Format for a Subsequent Note & Source List Entry for a French Departmental Archive

By History-Hunter on Fri, 04/14/2023 - 20:52

Forums

In a previous post, I noted that the following was given as an example of a First Footnote for a typical French Departmental Archive.

First Reference Note:
         Archives Départementales des Vosges (https://diffusion.ad88.ligeo-archives.com/ark:/50275/vta528b6619f3454/daogrp/0/layout:linear : accessed 23 September 2021) > images 7–8, Naissance de Charles-Jule Poirson, b. 4 September 1855 (registered 5 September 1855), natural son of Marie Poirson; citing Commune Lemmecourt (Vosges, France), État Civil, archived as Cote 4E270/3-43818, Archives Départementales des Vosges, Épinal, France.

No format for a companion Subsequent Note or Source List Entry was provided at that time. However; if one constructs them in a manner similar to that used for other citations, the following results.

Subsequent Note:
         Archives Départementales des Vosges, Naissance de Charles-Jule Poirson, b. 4 September 1855 (registered 5 September 1855), natural son of Marie Poirson.

Source List Entry:
         Archives Départementales des Vosges. https://diffusion.ad88.ligeo-archives.com/ark:/50275/vta528b6619f3454/daogrp/0/layout:linear : 2021.

a) The above Subsequent Note and Source List Entry seem so abbreviated that I wonder if something is missing. Are they adequate or do they need additional information? If more is required, could you explain why?

b) If one indexes their Source List by country, does one have the freedom to simply prepend "France. ", or is it more complicated than that?

Submitted byEEon Sat, 04/15/2023 - 10:01

Hello, H-H.  Yes, your draft citations for the Subsequent Note and the Source List Entry do need rethinking.

Source List Entry:

You suggest:

Source List Entry: Archives Départementales des Vosges. https://diffusion.ad88.ligeo-archives.com/ark:/50275/vta528b6619f34 /daogrp/0/layout:linear : 2021.

From this, would you or your readers know what kind of material you used from this archives?  That’s a fundamental requirement.  As a corollary, would you create a source list entry that said:

FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9Q97-Y3Q7-Z6Y : 2021.

Whether we’re using the website of a French national or departmental archive, or a Canadian national or provincial archive, or a U.S. state or national archive, or Family Search, or Ancestry, this type of Source List Entry would make our Source List unmanageable.

Let’s go back to basics: Fundamentals of Citation Chapter:

2.4 Citations, Types of

History sources are tracked in three basic ways: a source list ... , reference notes, and source labels.

SOURCE LIST (BIBLIOGRAPHY)

This master list of materials we have used will not document any specific fact. While our research is ongoing, our working source list helps us keep track of the materials we have examined ….

In the same Fundamentals chapter, sections  2.47 through 2.52 discuss the organization of a Source List. Specifically 2.51 demonstrates citing materials in major governmental archives internationally. You'll note that records are identified by Country, archive, series/record group, collection. With collection being the smallest element. Entries do not specify individual document. Section 2.51 also answers your question (b).

Chapter 3: Archives and Artifacts repeats the fundamental instruction from 2.4 and elaborates on it:

Source List Entries vs. Reference Notes

SOURCE LIST ENTRY: Bibliographic entries rarely cite individual documents or record volumes within an archive. The smallest level is usually a collection or series. You may, in fact, create your own generic description, such as

Draper Manuscripts. Pre-1830. Wisconsin Historical Society, Madison.

A generic description such as this is designed to reflect the material or the time period you actually studied, even though the collection may not subdivide its material into any such category.

In EE’s subsequent chapters, where the focus is on specific types of records, you will find French departmental examples at 6.52 (including website reference), 7.39, and 10.46 (including website reference).

 

Shortened Citation:

The three French departmental examples cited above (6.52, 7.39 and 10.46) also demonstrate the essentials for a shortened citation.

Submitted byHistory-Hunteron Sat, 04/15/2023 - 14:25

An observation...

I appreciate the references that you highlighted. Thank you. I'm still reading them over, yet again, but they are not helping me understand where one derives "missing" info that obviously isn't in the First Reference note I showed in my post.

I suppose my confusion stems from the abbreviated nature of the First Reference Note in the case I posted. Normally; I've pretty-much been able to take my first reference Note and remove the publishing, path and image number info and citing clause to create the Subsequent reference note. To create the Source List Entry has typically been a case of taking the First Reference note, dropping everything after the first semicolon, substituting periods for the commas and doing a bit of cleanup around the publishing info. However; In the case I used as an example of a First Reference note, there isn't really much there with which to work in the first place.

I suspect that the use of an ARK reference and other optimizations have made the First Reference Note shorter, but removed quite a bit of info that one needs to create the Subsequent Reference Note. To some extent, the same is true for the Source List Entry.

The optimization of the posted First Reference Note appears to have made it impossible to see how one could construct the associated Subsequent Reference Note and Source List Entry. I suspect having access to the un-optimized version would have made it possible to craft suitable ones.

If this is the case; then the approach is clear. Write all three elements first...in their un-optimized form. Only then should one do any optimization.

Submitted byEEon Sun, 04/16/2023 - 09:33

History-Hunter, the bottom line is that there is no one formula we can apply to any aspect of using historical records.There are only general patterns. Human nature is inconsistent. Historical records were created inconsistently. Historical records are archived inconsistently. Historical records are put online inconsistently.

With each new record file, set, collection, or whatever, e have to do the kind of thoughtful analysis you are doing, in order to create a citation that (a) will lead back to the what we use; and (b) provide sufficient data about the nature of the source to enable us to understand its strengths and weaknesses.