Forums
Hello,
I'd like to cite a digital image of a church register that is attached to a database entry on a website. Is there a single format example in EE that already covers all of these elements? More specifically, I will be citing a digital image of the church register (the religious copy) for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce in Hull, Quebec, Canada, attached to an entry in the LAFRANCE database, hosted on the www.genealogiequebec.com website authored by the Institut généaogique Drouin. From reading different chapters, what I've retained thus far is that I should cite the author (the church), specify that it's a digital image, cite then name of the database in quotation marks, the website title in italics, cite the author of the website as well as when I accessed the document. Here's my attempt at combining these elements: Notre-Dame-de-Grâce (Hull, Québec, Canada). Registres paroissiaux, 1886-1900 [copie religieuse]. Digital images. "Le LAFRANCE", Database. Généalogie Québec. Institut généaogique Drouin. https://www.genealogiequebec.com/fr/lafrance : 2014 Am I missing something? Thanks!
Dsuave,
Dsuave,
Is your citation intended only for a bibliography (a source list)? Or it it to be a reference note in which you identify the source of a specific assertion you are making?
It was to be used for a
It was to be used for a source list but it will also be used as a reference note for an assertion, at which point I would include the details required in a reference note.
Dan Sauvé
Dan, thanks for elaborating.
Dan, thanks for elaborating. Your citation works well for a source list entry.
In answer to your first question: EE p. 314 (the "Church Records" chapter) carries a QuickCheck Model for "Image Copies: Digitized Online." You've tracked it well. You do have one additional element, the citation of a specific database or module at the website, and you've also handled that addition well.
Perfect, thank you.
Perfect, thank you.
Is it unnecessary to add the title the specific database?
Dan,
Dan,
The website that you cite, at its home page, offers multiple options. They're not offered as tabs, but as sections or modules--one of which is "Le LaFrance," presumably the entity you are citing. If the Notre-Dame registers can be accessed only through this module, then you should cite it. Yesterday, when I attempted to backtrack you at the website, the "Le LaFrance" button was not working, so I could not follow through to clarify the structure of that module and whether it was (as your citation implies) a master database containing entries for many parish registers. Assuming there are no other issues, your citation seems to capture all the essentials for a source list entry.
Great, thank you for your feedback. To close the loop and to leave behind an example for others who may be in the same position as I was, especially since the formatting in my first post did not come through, here's what I ended up with (in French): Source List Entry Notre-Dame-de-Grâce (Hull, Québec, Canada). Registres paroissiaux, 1886-1900 [copie religieuse]. Images numérisées. "Le LAFRANCE." Base de données. Généalogie Québec. Institut généalogique Drouin. https://www.genealogiequebec.com/fr/lafrance : 2014. Full Reference Note Notre-Dame-de-Grâce (Hull, Québec, Canada), Registres paroissiaux, 1886-1900 [copie religieuse], p. 27, B614 Joseph Alexandre Sauvé; Images numérisées, "Le LAFRANCE," Base de données, Généalogie Québec, Institut généalogique Drouin, https://www.genealogiequebec.com/fr/lafrance : accédé le 10 janvier 2014.
The formatting in my last post did not come through again.
Take 2:
Source List Entry
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce (Hull, Québec, Canada). Registres paroissiaux, 1886-1900 [copie religieuse]. Images numérisées. "Le LAFRANCE." Base de données. Généalogie Québec. Institut généalogique Drouin. https://www.genealogiequebec.com/fr/lafrance : 2014.
Full Reference Note
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce (Hull, Québec, Canada), Registres paroissiaux, 1886-1900 [copie religieuse], p. 27, B614 Joseph Alexandre Sauvé; Images numérisées, "Le LAFRANCE," Base de données, Généalogie Québec, Institut généalogique Drouin, https://www.genealogiequebec.com/fr/lafrance : accédé le 10 janvier 2014.
I'm going to have to
I'm going to have to apologize to begin with because every time I think I have it worked out, I see something else that changes it.
