FamilySearch has billions of digitized records, many of which are indexed or available through the AI-assisted Full-Text search. When we find a record about our ancestor, we can attach it to their profile, download it to our files, or add a row to our research log. In each case, a precise source citation should be created to point back to the original record.
One of the challenges with citing the source is that with the digitization of microfilm, the same record could be accessed and viewed in different ways. This could cause some confusion because the image numbers may differ. For example, let’s look at an example from Russell County, Alabama—an Orphan’s Court Docket from December 4, 1843, to July 1848.
You can access the same record either through Images or the FamilySearch Catalog. Going to Images > Russell, Alabama, United States, we see the entry for the Orphan Court Docket book (in red in the screenshot below because I’ve already clicked on it).
Clicking into the film, we see the book’s image is #2 of 158 of IGN (image group number) #005175954. We are currently viewing item 5 by itself. The recommended citation from FamilySearch is below, with the image number bolded for comparison.
“Russell, Alabama, United States records,” images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-LB3Y-Q7Q?view=explore : Mar 1, 2025), image 2 of 158; Administration Department of Archives and History (Montgomery, Alabama), Alabama. Department of Archives and History.
Each record found in the docket book would have the same generic citation. It is up to the researcher to add the relevant names, date, and docket number.
The digitized docket book is part of item 5 in the larger image group, and when we click the down arrow next to “view item 5 by itself,” we see the same image is now #830 of 1,138. The URL remains exactly the same regardless of whether we’re viewing item 5 by itself or the entire image group: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-LB3Y-Q7Q?view=explore&groupId=M996-196&lang=en
However, the citation has changed to reflect the different image numbers.
“Russell, Alabama, United States records,” images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-LB3Y-Q7Q?view=explore : Mar 1, 2025), image 830 of 158; Administration Department of Archives and History (Montgomery, Alabama),Alabama. Department of Archives and History.
Since the URL and the film numbers remain the same for the image, relying solely on the image number would confuse someone looking at the alternate view.
What is the solution for the citation? Here are tips for creating a FamilySource citation.
- Always cite the physical information: Russell County, Alabama, Orphan’s Court Docket from December 4, 1943 to July 1848, front cover; (if citing a record in the book include the docket #, names, and specific date)
- Cite the digital information clearly: FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-LB3Y-Q7Q?view=explore&groupId=M996-196&lang=en : accessed 1 March 2025), IGN 005175954, image 830 of 1,138 or IGN 005175954, item 5, image 2 of 158.
- Cite the original holder of the image: Alabama Department of Archives and History.
Notice that I used the complete URL in the example and didn’t cut it off before the question mark. Leaving the entire URL will take you to the image data page, where you can switch between the image group and item 5. If I cut the URL off at the ?, you are taken to the same image in the digitized microfilm, which looks different in the view. Notice at the top of the screenshot that you are no longer in “Images;” instead, you are in “Records.”
This is the same page you would come to if accessing the court docket through the FamilySearch catalog page for Russell County. The screenshot below from the catalog page shows the original microfilm number (1221690 Item 5) and the Image Group Number (5175954).
I prefer using the FamilySearch Catalog, but until all the newly digitized images are added to it, we’ll need to use both Images and the Catalog to find all available records. Although accessing the same record in multiple ways can be confusing, as long as our source citations are clear, we should be able to return to the source at any time.
Be sure to try this out on your own using this example to understand how Images and the Catalog work and the importance of citing clearly.
Best of luck in all your genealogical research!
4 Comments
Leave your reply.