Help with formulation a Birth Source Citation

Hello, dalecarmack.  Let's see if we can't simplify this for you.  Starting with the indexed abstract page that FamilySearch created, you eventually ended up with the "original" record at https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-99XH-VQRZ.  So, that's what you'll want to cite, right?

Of course, it's not actually the original record. It's too neat and the handwriting is too modern. Flipping back to the start of the register, at image 78 of that set, we see that the original was "copied in 1901 by Miss L. H. Harrison." You'll want to add that note to the end of your citation, because copying errors could have been made.

Using Template 10 in EE's 4th edition (p. 128) try creating a citation to that "original." You'll cite the register in Layer 1. You'll cite the website in Layer 2. Then your Layer 3 will report where FamilySearch said it obtained the record. Template 10 itemizes, piece by piece, which pieces of information you need and where each piece is placed. After you draft the citation, if you have questions, come back and we can go deeper into the weeds.

Dale wrote: [Using Template 10] Here is how I interpreted the table [template] entries:

Author/Creator [Block]:  Maryland, Church Records, 1660-1996

Dale, when we look at the imaged register, where on that register do we see the words “Maryland Church Records, 1660-1996”?  We don’t. Those words represent the name of FamilySearch’s database.  Those words are not part of the identity of the register.  (See EE4, §3.16 “The Rule That Has No Exception,” particularly bullet 2.)

Also, look at the other EE examples for church registers. Template 11 has one. Chapter 8 “Church Records” has many.  You’ll note that all church registers begin with the name of the entity that created the register. Each church creates its own register. FamilySearch does not create those registers.  §8.4 “Citing Church as ‘Author’” covers this specifically.

When you’re looking at whatever imaged page you’re interested in, flip back to the first page of the register. There, you will usually find the identity of the church. In this case (image 78), it’s All Saint’s Parish in Frederick County, Maryland. Using EE format, that would be:

Author/Creator Block:               All Saint’s Parish (Frederick County, Maryland)

 

Dale wrote: Title [Block]: 

All Saints Parish, Register, Frederick County, Maryland, 1727-1863

In this case, the register has no formal title (unless it is on the cover of the register, which FamilySearch did not image).  What we see there on the first page is this:

​

As we just discussed, the words “All Saints Parish, Frederick County Md." identity the creator or the original record book.  The only other identity this page gives us for the book is “Commencing the 4^th April 1743 Feb. 29^th 1727/28/.” Instead of a title, we just have dates. 

Instructions for handling an untitled register are provided in the citation basics chapter at §2.27. (Hint: every history researcher needs to learn, by heart, what’s in those first two fundamental chapters: Chapter 1, Fundamentals of Research & Analysis; and Chapter 2, Fundamentals of Citation & Style.) Handling an untitled register is also illustrated in Template 9 and many other examples throughout EE. Applying those guidelines would give us something like this:

Untitled register “Commencing the 4^th April 1743 Feb. 29^th 1727/28/”

 

Dale wrote: Descriptor ]Block] - 

Not sure if this should be “copied in 1901 by L. H. Harrison” or left blank

Yes. This would be a good place to inform your readers (and yourself at a later date after your recollection of this source has gone cold).  Given that placing it here will create two sets of quotation marks in sequence, which is awkward looking, you might combine them into this:

Untitled register “Commencing the 4^th April 1743 Feb. 29^th 1727/28, Copied in 1901 by Miss L. H. Harrison,”

 

Dale wrote: Specific Item [Block] - Page 1

Yes.

Dale wrote: Descriptor (specific item [Block]) - Cornelius Carmack Birth

Yes.

Dale wrote: Date (specific item) - 

Not sure if this should be the Register date “1727-1863” or the actual Birth date/Year 

Given that you’ve just identified the Specific Item as page 1, that tells you that the date for the Specific Item is what you find on page 1.

 

LAYER 2:

Dale wrote: Bridge words between document and website provider - Imaged,

Yes.