Basically, I am trying to cite an original parish register (in french), that had been microfilmed but not by the parish, then the micofilmed was digitized and a partial database of information and put online, but they did not retain the roll numbers and frames, nor was the outside of these books recorded in any way I can figure out. And I don't know if there remains an original copy at the church or elsewhere, or in some cases have since been destroyed. (and a partridge in a pear tree)
I had a few questions about this that I have already answered for myself on this incredibly helpful website, but I am still left unsure if I have captured this pickle or if it's still stringing me along (instead of the other way around)
As near as I can figure out, it could be cited two ways and I think they both might be right, or both of them wrong or somewhere in between...
Full citation (because I've never been good at remembering anything past the kids birth dates and my husband and my aniversary... and maybe the dogs name...)
"Quebec, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967," digital images, Ancestry.com (http://ancestry.com: accessed 25 May 2014), Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfield (Lac-Mégantic, Québec, Canada). Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfiel paroisse registre, 1889, Premiere Feuillet [folio 1, both sides], M1, marriage act, Ferdinand Lavigne et Rose de Lima Turmenne, 8 Jan 1889; imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp., Drouin Collection", Montreal, Quebec, Canada: "Institut Généalogique Drouin." "Quebec, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967," digital images, Ancestry.com (http://ancestry.com: accessed 25 May 2014), marriage act, Ferdinand Lavigne et Rose de Lima Turmenne, 8 Jan 1889, Premier Feuillet [folio 1, both sides], M1, Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfiel paroisse registre, 1889, Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfield (Lac-Mégantic, Québec, Canada); imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp., Drouin Collection", Montreal, Quebec, Canada: "Institut Généalogique Drouin." The only other spoke in my wheel is if I have to add anything to cover me transcribing and translating record entries?
I would appreciate any thoughts on any of these things? (thank you!)
Paulette
Hopefully this might be more
Hopefully this might be more helpful...
"Quebec, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967," digital images,Ancestry.com (http://ancestry.com: accessed 25 May 2014), Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfield (Lac-Mégantic, Québec, Canada). Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfiel paroisse registre, 1889, Premiere Feuillet [folio 1, both sides], M1, marriage act, Ferdinand Lavigne et Rose de Lima Turmenne, 8 Jan 1889; imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp., Drouin Collection", Montreal, Quebec, Canada: "Institut Généalogique Drouin."
<br><br>"Quebec, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967," digital images, Ancestry.com(http://ancestry.com: accessed 25 May 2014), marriage act, Ferdinand Lavigne et Rose de Lima Turmenne, 8 Jan 1889, Premier Feuillet [folio 1, both sides], M1, Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfiel paroisse registre, 1889, Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfield (Lac-Mégantic, Québec, Canada); imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp., Drouin Collection", Montreal, Quebec, Canada: "Institut Généalogique Drouin." The only other spoke in my wheel is if I have to add anything to cover me transcribing and translating record entries?
Paulette, your problem is a
Paulette, your problem is a bit more complicated. What you are viewing is not the actual parish register. It is one of the annual civil registers submitted by ministers to the courthouse as a vital-records register. You'll notice the tag to the left of the image, which says "Registres ... au Greffe de Beauce" and the notation on the inside cover that says "St. Agnes de Ditchfield, Courts de Beauce." In creating the civil register each year, the ministers did copy from their church registers but, as we all learn the hard way, copies have far more errors than we want to believe.
All things considered (and in the interest of avoiding unnecessary wordiness), EE would be inclined to strip the entry down a bit further, but also clarify the nature of the record.
"Quebec, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967," database and images, Ancestry (http://ancestry.com : accessed 25 May 2014), marriage act, Ferdinand Lavigne et Rose de Lima Turmenne, 8 Jan. 1889, folio 1, both sides, Civil Vital Register for 1889, Sainte-Agnès-de-Ditchfield Parish, Lac-Mégantic, Office of the Greffe, Beauce; imaged from microfilm identified as "Gabriel Drouin, comp. Drouin Collection. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Institut Généalogique Drouin."
