Adding Archival Documents/Primary Sources

velovite
I have done a few searches of the forums regarding adding historical archive documents to zotero, and can only seem to find posts from 2007 at the latest. Is there any progress on this? My current issue with the "document' item type is that it gives fields for 'archive' and "loc in archive', but no more. It would be good to have a number (3-5 more) fields that could appear (ie 'loc in archive 1,2,3,4) so that historians can add the series, subseries, box number, folder number, etc.

Also, does Zotero allow for subsequent citations from the same archive/collection to have a shortened citation (like it does for books), or will it cite everything again and again? (Which would be bad for those working on dissertation with limited word counts)

Is there a way of doing this already that I have been ignorant of? Or is Zotero in the process of fixing this? If zotero can't do something like this, is it in the pipeline to be added/fixed?
  • adamsmith
    Also, does Zotero allow for subsequent citations from the same archive/collection to have a shortened citation (like it does for books), or will it cite everything again and again? (Which would be bad for those working on dissertation with limited word counts)
    in principle, yes. It depends on the style, of course and the way the subsequent citation is defined. You may have to write in a short title (in the respective field in Zotero).
    What Zotero cannot do for any type of items is to shorten the container or collection in subsequent citations of a different item from that same container/collection:
    E.g. if you have a different document from the same box in an archive or a different chapter from a previously cited edited volume, those will be fully cited.
  • erazlogo
    Try Chicago note style and see if it works for you.
  • velovite
    Which chicago note style in particular are you referring to? I am currently using Chicago note without bibliopgraphy (but have also tried with bibliopgrapy). It does not seem to do anything.

    I dont think this resolves the issue of more fields in the item type entry area.
  • erazlogo
    edited March 23, 2010
    It does not seem to do anything.
    What do you mean by this, specifically?

    Put series, subseries, box number, folder number in "location in archive"; use "manuscript" item type for unpublished documents and "letter" for letters and memos.
    I dont think this resolves the issue of more fields in the item type entry area.
    The citation should be formatted correctly if you put all that info in "location in archive."

    If this doesn't work, please provide an example.
  • velovite
    I guess I am not being clear: Yes, it can be formatted correctly if you put ALL the info in the location. What would be ideal though is if there were separate fields for series, box, file, etc, so that zotero would use its memory/autofill function so to prevent having to type in the same thing, in some cases, literally hundreds of times.

    You say to use "manuscript" for documents, why not use "document"?
  • erazlogo
    ...to prevent having to type in the same thing, in some cases, literally hundreds of times.
    You can duplicate an item, then change its author and title, etc. but keep archival info. That will be faster than entering data into 4+ separate fields with autofill.
    You say to use "manuscript" for documents, why not use "document"?
    "Manuscript" has type and place fields; "document" doesn't.
  • adamsmith
    edited March 23, 2010
    because of the way csl works - document is a universal fallback option that cannot be individually addressed by the citation style (i.e. it's not possible to tell Zotero "if item x is a document - do this",) something that is possible for manuscript.

    @your other request - I don't think archival practices - especially internationally - are sufficiently unified to make such an option useful/viable/desirable. Archives can be quite ideosyncratic in their classification system and Zotero would have a hard time putting those things back together correctly - so I don't think that's going to happen.

    edit: and what Elena says
  • velovite
    "@your other request - I don't think archival practices - especially internationally - are sufficiently unified to make such an option useful/viable/desirable. Archives can be quite ideosyncratic in their classification system and Zotero would have a hard time putting those things back together correctly - so I don't think that's going to happen."

    What I am suggesting is not that Zotero attempt to create a archive template to satisfy all users, rather, a generic one where the user can input the series/box/folder into generically named fields, such as "Loc in archive 1, Loc in archive 2," etc, so the user could figure out which order they would like them in, and input them in that order.

    Thanks for the help.
  • Tjowens
    Velovite, while I understand where you are coming from on this think about it from the perspective of creating style files. How should a style deal with "Loc in archive 1, Loc in archive 2" It just can't. This brings us back to a world where everyone has their own idiosyncratic databases of information filed away in systems only they understand.

    All of the info is, in fact, the location of the document in an archive. Keeping in mind Elena's suggestion for duping generic items, what other need do you have for a series of Loc in Archive fields?
  • bosborne77
    I know this thread is quite old, and this may be answered elsewhere. I'm a historian using Chicago, 17th edition, notes and bib. With my archival sources, which include a broad range of items (letters, photos, production books, programs, unpublished plays, design renderings, clippings files, oral history transcripts and recordings, radio shows, and much more), I'm having trouble figuring out if it's possible to cite the collection in full once and then use the "hereafter" with an abbreviated/shortened citation for the collection as a whole.

    To clarify, the shortened citation I'm having trouble figuring out is for the collection after it's been listed once. I'm good on shortening individual item titles. The collection, though, is something that my publishers ask me to shorten for every publication. Right now, I can only figure out how to get close to this by using that "Short Title" box, and that ends up with quotation marks around it, so I'm having to go back through and correct them. Is there a better way?
Sign In or Register to comment.