Canadian Census from Library Archives Canada

Hi, Sue. Thanks for the kind words.

Because your query actually involves three different questions, each of which require lengthy answers, I will break my response into three parts, with each addressing one of the questions.  Because Q2 asks for comparisons with two prior forum discussions--one of which is 8,200+ words and will require a bit of time to digest), It may also be tonight (after the day job is done), before I finish working through them all.

Before your Question 1, you also brought up a point to which I should respond also:

“You indicated in your book that citing Censuses is very complex and lengthy.  In the back of my mind I wonder if I could simplify my citations.”

Check EE 6.16, Sue. There un that census chapter (Chapter 6), under “Shortened Citations,” you’ll see guidelines for when and how census citations might be shortened.

QUESTION 1

“First, in each of the two cases below (from prior postings), the image at LAC in the document header there is a ‘Schedule No 1 Population by Name , Personal Description Etc.’ In the citations below, neither has this included exactly.”

Sue, at EE 6.16 (p. 264), see the guidepoint labeled “BASIC IDENTIFICATION.”  Specifically, this: “The year, the governmental authority (U.S., U.K., State of Iowa, etc.), and the type of schedule (population, slave, agricultural, etc.) should never be omitted for the years that multiple schedules exist.”

At the web page to which you link for the 1911 Canadian census (https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1911), we are told:

"The enumeration data were collected using 13 documents, known as schedules, which included a total of 549 questions.  Only Schedule 1 has been preserved."

Because this is the only existing schedule for the 1911 census, our citation does not have to specify which schedule we used.

 You also ask:

>Can the citation author, as with the title, amend or create a subtitle ( I will call it)?”

When we cite this record as 1911 Census of Canada, we are indeed amending the original title assigned to it by the agency that created the document. The actual title is far longer and does not lend itself to quick identification or to logical placement in a source list (6.3). When we look at the actual sheet for your person of interest, we see this identification at the top of the sheet:

“Fifth Census of Canada, 1911. Schedule/Tableau No. 1. Population by Name, Personal Description, etc./ Population—Nom, Renseignements Personnels, etc.”

Because most modern censuses carry "titles" such as this, most are cited generically by year, authority, and locale. This one is typically cited as 1911 Census of Canada )(or Census of Canada 1911), followed by Province Name, Specific Locale.

The actual title at the top of a census is used only for censuses that are random one-off historical documents such as the one cited at EE 6.43: “Récensemeent du poste des Natchitoches Pour l’Annéd Sept Cent Soixante Seis, 1766.”

Your Q1 continues with this:

"You have mentioned that when a title is amended then the quotation marks are removed.  How would the reader know when a subtitle is altered? How much header information of the document needs or should be included in the citation and in which element?" 

A basic principle of research and writing applies here (EE 2.6): If we copy three or more words exactly, we use quotation marks. If we don’t use quotation marks, then the default assumption is that we are using our own words, rather than quoting.

SUE'S QUESTION 2:

"In examining the image per the URL included in the citation, I don’t see the same information for the person of interest element as in the example citations below.  Should I be including only the information that I read on the document?  For example I would have written the following for the first example -District 185 Pontiac, District no 7, Enumeration District No1 in Clarendon Township, page 6, dwelling 57, Richard Wilson (age 59) household.  I am not sure from where some of the information in the citation comes. May I ask what am I not understanding?"

Sue, you reference two citations discussed in two different queries—both of which citations are created by History-Hunter, rather than EE:

1911 Census of Canada, Pontiac district (185), Quebec, Canada, population census, Shawville Village subdistrict (24), enumeration district 1 [stamped as enumeration district 45], page 12, line 33–36, Richard Wilson (age 59) household; imaged, Library and Archives Canada (https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1911 : downloaded 20 July 2022); citing Library and Archives Canada microfilm T-20439. For unexplained reasons; this record was indexed as subdistrict 45, rather than 24, and the enumeration district field was not included in the 1911 Census of Canada indexing.

1916 Census of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, population schedule, Saskatchewan, enumeration district (ED) 26, Humboldt, p. 9, dwelling 93, family 97, Richard "Dschloendorf" [Schloendorf], age 46, and family; imaged, "Search 1916 Census of the Prairie Provinces," Library and Archives Canada (http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1916/Pages/1916.aspx : accessed 11 June 2017); citing Microfilm T-21936, Reference No. R233-47-9-E.