Dale wrote: Creator - Not sure

If we are using FamilySearch’s website, then FamilySearch is the creator of that website and the database into which it has placed those images.  But, note §3.5 "Block 1: Creator (Who?):

Sometimes, the Creator Block of a citation will not be used. The identity of the author may be unknown—in which case we may say Anonymous or simply leave the block blank. Websites may be eponymous (self-named), in which case it would be redundant to cite the name of the person or agency in both the Creator Block and the Title Block (and likely in the URL/Place Block, as well). Omitting the Creator Block for self-named sites reduces repetition and length.

 

Dale wrote: Title [Block] (of database, if any) - 

Not sure, the actual record page does not have a title

Dale, in Layer 2, you are working with website—not the original record. You already dealt with the original record in Layer 1. Remember “The Rule That Has No Exception" §3.16:

• When identifying the ORIGINAL RECORD, you identify only what you see on those imaged pages.  Anything the website provider has to say is not part of the identity of the original.
• When identifying the WEBSITE and its database, you use only words that deal with the website and its database. You do not take words from the original record.

Here is a screenshot of what you see at your page of interest.

The database title (or a descriptor) appears above the left side of the image, as a hotlink.  When it’s a long title, it’s abbreviated, as it is here. Click on the hotlink to get the full title.

That title of the database is the set of word your draft used to identify the original register. But those words appear in the “frame” that the website places around the image, not in the image itself. (Again: The Rule That Has No Exception. Words created by the website that provides the images are used to identify that website and its provider. Those words are not reassigned to the original document.)

Dale wrote: Title (of website) – FamilySearch

Yes.

Dale wrote: Place (of publication) = URL  - 

https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/film/007575963?

Or  https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-99XH-VQRZ

Either one will do. If you have just one image from that register, the more-specific URL is appropriate. If you have numerous images to cite from that register, then it is logical to cite the URL that covers the whole register.

But note, that the URL to the film should not include the question mark at its end.

Dale wrote: Date - accessed 19 February 2025

Yes.

Dale wrote: Specific Item  (including the path) - Not sure

If  you cite the URL for the whole register, then you will have to specify the specific image number (or Image Group Number > image number, as demonstrated in Template 10).  If you cite the URL for the specific item, then you don’t have to cite the specific image number.  As the “Construction Notes” for Template 10 state: “The path and waypoints … need not be cited if the URL is .. to the exact image.”

 

LAYER 3:

Dale wrote: Descriptor (website’s source)  - Not Sure

Chapter 3’s basic instruction for citing Websites (§3.14), tells us:

        Online access to imaged documents requires the use of at least two layers and sometimes three:

• Record Layer: where we identify the original document, as fully as it can be identified from the image itself
• Access Layer: where we identify the website that delivers the images and (often) the specific database through which the images were accessed
• Location Layer (“Citing ...” Layer: where we report the source information as given by the website—a layer we begin with the words “citing ...”=

The “Citing ...” Layer is commonly used in one of two circumstances:

• Database citations: When Layer 1 presents all information from the database, including the item of interest, then the “Citing ...” Layer is used to report where the website says it obtained the information or the image.
• Online image citations: Often those images, as filmed, do not completely document the original record. Sometimes, details needed to identify and locate the original source may appear only in the website’s frame for the image, or in a sidebar, or in a separate source discussion.

In this case, the images themselves

• identify the creator of the record book (the Who? information we need to cite; see EE4 §3.2 "The Five Ws")
• provides words we can use to create a title (the What? information)
• provides specific page numbers (the Wherein? information)
• provides specific information we need (another essential piece of What? information)

But the images do not tell us where that register is located.  Therefore, we do not have a complete citation to the original. For the missing information we need to fully cite that original record book, we study the website, its database, and its image group. Typically, the crew that is making the images (or film) before they begin imaging the actual register or set of files, will create a “target” that identifies where the record is housed or where the film was created.

In this case, we find that information easily on the first image for that record book (image 78). It carries a tag (target) that is obviously created by the filmer and obviously not part of the original book itself, stating:   “Filmed at the Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, MD."

Because this information came from the website, not from what we see on the images (and therefore can confirm its accuracy), we put this website information about the original (which we hope is correct, but sometimes isn't) into a separate layer, saying that the website is citing ... [thus-and-such].