Citing Norway Church Books on DigitalArkivet (arkivverket.no)

I am still learning accurate citations, so please bear with me ...

I have read through Chapter 7 on Church Records, and I think I have created a correct citation to my g-g-grandparent's marriage record found in a church book in Norway:

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Parish Register (official) number 14 1875-1882, "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, no. 24, 29 June 1877; digital images, National Archives of Norway, Digitized Parish Registers (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015).

 

Note:  When a perma-link is available, as in this case, I prefer to put them into my citations.

 

Q1. Does the translation for [Marriage] go inside the quotation marks or outside?

Q2. The name of the book is "Parish Register (official)", so should the words "official" be inside parenthesis, or should I leave the parenthesis off as in "Parish Register official ..." ?

Q3. Should I put the date range of the book in parenthesis even though the name of the book in DigitalArkivet doesn't?

 

Do you have any other suggestions?

Thanks in advance!

    - Brad

 

 

 

Submitted byEEon Tue, 02/10/2015 - 20:08

Brad, you say you are "trying" to learn. It looks to us like you're succeeding, not just "trying"!

Question 1:
For square brackets, you could put them inside or outside, given that square brackets mean that this is an editorial addition. Sometimes, the choice will depend upon the context and what would be clearest to the reader.

Question 2:
Parentheses are more ambiguous than square brackets. If the parentheses are there in the original, EE would retain them and place the parenthetical word within the quote.

Question 3:
If the archives' own title or label has no punctuation, we might simply replicate what we see or we might choose to punctuate it for clarity.  Your choice!

 

 

Submitted bystoneon Tue, 01/26/2016 - 12:32

I believe that my previous citation was not quite formatted correctly, and I don't want others to be misled when citing to the Digitalarkivet.

Previous:

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Parish Register (official) number 14 1875-1882, "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, no. 24, 29 June 1877; digital images, National Archives of Norway, Digitized Parish Registers (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015).

 

Corrected:

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Parish Register (official) number 14 (1875-1882), "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, no. 24, 29 June 1877;  "Digitized Parish Registers," digital image, National Archives of Norway, Digitalarkivet  (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015). 

 

Reasoning:

In the second layer of this layered citation, we have:

Database Title: Digitized Parish Records

Item Format: digital image

Website Creator: National Archives of Norway

Website Title: Digitalarkivet

... and of course the URL and date.

 

Following the example in EE 3rd ed. 2.33, p. 38, the order of these elements would be as listed above.  However, I have seen other examples where this order is different, so suggestions from others are welcome.  We want this right for posterity.  :^)

     - Brad

 

Submitted byEEon Thu, 01/28/2016 - 12:37

Brad, as I understand it, your question relates to the second layer of the citation, which you have revised to include the name of the database in which the image is found. Yes? 

If so, I would make one suggestion. That second layer should be introduced by a phrase such as "imaged at ...," so that readers of your citation do not assume that the first part of your citation (the part before the semicolon) relates to one source while the part after the semicolon relates to another source. The revision blurs that point.  Now that you have identified the database, EE’s second layer would be:

...; imaged as "Digitized Parish Registers," database with images, National Archives of Norway, Digitalarkivet  (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015).

However …

You have also revised the first layer of your citation as well, adding a wee bit of punctuation that has led to opening a can of worms. Your first layer initially read:

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Parish Register (official) number 14 1875-1882, "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, no. 24, 29 June 1877;

It now reads:

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Parish Register (official)number 14 (1875-1882), "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, no. 24, 29 June 1877;

Question: Why are you using both quotation marks and parentheses to set off that word official?

Parentheses indicate thaht we are inserting some kind of explanation. Quotation marks mean that we are actually quoting something. But rarely would we quote just one word of a record unless it has some peculiar significance. Logically, we might use “official number 14 (1875-1882)” if we are quoting exactly from the title of the book. However, common practice when citing a record series by its number (as opposed to citing the exact title of an individual register) would be just to say Register 14 (1875-1882).

My effort to figure out what is special about the word “official” led me to use your link to examine the record. That’s when the can of worms opened up and 3 puzzlers crawled out:

  • Where did you get the information that this was Register 14 for the parish?
  • Your phrase “C. Ægteviede [Marriage]” represents the section of the book but, without telling the reader that, the logical supposition is that this is the title of the book.
  • Frame 1 of that digitized film gives us the title of the individual book:

Ministerial-Bog, Lies Praestegjeld, Askers Provstie; Begynbt dan 4th? Januar 1875; Glattet den 31 Deiember 1882.

So, back to your phrasing:  Parish Register (official)” number 14 ...