Red type also marks other wee changes, such as the correction of Ancestry's name, a more-precise quoting of what Ancestry cites as its source, and the detachment of the colon from the URL, so that it will not become part of the URL.
THANK YOU so much for helping
THANK YOU so much for helping me with this. I've been struggling with it for days and also to apologize as I sent you my "working copy" instead of what I had finished with. It's all in the details. :(
<br>When I transcribed this particular register, I thought that it said comté, meaning county. While transcribing it, I had the fun of figuring out what people were writing as a signature, and what they called themselves as opposed to what their names were written by everyone else. Anyway, I think this is the original register for that reason and the change in the priest's handwriting when another stepped in. Should I find out if a duplicate was made, if that is even possible, or just in case, cite that this was an original register since I know that most of the churches complied with this by about this time frame?
<br>I'm going to research civil and ecclesiastical boundaries for Lac-Mégantic to make sure the word could even have possibly been 'comte'. If transcribing and translating are considered art forms, then I would to feel like I was attending a college of art at times. At least then I could get a diploma at some point in my life that could collect dust along with the dust bunnies that multiply in my house due to neglect. :)
<br>Once I have this done this history research (I love this part), and have found out if a duplicate was made (if that possible... I haven't ever looked into it before), if I find there WAS a duplicate, I still cite it as original, but if I cannot find an answer to that question, should I still cite it just in case since I know that most of the churches complied with this, in this time frame?
<br>Last question (I promise), since everyone on my side comes from Quebec and I will be doing a LOT of transcribing and translating (and abstracting and extracting... I really did do a lot of research online and in your books and website before breaking down and asking), do I need to put myself in as a transcriber... etc. and if I have to, given the amount of records I'll be re-entering into my computer, can I not just put that information in a note at the beginning (or footnote) that information? In the past 25 years or so, there have been others who have done it for me and I do have their information to add.
<br>The only reason I'm being so picky before I even start re-entering 25 years worth of research, is that if I have to do it all over, it darn well is going to be done completely and correctly... and make lots and lots and lots of backups... I do eventually learn. :)
Forgive duplicate questions
Forgive duplicate questions in my last post (and bad sentence structure). I know everyone else's time is very important too. Lack of sleep. Lack of chocolate. now lack of humor
Paulette,
Paulette,
I, too, puzzled over whether the word was "courts" or "comté." However, we are still left with "Registres ... au Greffe de Beauce." The greffes were not the keepers of the original parish registers. They maintained the copy that was made for civil-registration purposes.
As a starting point for further study on the nature of the registers filmed under Drouin, Ancestry supplies this description of the material it has digitzed:
"Until the late 1900s, church registers in Quebec served as civil and vital records in that province. Throughout the years a second copy of church records, from all denominations, was sent annually to the appropriate courthouse. During the 1940s the vital record collections in courthouses throughout Quebec were filmed by the Institut Généalogique Drouin.* The filming of vital records continued for some areas up through the 1960s. Consequently, this filmed set of records became known as the Drouin Collection." (Emphasis added.)
Ancestry also notes that it has taken this passage from "Patricia Keeney, 'Civil Registration in the Province of Quebec' in French Canadian Sources: A Guide for Genealogists, (Orem, UT, USA: Ancestry, 2002)." http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=1091
If you find otherwise, do let us know. In the meanwhile, we're still inclined to think that the script in that register is much too neat and much too uniform to have been done sporadically as the events occurred.