The Forum Q&A discussion for the 1916 census is especially lengthy (8,200+ words!).  I hope I am distilling its issues down to the exact ones that are puzzling you.  If I understand you correctly, then the answer is this:

• Different censuses are created in different ways. They may have different types of districts and identify those in different ways. They may have different kinds of pagination and different ways of identifying households and individuals. 
• Whatever census we use, we supply the essential data given on that census.  If prior censuses contain different elements not found on the census being used, then those elements are not mentioned in the census being used.

Your Q3 also states:

For example I would have written the following for the first example -District 185 Pontiac, District no 7, Enumeration District No1 in Clarendon Township, page 6, dwelling 57, Richard Wilson (age 59) household.

The village and page number identified by H-H is not the jurisdiction and number cited on the page for Richard Wilson 59. EE would identify this part of Richard's citation in this manner:

District 185: Pontiac, Sub-District 7, Enumeration District 1, Clarendon Township, p. 6, dwell. 57, fam. 57, Robert Wilson aged 59.

Note the addition of “Sub.”  If our citation says  “District 1865 Pontiac, District No 7 …”  then readers will be puzzled by the consecutive citation to two different districts with different numbers ( “District 185, District 7”). You’ll note that the printed form actually says “S. District No. 7.” The “S” is for sub-district. Including that helps clarity.

Skipping over your numbered Question 3 which I'll answer separately, we see several unnumbered questions after that, which relate to this Question 2. I’ll answer them in this message:

      (Third-from-last paragraph):

“I read in your book that the source entry list entries can be grouped. Should I be arranging the elements in my source citations to assist in this concept? Is this even possible?”

Yes. This certainly is possible. EE 6.3 “Arrangement of Elements in Source List (Bibligraphy)“ demonstrates multiple ways this might be done.

And you ask:

“Should the reader be able to match the reference note to the source entry associated with it? The reason I ask is if the element’s order is adjusted will that hinder the reader in finding the source entry”

Reference Note Numbers, which appear as superscript within our text, are keyed to the numbered reference notes (footnotes or end notes). We use them to provide exact citations for each specific fact.  Source List Entries, which are a generic description of the source, are not numbered; they are also arranged in alphabetical order.  In the “Fundamentals of Citation” chapter, at 2.4, see “Citations, Types of.”

SUE'S QUESTION 3 & SAMPLE CITATION

Here Sue asks:

Third, I have a number of citations where the index is incorrect. How would I show this? Would I show it in the search terms in Layer 2 as it is related to the database or add a note after the Layer 3 credit line?  

See EE 6.20: Correcting database errors.  Most can be handled as a one-word correction in square editorial brackets, right at the point of the citation where the error appears. If your correction requires a lengthier discussion, then it would be best to put it in a separate sentence following the citation.

Re your source citations for which you seek an appraisal, the Reference Note introduces one point that's touched upon in the Q&A'a above. I'll go into more detail here:

“Fifth Census of Canada, 1911,” Ontario, Canada, Schedule 1 Population by Name, Personal Description etc., Province of Ontario, District 64 Durham, Sub District 46 (05), Enumeration District 4 South, in the Town of Port Hope, p 18, dwelling 179, Wm Clemence age 68 and wife Emma; imaged in “Census of Canada, 1911,” Library and Archives Canada  (https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/census/1911/Pages/1911.aspx: 22 Mar 2023); citing microfilm T-20369, reference RG31, Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa.

EE (as demonstrated in every sample citation in Chapter 6) does not recommend starting a citation with “Fifth Census of …”  The standard identification, used worldwide, follows one of these two formats:

• Year, Jurisdiction   …
• Jurisdiction, Year …

This applies to Canada also; see EE 6.50 Canada.  If we identify our censuses by ordinals, then the alphabetized Source List would present this scrambled sequence:

• Fifth census of Canada
• First census of Canada
• Fourth census of Canada
• Second census of Canada
• Sixth census of Canada
• Third census of Canada

Given that most researchers today also work across international bounds, identifying them by the ordinal, Fifth, First, Fourth etc., would also intermingle Canadian censuses with censuses of U.S. and elsewhere.  For this and other reasons discussed in chapter 6, the standard citation format is the Year, Jurisdiction  or  Jurisdiction, Year.

EE 6.50 (p. 301) “Canada: Online Images” provides sample citations (Source List Entry, First Reference Note, and Subsequent Reference Note) to Canada’s 1911 census, using Ancestry’s database. The LAC database can be substituted for Ancestry, element by element.