Indexing: Specifically orphanages in Italy
I have come across a few birth records while indexing Italian records that mention "ruota di proietti" which refers to foundling homes (orphanages). The ruota (wheels) were where babies were set by unknown parents and turned to be taken in by the nuns or others in charge at the orphanage. Due to this, should I put the year, but leave the month and day blank since the record only knows the day the child was placed on the ruota (wheel) and not when the baby was born? For more information of what I'm talking about, feel free to read this https://www.abruzzogenealogy.com/infant-abandonment-and-foundling-wheel-in-southern-italy-abruzzo-molise/.
Best Answer
-
For the purposes of indexing, we follow the project instructions and field helps. To get the BEST answer for this question, @Andrew Kent Gibbons should share the share the batch in Indexing Chat by using the link or batch code. Then others who work on the project will be able to help, or further assistance can be accessed if necessary. Sometimes project instructions and field helps get changed if there is a problem.
Without knowing the exact project Andrew is working on, it is difficult to provide a great answer. But, I have now accessed the instructions to one Itaiian project: Civil Registrations from Campobasso. They include the following information:
- If a child was abandoned by his or her parents, a note was usually left with the child, giving details about the child's birth, such as a name, the date of birth, or information about the parents.
- Type the name that the civil authority gave the child; do not use a name that was recorded on the note.
- If a birth date was included in the note, type it in the birth date fields; if no birth date was given, type the date of registration instead.
- If a belated acknowledgement of an abandoned child by his or her biological parents was included with a birth record (for example, in a notation of a marriage that took place after the birth of the child), type the names of the biological parents.
- If the names of biological and adoptive parents were both given in a record, type the names of the adoptive parents rather than the names of the biological parents. Do not type the names of foster parents that may have been included in the record.
Often the field helps provide a hierarchy of other dates to use when the actual date is not available. For instance, on marriage records the field help often says:
Index the date that the marriage actually took place. If the actual marriage date was not recorded, index the marriage date based on the following priority:
- Certificate date
- License date
- Application date
- Return date
- Date the marriage record was signed
The field helps for the birth day and month for the project I pulled up state:
Do not confuse the birth date with the registry date, which was the date when the record was created. The registry date was usually written at the beginning of the record. The birth date was written farther down in the record. However, if the birth date was not recorded, type the registry date instead.
The terms "suddetto," "oggi," "d'oggi," and so on indicate that the date was recorded earlier in the document. They usually indicate that the birth day was the same as the registration day.
If the day was not recorded or was written as a variation of the word "unknown," press Ctrl+B to mark this field blank.
I understand your concern @Paul W. Before I started indexing, I always wondered why some of my ancestors death dates were off by a day or two. But when we indexed obituaries the instruction was:
If a specific death date was not recorded, index the most recent date in the document as the death date. After many years of indexing, I now realize why it is imperative to seek out the image and see it with my own eyes. But, when I can't, if it seems to be within a day or two of the event, I just smile and know that an indexer was following the rules to provide me with the best available details of when the event happened.
0 - If a child was abandoned by his or her parents, a note was usually left with the child, giving details about the child's birth, such as a name, the date of birth, or information about the parents.
Answers
-
@Andrew Kent Gibbons
.
Andrew
.
I saw this yesterday; but, am not experienced enough to respond ...
.
As, no one has yet responded, after some 22 Hours ...
.
I am 'Tagging" this (General) 'Question' of yours, to the 'Group' being "Indexing Chat", in this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum; so that, the members of that group can answer/assist you.
.
Brett
.
@Indexing Chat
.
For: @Heather R Jacobs
.
0 -
Usually we would put whatever date was indicated on the record. Unless the project instructions or the field help say not to index the month and day, then you probably should. The researcher will see the image and be able to read it for themselves.
0 -
But the researcher will not necessarily "see the image" if it becomes subject to restricted viewing, or FamilySearch has no permission at all to display it. Regardless, surely one should not index the exact date as a "birth" when there is only evidence of the birth having taken place close to that date?
As I have commented before, the whole subject of project instructions needs to be examined, both to ensure consistency (e.g. whether to index as a "baptism" or "christening" - or, indeed, as a "birth" or "other event") and to prevent inaccurate information being recorded. At present, it appears the content of the project instructions are at the discretion of individual supervisors / project leaders, which results in inconsistency and confusion once the indexed records appear in FamilySearch.
0 -
Thanks for your response, Melissa. I guess my middle name should be "Pedantic", but I just feel uncomfortable about recording detail in a field which is not strictly applicable to the event. For England & Wales birth registrations, for example, there is a separate field to add the record as a "registration" rather than an actual birth. In cases like this, why can't there also be a field specifically for the registration, and the birth field be left blank?
0 -
@Paul W Thank you for your questions and your care for these records. Each project that is indexed will have different rules and guidelines based upon the wishes and contracted agreement of the archive who owns the records. We may not understand all the reasons, but we need to do as the archive wishes. Then whether FamilySearch publishes them, or the archive uses them for their use, is up to the contracted agreement.
0 -
Heather - if FS is indexing data for a customer, then what you say is perfectly sensible.
However Paul and I have seen various oddities in FS indexing that cannot possibly have been as a result of a customer's requirements because there are already indexes in existence - i.e. FS is indexing for itself.
E.g. One of the most annoying aspects (not date related, and complained about on several occasions) that comes to mind is the indexing of the English & Welsh Probate Calendars where the non-testator names have been indexed as Beneficiaries, when they are actually Executors. An utterly different role. This has to be FS's own decision because the English & Welsh Probate Courts already have their own indexes to these calendars.
So I think we're in basic agreement but there is debate over the extent to which FS has flexibility.
0 -
Heather
Thank you for your response. Up to a point, I naturally accept your reasoning. However, you cannot surely be telling me that the record holders would say things like:
"You may index these christenings, but only if they are indexed as Baptisms", or
"You can index the dates for these registrations, but only if you index them as Births".
I'm afraid I have to stand by my assertion that there is absolutely no sense to the inconsistency in the way different collections of identical types are currently indexed.
There are also errors - like the one mentioned (above) by Adrian, as well as in titles of collections, which I have been assured will be corrected yet still remain with their current, misleading wording / titles.
0