Thank you so much for looking
Thank you so much for looking that up for me and hopefully something in what I learned might shed some more light to help make a clearer answer possible. I have spent the *entire* day researching the Drouin microfilms to place provenance. I did find what you did, but I also found something I had never heard of in all the time I've been using Drouin:
[1]Whence the Drouin Collection?<br>allfamSeptember 1, 2009 at 11:38 AMFor bvanasse: Each parish maintained 2 parish registers, one which was sent to the archives, one held in the parish. Ancestry films are from the archival copies held by the Drouin Institute. For the most part FamilySearch has filmed the parish copies[?], so they are different films and different versions of the registers to begin with. But the indexes still need improvement in any event.<br> So I went looking to see if this was true and found this on the Drouin Institutes website:<br> 2,366 microfilms of the Drouin Collection page [2]"... The 2,366 microfilms of the Drouin Collection includes Vital Records (all religious denominations) from Quebec, from the origins until 1940/1942, for the whole set and to August 1968 for Hull and Gatineau, from a part of Ontario (until June 1968 for Ottawa), from Acadia and from the USA; the set also comprises microfilms from notaries and other documents.<br> Those microfilms are different compared to the set available at the LDS (Mormons) libraries. The microfilms of LDS were taken in 1976, concern only the catholic records from beginnings to 1876 and can't be purchased. The Drouin microfilms were taken in the 1940s (so that anything lost between 1940 and 1976 is on the Drouin copy but not on the LDS copy), and cover until the 1940s both catholic and non-catholic records. Until 1993, the vital records of Quebec were maintained by churches and not by the province (all this changed in 1994) and the records are organized by religion, then by church..."<br> and to [3]the LDS and Familysearch where I found in their catalog about the same information as the Drouin website except for some dates which I suspect were partially their digital editions or additions) I opened the same page of the repertoire side by side with Ancestry.com; and my ancestor's signature was also there and they were exact duplicates except for one glaring thing... FamilySearch is *incredibly* clearer than Ancestry!<br> And lastly, [4]I researched the border changes that Lac-Megantic has been through and Lac-Megantic was in the county of Beauce in 1899. It didn't change again until 1902. Honestly though? Now that I look at it at Familysearch, I think it looks more like court... unless they would have noted it as greffe in the books? Never mind. I could run around forever. And as I look all this over, I realize I still don't know if I need to cite one or the other version, or both of them. Sigh. or if I need to give transcription info... but other than that, I learned a lot about the provenance and locations of the Drouin collection (and hopefully am doing better with my citations, although if I'm not, I only just started so I'm sure everyone has a learning curve?) :)<br> Sources:[1]Allfam, "Whence the Drouin Collection?," The Ancestry Insider Blog, 1 Sep 2009 (http://www.ancestryinsider.org/2009/09/whence-drouin-collection.html : accessed 28 May 2014). <br> [2]Drouin Genealogical Institute, Drouin Genealogical Institute (http://www.drouininstitute.com/ : accessed 28 May 2014), history of Drouin microfilm collection; as a source, has not been tended closely. Many links do not work as I navigated throughout their site. The homepage does state the Boutique was updated Apr 2014, it's copyright at the bottom of their homepage was updated to 2014, but it has "Visitors on April 1st, 2014 : 1 861 107" posted at the bottom. It's HTML header was 1999. Even though it's the Drouin website, need to corroborate history elsewhere.<br>
[3]"Québec, registres paroissiaux catholiques, 1621-1979," index and images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1961-28000-12556-76?cc=1321742&wc=MHBY-123:15159201,15159202,13637903 : accessed 28 May 2014), Lac-Mégantic, Sainte-Agnès, Baptêmes, mariages, sépultures 1884-1899, image 114 of 601; current HTML and the clearest digital images by far than Ancestry.com<br>
[4]QuébecPolitique.com, QuébecPolitique.com (http://www.quebecpolitique.com/ : accessed 28 May 2014), History of county changes of Frontenac; "Première élection générale: 1912 (voir Beauce [1867-1912] et Compton [1867-1912])."; current HTML, updated website and good as a starting point outside of a historical map, a gazetteer or Guide du colon - Province de Québec.
Paulette,
Paulette,
It's amazing not just what we learn but also how much we learn when we begin to dig deeper. In response to your specific statement ...
I still don't know if I need to cite one or the other version, or both of them.
