Citing Personal Transcriptions of Documents

I have been transcribing some documents that I either photographed myself at Gloucestershire Archives (UK) in 2019 but also others where I had previously paid a local researcher to photo on my behalf (who provided photos of the archive detail of the record, of the relevant box or folder or whatever).

My question relates mainly to the transcriptions of these documents.

Lately, I have been doing some digital scrapbook pages that I hope to share with cousins (or post at FamilySearch or Wikitree) and have attached a single page of one to give you an idea of these.

My goal is to cite the information I have transcribed. My thoughts are where the info came from is enough, but do you think I need to add a "better" citation or is what I have noted (as per attached) enough?

I am "very new" to citing manuscript items, and I have 100's of photos of unpublished documents that I would really like to add to my family tree software with proper citations. For the scrapbook pages, I feel that they do not necessarily need to be as complete? v. what I might do in my software. 

Have read through chapter 3 of EE, but I still can't get my head around original documents viewed at an Archive. I "think" in this situation, I prefer to lead with the collection name or item details. To be honest, I am not sure of how I should approach either.

 

 

 

Upload a document

Submitted byEEon Mon, 05/24/2021 - 10:15

Robyn, let's approach this from another angle that might simplify the issue for you.  Every time you read a document, do you feel a need to cite your reading of the document instead of the document itself?  No.  Why, then, would we need to cite our “write-out” of the document instead of the original? (Or, in this case, the photograph of the original.)

That said, there are a few situations in which citing our transcription would be necessary. For example: if once-upon-a-time we had made a transcription of a record and then, say, the church office burned and the original was destroyed.

As for your citation on the attached image, it works so long as it remains attached to your transcription. However, if someone copies your citation to reference the document in their own writing (giving credit to you, of course), their readers would then be left with a couple of very basic questions unanswered:

  • If those readers went to D2440/ Box 84/33 at the Gloucestershire Archives, would they be looking for a document that is formally titled "Hicks Beach Family of Coln St Aldwyn and Great Witcome"? If so, then that title needs quotation marks around it. If the object they would be looking for does not carry a formal title, then they need more details to understand what it is.
  • In either case—in most situations—a couple of other questions need answering when we cite a document from an archives. (Remember, every citation should answer the questions, Who, What, When, Where, and Where In?)  So: who created the document and when was it created?

In this case, we might say that adding those elements to the citation is not necessary because those details are in the transcription to which the citation is attached. But that leads back to the issue I first raised: what happens if someone copies your citation to reference the document in their own writing and your citation does not include the who and when?

In addition to the five basic Who, What, When, Where, and Where In questions, there's actually a sixth W that every citation should consider: Why?  As in Why should we attach any credibility to what this source has to say? Answering the Who and the When, along with identifying the title or nature of the document, are all essential to credibility.

Thus, a standard citation to an archived document such as this might be:

Agreement, William Edward Boyes with Thomas Penson, 21 October 1842; Collection: Hicks Beach Family of Coln St. Aldwyn and Great Witcome; Reference: D2440/box 84/33; Gloucestershire Archives, Gloucester, England.

You might then add that you are working from a photocopy supplied by So and So. However, the "scrapbook" nature of the medium to which you are adding the citation raises a "conflict" between the ideals of thoroughness (from a researcher's standpoint) and brevity and informality (from a graphic designer's standpoint).

Given your statement that you are “very new to citing manuscript items” and are still unclear after reading chapter 3, “Archives & Artifacts”—and given that you work heavily in British records—I’ll also ask: Have you seen 6.51 and, particularly, 7.38, both of which discuss the essential elements for citing materials from British archives, one from the standpoint of church records and one from the standpoint of civil records?

Finally, to say that your scrapbook-style page is “engaging” would be an understatement! Are you using special software for the design and layout?

Submitted byRobynRon Mon, 05/24/2021 - 16:00

Dear EE

I always love the way you explain things and provide reasons for your guidance.

It's funny because if it had been a letter from one to one, I would have likely started with - Letter, William Edward Boyes to Thomas Penson, 21 October 1842; etc...but I was unsure what to actually classify this document as - agreement sounds good - thank you!

I need to go back and reread through chapter 3 and take a look at 6.51 and 7.38 (which I am sure I have read).

You are certainly right about the informality of the scrapbook, and the differences between a researcher/designer's point of view. I was trying to find a mid-way solution for the citation, to appease both. In my genealogy software, I know I would have done it differently.   

The scrapbook is made with My Memories Suite software, but many folks (the experts) who do scrapbooks use Photoshop Elements. I am just learning and the MM software is quick and easy to learn. I just start with a blank page and add things, like the papers, flowers. It's fun and a nice way to present things.

Thanks for your help once again.

Robyn R