Citing Sources…Parish registers

A consistent format for the citing of all sources is a desirable goal, and while a common format might not always be possible, one has been established over the years for Acadian parish registers. When I first began turning the pages of these precious documents at glebe houses in Cape Breton in 1961 I devised a numbering system which I used in papers I prepared for dissemination to relatives, i.e., River Bourgeois “P.R. #1”, Arichat “P.R.#2”, etc. with endnotes identifying the name and location of each.

It soon became evident that this “personal” code was a rather unprofessional approach, and somewhere between Father Clarence d’Entremont and Father Angus A. Johnston (A History of the Catholic Church in Eastern Nova Scotia [1960]) I recognized a pattern which identified such sources geographically, by place-name. Father Johnston’s two volumes are broken down (both chapter and often paragraph) by geographical locations, not parish names. I believe it was Father Clarence who explained the reason: parish names change.

What we most care about is in fact location, thus for me to cite “St. Joseph parish registers” (in Cape Breton) would be to pointless, requiring further identification (for example) “Little Bras d’Or” or “North Sydney” for clarification. Codes for identification should be clear and brief, thus all records for the Beaubassin registers should

read simply “Rg Bbn” and the use of “Notre Dame de Bons Secours” or “Our Lady of the Assumption” (the latter being the name of the third [and last] church at that place) is of interest but irrelevant to the citing. Moving along to that fateful evening in the Autumn of 1838 we read that “…all the Arichat records were lost in a fire.”

Some communities grew of course, and thus eventually a citing of “Rg Sydney (Sacred Heart)” would be appropriate, but in the early years no such identification by parish name is needed nor desirable. In Steve White’s

DGFA we find little mention of parish names outside of his notes, and yet we have clear, unambiguous, identification of the source we seek.

If for no reason other than a conservation of space in a document, the above observations should be given consideration. In general, and again in the interest of economy of space, there is no need to give page or numbers referring to the act being noted for chronology is inherent in these records and the dates alone will bring you to what you seek; brevity is the soul of documentation.

Next of significance is being quite specific with respect to the nature of the source one cites. If you yourself have viewed and extracted information from a church register, the original document, you may then write “Rg Bbn” but anything other than that experience suggest (in my judgement) that you write “Rg Bbn, (film)” and that is what I have done with respect to those registers because I have never had the privilege of seeing the originals. If this appears to be “overkill” of a kind, consider that the person who filmed the original may have had limitations placed on him at the time of filming, or may have missed something. Having said that, such a copy comes very close to being legitimately referred to as a “primary” source.

Such is not true of transcriptions, and those as well might suggest specific clarification on the part of the transcriber. Were the transcriptions made from the register or a film of that register? As anyone who has viewed such films is aware, there are times when one sits there, straining the eyes, thinking “If I could just see the real page!” from time to time. Not to worry, a responsible transcriber will indentify questionable data, perhaps causing you to seek the original.

Again, be very specific when you cite (in your work) the nature of your source. When you accept a transcription of data from a parish register your citing might well read “Rg N. Sydney, trans by _________ (date)” or “Rg N. Sydney, trans by_______ , fr film, (date)” for only in that way can you be (at some future date should a question arise) cognizant of that distance from which your data is removed from a primary source. If you are merely passing on data to another, and wish to give your source, an informal “I retrieved this information from a transcription of the registers by________” should suffice.

For those unable to get close to reviewing original or filmed records, transcriptions by known to be reliable individuals has great merit, seek them out; I have yet to see on the web (perhaps it will one day come) or on a CD, an image that is in fact a “filmed” primary document.

Whatever your source (and you do always give your source, yes?), cite it clearly and specifically; it will serve you well in the future as most of us have learned.

Colonel John Brooks Devoe

Greyrocks Stratham NH

NOTE: Any private or public use of the above text is granted with the condition that I am identified as its author. JBD

Contact me Back to Table of Contents Acadian Grandfathers (home)