I’m a quandary as to how to incorporate new information that I found into existing citations and would appreciate input. This could well be a case of me not seeing the forest for the trees so please bear with me. I apologize for the length of the post!
Many years ago I began indexing FamilySearch film 1222391 (now available online here). I had ordered the microfilm and proceeded to digitize items 2–4 (records for the village of Podhajczyki) so that I could work on the project at home. For each frame containing the left and right side of the church registers, I took two images (one for the left page and the other for the right). More recently, I have also started entering the data into Roots Magic.
I was careful—or so I thought—to cite my source. See attached image for a screen capture of the citation manager for the birth fact for Helen Haluk.
After sporadically entering over 1000 citations, I realized that I was citing MY image numbers and not the microfilm frames. < sigh> Out came Evidence Explained where I reviewed Chapter 7 and the Quick Check Model: IMAGE COPIES: MICROFILM FHL-GSU PRESERVATION COPY. I also searched the forums on the EE website.
I soon realized a couple of things. First, I need to do better on citing the item of interest and second, that I couldn’t use frame numbers because they aren’t provided on the microfilm. I could count frames but that would be prone to error. So, back I went to have a much closer look at my images to look for page and record entry numbers.
I have discovered the following about the records in items 2–4.
- Item 2 (begins at image 115 of 888 online)
- The images appear to be of an original parish register book. This is event to me because ALL 192 pages are numbered and where there the year changes, there is no preceding entry by the priest in Latin indicating the record is a true copy.
- I have also noticed that archive staff have crossed out the page numbers on the right-hand pages and replaced them with folio numbers.
- There is no volume/book number on the cover of the book (the label which looks a little contemporary to me but just a guess). Given the records start in 1785 (about the time that the Emperor decreed that metrical records must be kept in columnar format), I can only presume this is volume/book 1.
- Item 3 (begins at image 267 of 888 online)
- The archive staff are awesome! They inserted a sheet identifying which year ranges are on which folio numbers (see image 270 of 888 online). This provides a handy way to jump forward in the online images to a different date range!
- Records up to the end of 1886 are bishop’s copies. Generally, for each year, the first page is annotated in Latin at the top indicating that it is a copy of birth records for the Greek Catholic parish of Podhajczyki, Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Greek church, original book number and page number from which copying began. The copies are not paginated and only contain the archive folio numbers in the upper right. It would seem the copies might have been bound together but no cover was microfilmed. There is a page written in Cyrillic preceding the records that basically reads “Metrical records of births for of Podhajczyki, Kolomyia raion for the years 1875-1911”. Given that “raion” is a fairly contemporary word, it makes me think this page was prepared by the archive.
- There is a gap in records after 1886 and then records from 1895 onward appear to be of an original parish register book for the same reasons as mentioned in item 2.
- Item 4 (begins at image 486 of 888 online)
- This appears to be an original parish register book for the reasons identified previously.
- The cover of the book was not microfilmed so I have no idea of the volume/book number. There is a page written in Cyrillic preceding the records that basically reads “Metrical records of births for the village of Podhajczyki, Kolomyia raion for the years 1875-1911”. Given that “raion” is a fairly contemporary word, it makes me think this page was prepared by the archive.
So, to my questions:
- For the record series for my source list entry, I’ve used Metrical books, 1784-1897. I started with the cataloguing description on FamilySearch (Metrical books, 1785-1931) but these dates includes records from other parishes also included on the film. Consequently, I tweaked the dates to be reflective of the records only for the parish of Podhajczyki. Does this make sense?
- I’m pretty sure that I should somehow differentiate between original registers versus bishop’s transcripts. Do the following examples make sense?
Footnote for Bishop’s transcript record:
Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Greek Catholic Church (Podhajczyki (Gwoździec)), Метрическая Книга с.[ело] Підгайчикии [Metrical Books of the village Podhajczyki], Bishop's copy of register book VI (beginning with page 87), Folio 1 recto first un-numbered entry, Helen Haluk birth registration 1 January 1875; FHL microfilm 1222391, Item 3.
Footnote for record from an original register:
Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Greek Catholic Church (Podhajczyki (Gwoździec)), Метрическая Книга с.[ело] Підгайчикии [Metrical Books of the village Podhajczyki], Un-numbered volume (likely 1) of original register, Page 1 (crossed out and replaced with folio number 79) first un-numbered entry, Simeon Mielnyczak birth registration; FHL microfilm 1222391, Item 2.
Thanks so much for any and all assistance!