...the basic rule is Cite what you use. When, as in this case, we use both Ancestry images and FamilySearch images, and find one to be clearer than the other, EE would advise citing the provider with the clearest images and then adding a note to say that the FamilySearch image in this case is clearer than that provided by Ancestry.
Adding comments about clarity to our citations can help us in the future, after our recollection of all this has gone cold. It can also "protect" us in the future, if someone who has used inferior images should question our reading of the text. We all see instances, from time to time, in which Researcher A makes an assertion and cites an imaged document, after which Researcher B goes into print (or online) saying that Researcher A's assertion about the contents of the document is questionable because the text in the image is not fully legible. Often, in such cases, Researcher A simply used a better image; but Researcher A could have avoided that criticism by adding a note about the clarity of the source.
Awesome! Luckily, I only just
Awesome! Luckily, I only just started re-entering any data at all, I just upgraded to Legacy8 (and tweak citation), an added both sets of images (with citations) to the detail, then finally put my entire journey yesterday (with your advice & my sources) as a to-do item that was finished, but can now refer back to the search if I need to. The final analysis of the source I attached to the source notes. I think I am SET! Thank you!
I bought a digital copy of EE
I bought a digital copy of EE because the real thing was out of print. Finally got the hardcover,2nd printing, last week. Now I can feel the pages and it is making more sense to me !!
The majority of my ancestors are from Quebec so I am a big time user of LaFRANCE (online subscription, digital images of church entries with optional database derivatives ), PRDH (online subscription, database, derivitives) and Fichier Origine (online, free, derivitives) -(I hope this is accurate!)
Anyhow.... I want to create a template for citations that I can use easily for the thousands of Quebec/Nouvell France individuals in my tree
Below is my first crack at it. The fields insuperscript superscript superscript is where I would insert the information about the individual record. In the uploaded document, the fields are in red font.
...Am I on the right track? Please steer me away from this if it is off the mark! MERCI! THANK YOU!
QUICK CHECK TEMPLATE for
DIGITAL IMAGES of Qubec CHURCH RECORDS
found in LaFrance
(Following the format on Page 314 of Evidence Explained)
Source List Entry
Institut généalogique Drouin(490 Charles-Péguy Est, La Prairie, Québec, Canada, J5R 3G1). LaFRANCE. 1621-1849. Digital Images.Quebec Records: The LAFRANCE.https://www.genealogiequebec.com/en/lafrance. 2015.
First (Full) Reference Note
1. Institut généalogique Drouin(490 Charles-Péguy Est, La Prairie, Québec, J5R 3G1). LaFrance. 1621-1849. Record Book ID. Page, Item of Interest and Date for Unpaginated Entry; Digital Images, LaFRANCE. (https://www.genealogiequebec.comURLending): accessed day month year.
Subsequent (Short) Note
# Institut généalogique Drouin (Québec, CA), Record Book, Page, Item with Person of Interest and Date.
Hello, Franco,
Hello, Franco,
Your basic issue is this: Do you want your master source to feature the online database or the local parish? The QuickCheck Model on p. 314 focuses on the local parish. Apparently, you want to make a template to use for all parish records found in this "database with images." In which case you need to follow a template that features the database; as with the Scottish example at 7.43 (p. 367).
A couple of other tweaks would also help to ensure that your citation is understood by others who are versed in basic practices:
Incidentally, all the
Incidentally, all the different entities named at the website are a bit confusing, but the site's setup is telling us that
We would string all that together this way,
1. Institut généalogique Drouin, "Le LAFRANCE," database with images, Généalogie Québec (http......
EE
EE
I sincerelt thank you for your help with this. I think so much of my research is based on laFrance and the PRDH from Universite of Montreal, featuring the online database it the only way (for me) to cite the thousands of records in my personal family tree.
If I was a professional genealogist, perhaps this would not be good enough.
I am going to redesign my Quick Check based on your reply. Merci!
Avec plaisir!
Avec plaisir!