WWI Military Personnel Records, St. Louis

Steve, did you obtain the photocopies directly from the NPRC itself or from a fellow researcher? If it came directly from the Center, did the staff not put any semblance of a citation on the photocopy? Perhaps a stamp on the back of a document?  (The devil is always in the details!)

This is perplexing, but not surprising. NARA has excellent archivists, many of them with graduate training in history. Yet, somehow photocopies seem to escape from their facilities with little to no identification.

For want of anything concrete from them, we might create a citation like this:

[Name of Soldier] personnel file, service no. _________ (discharged 19___); Official Military Personnel Files, Enlisted Personnel, ____-____, Army; National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis Missouri; photocopies supplied by the Center without citation.

The potential problem lies with the words between the first and second semi-colons. Typically, that series name would carry a starting and ending date. EE does not have at hand a guide that cites the specific dates for the Army series, only the Navy. It's also possible that the records sent to you might be from a different series or sub-series. Without some cryptic notation supplied by the Center, we're flying blind here. 

As for the hospital and Silver Star info you found in the file, those details should lead you to other records that would have been archived separately from the personnel file that was subject to damage in the 1973 St. Louis fire. If you’re new to this type of research, you might get guidance on these additional records at the blog, _Stump Craig_ (http://stumpcraig.blogspot.com/).

You're analyzing well, Steve. We always run a risk when we extrapolate citations from generic website discussions of its holdings, but if (as with the documents you ordered) that is all an archives provides, then that's what we have to work with. When creating a citation for a "rolling date," the standard way to handle the situation is to use open dating: i.e., 1912--. (Note, here, that the two hyphens should actually be an em dash.)

Hiztorybuff,

When our narrative (or a piece of info we enter into a database) comes from one specific document in a file, we should identify that document. The standard format is to cite the document (by creator, type of document and date), then cite the file, the collection, the series, the record group, the archives, and the city—in that order, going from smallest item to largest.

Your example above doesn't follow this practice precisely, but your instincts are obviously good. You've made it clear which record the piece of information came from (assuming Mrs. Carman did not make more than one affidavit), although you did not include a date to help in the evidence evaluation, as well as source identification, process.

EE 11.30 has models for citing to the specific document.

Hiztory Buff:

Would you check the back side of each document and see if there is an archive stamp, with cryptic notations penned thereon?

Hiztorybuff:

It is frustrating when an archival technician sends the file without even a cryptic stamp. Like you, we would be reluctant to assign the file to a specific collection and series without some guidance or verification from the archives. Apparently, you have studied the appropriate preliminary inventory for RG 24:

Virgil E. Baugh, comp., Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel, PI 123 (Washington: National Archives & Records Service, 1960).

Lee D. Saegesser and Harry Schwartz, comps., "Supplement to Preliminary Inventory No. 123, Records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel," NM 74 (Jan. 1967), unpublished manuscript available as fiche.

Within these confines, your citation is both cautious and informative. We've asked a colleague who has much onsite experience with NPRC records to weigh in, if she sees a problem. (Do have patience. For most of us, it's last-minute conference prep time for the biggest conference of the year.)

In the meanwhile, have you considered contacting NPRC again, briefly explaining to them that the citation was missing from the records they sent, and ask if you have correctly identified the collection and series within RG 24?

HiztoryBuff, our colleague has just been touch with the NPRC and the reply was essentially this:

• Personnel files at NPRC do belong to specific record groups, but "mostly just for citation purposes."
• Some "auxiliary records" obtained after the 1973 fire were designated by NPRC as RG 64, Records of the National Archives, rather than being assigned to the agency that created the record.
• Records that were transferred to NPRC directly from National Archives 1 and National Archives 2 in DC continue to carry the same Record Group designation assigned to them while they were at 1 or 2.

All things considered, the advice above still holds: it would be best to contact NPRC and ask if they would supply the details that you need for an appropriate identificaton.

And, yes, it is much easier for researchers and writers to accurately identify their materials when archives supply a record with a citation attached!

This thread is very helpful! When my dad passed away in 2015, I requested his DD-214 from NPRC in St. Louis. I received two copies of his DD-214 but no information about a record group or file location. He was in the U.S. Army from 1962 to 1964 and served just under 2 years of his 3-year commitment. If I contact NPRC, after everyone gets released from shelter in place, would they be able to give me more detailed information about the file location?