Marriage Register Copied - Not the Original

By Anonymous on Wed, 06/08/2016 - 18:47

Forums

Hello,

I am hopeful for assistance in writing a citation for a 'copy' of an 'original copy' of a marriage register from New Zealand.

The document was purchased through the New Zealand BDM website, which is referenced with the registration number of 1870/6021, produced through a search of their historical marriages. The actual document is a handwritten transcribed copy of the original marriage register, presumed to be issued in the same year (1870) which was then sent off to the relevant office of the Department of Internal Affairs for official Govt. record keeping.

It has an entry number of 58 (hand written) and a folio number of 674 (stamped). I am told that the entry number is identical to the entry number in the original register, and that 674 is the folio page reference (I am still not sure what this folio page ref actually refers to).

Anyway, I have come up with the following citation. The register copy was issued by the Registrar Office in Wellington which is where the marriage took place. The document clearly states it is a Copy of the Entry in the Register Book of Marriages kept by me (i.e the Registrar Office).

My citation:

Wellington Registrars Office, marriage register, entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville, 1870; citing register Copy of the Entry in the Register Book of Marriages, registration no. 1870/6021, New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Wellington.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Many thanks in advance.

Robyn

 

Submitted byJadeon Wed, 06/08/2016 - 20:37

I would make the Copy reference the beginning entry, and the "citing" part referring to what you know about the original register, since you have the rather inadequate statement as to what your copy is of.

Sometimes the original documents are too fragile to wrestle on a copying device and no microfilm is available to copy from.  Unless this is the case and there has been no destruction of the original, I would find it aggravating to be furnished a copy of a transcribed copy (are you sure when the transcipt was made?) rather than of the first-written version.

Most of us have experience with mistakes that creep into transcripts, even when they are pretty contemporaneous.

Good hunting,

 

Submitted byRobyn_62on Wed, 06/08/2016 - 23:10

Hi Jade,

Thanks for your message.

I had previously emailed New Zealand BDMS to question the source of this record, which is the standard type of document that they supply for 'print-outs' of all BDM records.

This is what they told me.

58 is the Entry Number in the Register Book.

This number would be the same across any copies that were made and would show on the original entry.

67 is actually 674 (it is very faint on the printout as it is a pencil notation) but mirrors the Folio page reference number at the bottom of the page.

The original copies are often the Church copy. I can see that this marriage occurred in a Registry office. "The other copy will have been held in the District and the copy was sent to a central office of Internal Affairs". These registers are generally such that one copy is held by BDM and one by National Archives.

So what I have gathered from the above, is the document that I have from BDM's for this marriage, is a mirrored transcription of the entry made in the original marriage register. And of course when transcribing details from one register to another, mistakes can be made. I think it was practice that at the end of each quarter, that the officiating registrar or minister of the church, had to send in a quartely return of all BDM's from their district or church, to the office of Internal affairs. So in all cases, the second register, would have been written up shortly after the end of each quarter.

Perhaps I should change it to:

Wellington Registrars Office, "Copy Of The Original Marriage Register", entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville, 1870; citing registration no. 1870/6021, New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Wellington.

I guess I am trying to cite the document so the citation shows that I have a hard copy, which originated from the Wellington Registrars Office in a duplicated register, and then that I got the actual document from NZ BDM's under their registration no. 1870/6021.

I have attached the document for interest.

Thanks again

Robyn

 

Submitted byRobyn_62on Thu, 06/09/2016 - 01:13

After a review of EE, I now think that this record should be cited as:

Registrars Office (Wellington, New Zealand), "Marriage Register (copy)," unpaginated, entry 58, folio 674, Livingston-Somerville marriage (1870); Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Wellington.

I have based my citation on the QCM "DERIVATIVES CHURCH RECORD BOOK, RECOPIED" page 319. It seems to be the closest evaluation of the document at hand.

Editor, it would be wonderful to receive your feedback.

Thanks

 

Robyn, Jade is doing an excellent job of helping you think through the issues while I was off toiling in other vineyards. But there's one issue that hasn't been addressed. Can you point us to the website description of this record—the one from which you made the request? If the link leads to something behind a paywall, can you take a SnagIt or screenshot of what you see at that page?

Hello Editor,

I have attached 3 screenshots of the website. The first 2, are the main search screen with the results of the search and the 3rd is the one when you add it to the baskst to purchase.

Regards

Robyn

Submitted byEEon Fri, 06/10/2016 - 11:29

Thanks, Robyn 62, for the attachments that point us to the website you used. Because we have not personally used this set of records, it would have been foolish for us to attempt to cite the record or evaluate a citation with studying the background information provided by the archives.

If I have correctly interpreted the guides I have read and the screens you've provided, the records were initially created locally and a copy sent to the NZ Registrar's Office in New Zealand. They are now in the Archives New Zealand.

Because you are citing the archival copy rather than the original register, your format can follow the basic format for citing material archived in almost any national-government archives.  That organization framework is described at 3.1. The typical document involves these "levels" of information that have to be identified:

  • item or piece,
  • file (if we are citing a loose record)
  • collection (and possibly a series that the collection is just a part of)
  • record group
  • archives name and location

Your first draft does the better job of fitting this structure. You have suggested this:

Wellington Registrars Office, marriage register, entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville, 1870; citing register Copy of the Entry in the Register Book of Marriages, registration no. 1870/6021, New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Wellington.

1. Given that the local Wellington Registrars Office would have many registers, our reference to "marriage register" needs to be specific. The first image you supplied carries at its top a line that has been clipped off, with only the base of the letters showing. It's not readable. Possibly that is the title of the register. If not, and if the image you purchased does not identify a specific title or book number, then you might quote the wording on the first visible line, to create this:

Wellington Registrars Office, "1870 Marriages in the District of Wellington," entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville, 1870;

The "1870" statement after the names of the parties need not be repeated here, given that it's on the title that we have quoted.

2. Your next layer of the citation says "citing ... ."  However the document that you have cited is not, itself, citing anything else. We use the phrase "citing" when a third-party provider gives us an abstract or an image and says "this is where I got this from." In those cases, we are not dealing directly with the archive that maintains the record. We're depending upon the reliabilty of the third-party provider. Therefore, we first cite the provider, then report what the provider gives us as its source.

3. For citing a record in an archive (back to EE3.1), once we have identified the item or piece, as we've just done above, then we identify where that item/piece can be found in that particular archive— collection, series, record group—followed by the identity of the archive and its location. In this case, there are very few levels to cite. Continuing the progression from smallest item to largest, we would round-out the citation this way:

Wellington Registrars Office, "1870 Marriages in the District of Wellington," entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville; Central Registry copy, registration no. 1870/6021; Registrar of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs; Archives New Zealand, Wellington.

4. If we want to record the fact that we located the record via the website, then we might create a citation such as this:

Wellington Registrars Office, "1870 Marriages in the District of Wellington," entry no. 58, folio 674, John Livingston-Margaret Somerville; Central Registry copy, obtained through New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs, Births, Deaths and Marriages: Whānautanga, Matenga, Mārenatanga (https://www.govt.nz/organisations/births-deaths-and-marriages/ : 10 June 2016), which identifies the record as national registration no. 1870/6021.

 

Dear Editor,

Firstly I really want to thank you for taking so much time to help me with this citation. I literally have 100's of these documents, so am extremely grateful for your suggestions and advice. I think I like no. 4 the best, because it clearly describes both the hard copy document and where I got it from. Again thank you.

Regards

Robyn

Submitted byJadeon Fri, 06/17/2016 - 12:40

This is a great layered revision.  I had completely missed the element of the website you were starting from.

Good hunting,