Given that this phrase doesn’t appear on the title page, and the number 14 doesn’t appear there,  are you perhaps taking this from a descriptor that the database itself supplies?

 

Submitted bystoneon Thu, 01/28/2016 - 16:23

Thanks so much for taking the time to look at the link and posting your comments and suggestions - especially when the document is gothic Norwegian script.  We have got to smash those darn crawly puzzlers!

You are indeed correct that I am cross-mixing my citation layers.  Not good.  

Let's try this again.

 

First Layer - Original Document:

This information is extracted as if we were standing in the parish that created the book and were holding it in our hand.

Parish: Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway)

Name of book (from inside cover): Ministerial-Bog, Lier Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie; Begyndt den [Beginning on] 1st Januar 1875; Sluttet den 31 Desember 1882

Section: C. Ægteviede [Marriage]

Page: 318

Line number: 24

Date: 29 June 1877

Insights:

  • When standing alone, the sections of the book's title are separated by semicolons rather than commas.  This could be confusing when we are also using the semicolon to separate layers of the citation.  Perhaps the title can be shortened.
  • Given the line number for the record, the date is not necessary.

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Ministerial-Bog, Lier Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie 1875-1882, section "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, line 24

 

Second Layer - Website:

This information is extracted from the website itself.  

Database name: Digitized Parish Registers

Item Format: database and digital images

Website creator: National Archives of Norway

Website name: Digitalarkivet

Permalink URL to image: http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268

Date visited: 9 February 2015

English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official)

Image number: 318

Insights:

  • Since the entire website is created by the National Archives of Norway, perhaps it is not necessary to include the creator.
  • The English language path is the minimum needed to find the book.
  • I am not sure when the item format precedes the database name and when it follows it.  I have seen examples of both.

"Digitized Parish Registers," database and digital images, Digitalarkivet (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015), English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official), image 318

 

Third Layer - Repository:

The Digitalarkivet provides source information for each document (including the permalink) when selecting "Display page header: Yes" and "Image information: On top" when viewing the page.  Source information for the book itself is found on the volume page.  Major kudos to them for including this information!

County: Buskerud

Parish or district name: Lier

Register: Parish register (official)

Number (archival reference): 14

Period: 1875 - 1882

Location: Regional State Archives of Kongsberg

Number of digitised pages/images: 421

Insights:

  • The archival reference number may be handy if you showed up in person at the repository, but there should already be enough information in the citation to find the book without it.
  • The important part of the source information is the new information about the location of the book.

Regional State Archives of Kongsberg

 

Putting it all together:

I notice that when citations are complex, sometimes words such as "imaged as" or "citing" are used following the semicolon that divides the layers.  I am not sure when to use these words nor do I understand the best words to use for a given situation.

How does this look?

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Ministerial-Bog, Lier Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie 1875-1882, section "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, line 24; imaged as "Digitized Parish Registers," database and digital images, Digitalarkivet (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015), English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official), image 318; citing Regional State Archives of Kongsberg.

 

     - Brad

 

 

Submitted byEEon Fri, 01/29/2016 - 12:29

Brad, you're a superb analyst.  Below, I’ll comment on some of your observations and do one last bit of tinkering with your citation:

"When standing alone, the sections of the book's title are separated by semicolons rather than commas.  This could be confusing when we are also using the semicolon to separate layers of the citation.  Perhaps the title can be shortened."

EE would not shorten the title of the register because each piece of data is essential. The way to avoid “confusing” anyone is to follow the principle of using quotation marks around the titles of manuscripts or unpublished registers. (To put it another way: When we copy a title exactly, we use the quote marks because we are quoting.  If we generically cite the series—say, Parish register no. 14—then we don’t use quotation marks unless that exact phrase appear on the cover or title page.)

"Since the entire website is created by the National Archives of Norway, perhaps it is not necessary to include the creator."

It is essential to cite the creator of the website when the website name contains no clue to the identity of the creator. But, we would not site NAN twice, as creator of the database and as creator of the website.

"I notice that when citations are complex, sometimes words such as 'imaged as' or 'citing' are used following the semicolon that divides the layers.  I am not sure when to use these words nor do I understand the best words to use for a given situation.

Each of those two phrases “imaged as” or “citing” means exactly what the word or phrase says.  When we cite an original document that is imaged online, after our citation to the record we end it with a semicolon and start the next layer with “imaged as ….” or "imaged in" (which is more precise when we're citing a database that contains the image). When  we cite a database and that database itself cites its own source, then close out our citation to the database with a semicolon and start the third layer saying that what we have just identified is “citing [whatever]."

