Style request: National Archives and Records Administration

esh1996

Hi there, I use Chicago 17th and full note, and I can't seem to figure out how to get it to fit with the NARA style. And considering my thesis is going to be using the NARA files a lot, I definitely need to know! It's fairly specific, and would probably benefit from its own style tbh...

https://www.archives.gov/files/publications/general-info-leaflets/17-citing-records.pdf

The general format is this: item (report, letter, map, photo, etc); file unit; series; subgroup; record group ###; archive based on physical location.

So, for an example, let's use this letter found in the NARA: https://imgur.com/a/ooTfem9

The citation would be "Lilly Neubauer to Wiesbaden Central Collecting Point, September 24, 1950; Ardelia Hall Collection: Wiesbaden Administrative Records (National
Archives Microfilm Publication M1947, roll 0046); Restitution Claim Records; German; RG 260; National Archives at College Park, MD."

Quite frankly, I think if the general format was made with drop downs for the archive location, it'd be super. I am not smart enough to figure out how to code all that madness lol.

damnation

See this for how to request a style. There is information missing.
https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/wiki/Requesting-Styles

esh1996

Ok, so from my best guess this would be the citations.
Edit: when citing a source more than once, I suppose that the first footnote is the full citation (bibliographic), but also has the shortened versions of the category in parentheses. Example would be like "The Varieties of Capitalism and Hybrid Success by John L. Campbell and Ove K. Peterson (Varieties of Capitalism and Hybrid Success by Campbell and Peterson); ..."

In text/footnotes:
Firms and the Welfare State by Mares; Eds. Hall and Soskie, 2001, p. 184-213; Varieties of Capitalism.

Varieties of Capitalism and Hybrid Success by Campbell and Peterson; Vol. 40, Iss. 3, p. 307-332; Comp. Polit. Stud., 2007.

Bibliography:
Firms and the Welfare State: When, Why, and How Does Social Policy Matter to Employers?, by Isabela Mares; Edited by Peter A Hall and David Soskie, 2001, p. 184-213; Varieties of Capitalism. The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage.

The Varieties of Capitalism and Hybrid Success by John L. Campbell and Ove K. Peterson; Volume 40, Issue 3, p. 307-332; Comparative Political Studies, March 1, 2007.

damnation

Hi,

I'm struggling with those guidelines and matching that to the examples you gave. Is there a example publication anywhere? If behind a wall, can you upload it somewhere and sent it over?

adamsmith

I think this is a misunderstanding of what the NARA citations are:
They are suggested citations for archival records in the National Archives -- different citation styles would still cite them differently, though should include the same information.

Zotero's archive fields are a bit crude (we're hoping to improve that) but for now you'd put
"Ardelia Hall Collection: Wiesbaden Administrative Records (National
Archives Microfilm Publication M1947, roll 0046); Restitution Claim Records; German; RG 260; " into the Loc. in Archive field and

"National Archives at College Park, MD"
into the archive field and Zotero's Chicago Manual style would handle this appropriately.

damnation

Thanks.

esh1996

OK, I see, so the NARA citations are not necessarily it's own unique style then? If not that certainly makes this whole post null, and apologies for wasting any time! D:

adamsmith

Correct -- you don't need to follow the exact format NARA suggests when using a given citation style, but you should heed their recommendations for what to include in a citation.
So for example, Chicago Manual would never use semicolons between different citation elements, and you should do so when citing NARA documents in a document otherwise using Chicago Manual citations.

neoncarwash

adamsmith,

I just wanted to clarify what you meant in your last comment. Were you saying that you should follow the suggested NARA use of semicolons between major elements even if adhering to CMoS for other citations (commas between elements) in the same project or paper?

Also, your thoughts on how to link multiple NARA citations in a single reference note if adhering to using semicolons between citation elements? Use a period as ESM suggests?

adamsmith

No, I was (trying to) say that you should _not_ use semicolons between elements of a single citation in a Chicago style document (but rather use commas as per Chicago style).

For multiple NARA citations in a footnote, I'd recommend semicolons, again as per standard Chicago style. Not sure what ESM's logic is for using periods?
(If you do use citations as recommended by NARA, i.e. with semicolons, it does make sense to use periods between them to avoid confusion)

neoncarwash

I assumed that was what you meant, and that the "not" was left out. Thank you for the clarification.

My understanding is that the NARA's recommended use of semicolons between citation elements is due to the fact that many of those elements are rather lengthy titles that may have commas within the element itself, and the use of semicolons are for clarity between elements.

ESM has been a proponent of "layered" citations for citing an original document or record that was viewed in a digital format at a site such as FamilySearch or Ancestry. Since you are viewing an image of the original, you cite the original document as you normally would, and then cite the digital derivative information. These "layers" are separated by a semicolon. This is the reason she recommends periods between separate citations in a single reference note, particularly when using "layered" citations.

I'm not an ESM or Evidence Explained fan. EE is extremely verbose, riddled with inconsistencies, and in some places, self-contradictory. That said, I do believe the layering method has merit when using online images of original records. To my knowledge, CMoS doesn't really address any method for citing an original record or manuscript viewed digitally online, at least not in a way that places emphasis on the fact that it is an image of the original. I would be interested to hear your and others' thoughts on this.

adamsmith

The Chicago Manual is usually quite pragmatic about such things, so if someone has a preference to modify standard archival citations as given in the Manual for some good reason, I don't think that'd be objectionable. It would, however, be impossible to automate, so beyond the scope of something we'd support in a CSL style.

Here's what Chicago Manual has to say for online archival sources:

Citations of collections consulted online (to date, a relative rarity for this type of material) will usually take the same form as citations of physical collections, aside from the addition of a URL or database name

With the relevant example:

Daily Expenses, July 1787, images 7–8, George Washington Papers, Series 5: Financial Papers, 1750–96, Library of Congress, Washington, DC, http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/gwseries5.html.

hcmaruyama

Thank you for this. It's very helpful. I would like to add that it could be really helpful for historians if you're looking for more projects (I'm sure you have a ton on your plates) to add just a little more capacity to separate out the data for national archives records--if we could put the "Daily Expenses," under title, and "July 1787" under date, we'd be able to compile sets of documents and organize them by date in Zotero and could even use the Title (sort of) to sort by author (some records might look more like "J. Smith to J. Doe, July 1787" so the title could be used to sort by author)--currently I'm organizing these searches in the MacOS finder app which is pretty flimsy on its search function. Date, to me, seems to be the place where archival documents under Chicago Manual do really differ from secondary source documents. Not sure if this would be an easy thing to do but I also would personally prefer to use the NARA recommendations for citation format for all the reasons stated above (semicolons add another level of separation, NARA can more easily retrieve the documents if there is consistency; researchers tend to cite the documents more consistently in the NARA format than in Chicago) and do tend to use those until I'm told otherwise for primary source documents. I also believe museums and public history museums might actually adopt/already use that format because they don't cite as many secondary sources and out of respect for preferred citations from contributing organizations. So it could be useful to have it even if there is an assumption that writers will default to the Chicago Manual of Style, or whatever format the journal asks for.

adamsmith

I don't quite understand the part about dates -- why can't you just add that in Zotero's date field?