause others to downgrade the reliability of the data credited to that source. At the least, could you not expand it to say something such as, "Data collected by David Slager, ca. 19__–19__, from older relatives who gave information on themselves, their children, and their siblings"?
Excellent idea. That is
Excellent idea. That is exactly what I was hoping for. Your suggested format is very helpful. I think that there are many people that have wondered how to deal with a similar type of situation.
Thank you!
All history researchers have
All history researchers have those early habits they still have to deal with. It's either that or burn all our early research notes. :)
Perhaps I can adapt this
Perhaps I can adapt this model for information I "gleaned" as a child sneaking around and listening outside the dining room windows on summer Sunday afternoons. I learned about a favorite uncle's first wife and about the husband who deserted my grandaunt among other family secrets.
Suzanne Matson