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Ministerial-Bog, Lier Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie 1875-1882, section "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, line 24; imaged as "Digitized Parish Registers," database and digital images, Digitalarkivet (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015), English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official), image 318; citing Regional State Archives of Kongsberg.

As an aside here, when I go back to the title page of the book (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_side=1&show=269&uid=141344&urnread_imagesize=medium&hode=nei&ls=1) I’m reading the ID of the parish as “Liers,” rather than Lier. The location today seems to be “Lier,” but when we copy the name of the book straight from the title page, we need to copy exactly. Also, that title page gives exact starting and ending date. EE's citation (using red to flag differences between yours and ours) would be:


Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), Ministerial-Bog for Liers Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie … 4 Januar 1875 [to]  31 Deiember 1882,” section "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, entry 24; imaged in "Digitized Parish Registers," database and digital images, Digitalarkivet (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015), English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official), image 318; citing Regional State Archives of Kongsberg.

Incidentally, in case you're wondering why EE would change your word "line" to "entry," it's because the numbers on that register page don't represent lines. The registration entry you're interested in actually has four lines.  (And no, nobody will take away your license to do genealogy over a point like this. But you obviously are trying to learn all the reasoning behind each practice, so I'll cover this nit as well.)

 

Submitted bystoneon Fri, 01/29/2016 - 15:16

Thanks for your words of advice and encouragement.  It is important to really understand the details, so please leave no nit unpicked.

The distinction between "line" and "entry" is great.  I also like your use of the ellipsis in the book title to make it easier to read, yet retain the information.  Good catch on the parish name too since we need to include exactly what is written in the title.

I noticed that you didn't include the National Archives of Norway in the final version of the citation.  In your mind, does either including "Digitalarkivet" or "citing Regional State Archives of Kongsberg" identify the author?  If not, would the citation be:

 

Lier Parish (Lier, Buskerud, Norway), “Ministerial-Bog for Liers Præstegjeld, Askers Provstie … 1 Januar 1875 [to]  31 Desember 1882,” section "C. Ægteviede [Marriage]," p. 318, entry 24; imaged in National Archives of Norway, "Digitized Parish Registers," database and digital images, Digitalarkivet (http://www.arkivverket.no/URN:kb_read?idx_kildeid=5886&idx_id=5886&uid=ny&idx_side=-268 : accessed 9 February 2015), English language path: Buskerud > Lier > 1875-1882, Parish register (official), image 318; citing Regional State Archives of Kongsberg.

 

 

    - Brad

 

 

Aach. I did omit the creator of the website, even though I said it should be there. Thanks for catching and revising. As I've been known to say before: even editors needs editors, when doing their own writing. Blog posts and online forums definitely suffer from that lack!

Submitted bystoneon Sat, 01/30/2016 - 13:55

Not to beat a dead horse, but eventually it would be great to understand how to create the very best in class citations.  If you were writing an article for NGSQ or other premiere journal, would this citation be changed in anyway, or is the last revision exactly how it would be done?

 

It would be interesting to know if there are general "pro-level" suggestions for writing citations for these premiere journals.

 

 

 

 

Brad, the citation that might eventually be published is never the ideal citation for any researcher. Every publisher—even good scholarly journals—look for ways to shortcut citations in order to save space. (The printed page is expensive real estate.) It is also true that different editors shortcut in different ways. They fall into certain patterns or habits depending upon the type of sources their journal usually publishes.

As researchers, our working citations need to be complete enough to do at least three things. The first two are the reasons you'll find on the home page to this website.

  • Document the exact source in which we found a specific piece of information. (You know, the old reason we were taught in school: So other people will know that we didn't just make up our assertions. {smile}.)
  • Identify our source well enough that we can evaluate its strengths and weaknesses and, with reasonable reliability, the likely accuracy of the information.

But, from the standpoint of your specific question, there is a third consideration. We need to

  • Record enough information that, when we get to the point of submitting our work to Whatever Editor, we have all the information Whatever Editor needs—whatever pattern that journal follows. Otherwise, we find ourselves needing to relocate many sources to which we no longer have access, including even sources that no longer seem to exist in the vapor of the Internet.

Submitted byEEon Sat, 01/30/2016 - 21:32

Brad, I might also add that whatever we submit to the editor of a good, peer-reviewed journal can never be "exactly how it will be done" if it is accepted for publication. We can't even assume that after we do whatever revisions the peer-review justifies, that what we supply is "exactly how it will be done." Good journals have good editors. They edit.

Submitted bystoneon Mon, 02/01/2016 - 14:55

What a great insight!  This explains why there are citations in journals that may not be as complete as a researcher might like.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

   - Brad