Genline/Arkiv Digital/SVAR

[Mark Hoenig]

I have a few questions about the archived records online.
 
I use SVAR, because they seemed to be official and because I could buy a 3 hour session to try it out.  They seem to have a few databases that other sources don't have, but they haven't finished scanning all parishes --  I was told they may not be finished Blekinge until November next year.  They do seem to be scanning over a thousand records a month.  
 
Does an overwhelming majority use Genline?  It seems Genline numbers are used exclusively in a lot of posts, which to me means limiting your help to those who use the same service.  Why is the name of the parish record, and the original page not used as well?
 
Are both Genline and SVAR scanned from microfiche orginally scanned by the LDS?  How about ArkivDigital? Their samples seem of higher quality, although they don't have any English translation.
 
What are the pros an cons of the various services?
 
I realize the board has a rule against advertising, but I am looking for more of a consumer rating - or experts explaining which tools they like using for the job!

[Eva Dahlberg]

I think that the majority that use online sources uses Genline for two reasons 1) they were first, 2) they now have the church books for the whole country up to 1895.  
However SVAR and ArkivDigital also have other material than the church books that may be of interest (SVAR has taxation records 1640s-1820, military records, extract databases; ArkivDigital also have military records and estate inventories) and they are also rapidly putting new parishes up there. Especially SVAR also has newer material as SVAR has first access to the church books at the Archives (it's a branch of the National Archives). Genline today is the most expensive one, which is one factor apart from quality to turn to others.
 
Genline only have the old LDS films for scanning. ArkivDigital only uses digital photographing from the original books on site at the Archives.  
 
SVAR for pre 1895 uses LDS films and the National Archives own microfilm/microfiche done after the LDS. Until 2003 the modern church books (1895-1991) were copied to microfiche by the NationalArchives/SVAR and from 2003 they scan the original churchbooks. Material from the 1900s that you find at SVAR as original books (ie not SCB extracts) may therefore be either scanned from microfiche or scanned from original books. That is a process which is ongoing, as the project for handing over all the 1895-1991 church books from parishes to Regional Archives will not be finalized until ca 2013.
 
The thing many try to teach is that the source citation and reference should no be limited to the GID number, it is of as little use as only having the old micro film roll number ... You should state parish, type of book, page etc. But it is difficult to get that message across.  
 
By the way, many of us still use microfiche - offline sources.
 
There are also other issues that may weigh in when making true comparisons of customer value - the browser you need, time for loading pictures etc but I'm not doing that now. There is also a difference highlighted in bold in the quote below - designation of volumes and sometimes also parish names differ - due to one denomination for the volume used in the Archives at the time the LDS filmed the books, and another denomination used today. So also volume number is not sufficient as a good source citation, you should state years covered.
 
regards,
Eva
 
PS. The forum rules in English regarding Source citations - we try to preach the same in Swedish and it's an often debated issue (in Swedish, the literature by ms Shown Mills is not mentioned, but the rest is the same) - especially when people ask for help reading something and only give a GID number - when the book is available on both ArkivDigital and SVAR with better quality ... And the issue of comparison between the online sources and their providers also comes up in the Swedish discussions.  
 
Source citations
Citations should always be given when posting, both when you ask and when you answer. There is a chapter about this in Swedish in the Rules of Conduct. To summarize, you should always document your sources and when you post questions or answers you should state the sources for your information. Excellent citation guidelines for genealogists and historians are given by Elizabeth Shown Mills in the publications “Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace” or “the QuickSheet: Citing Online Historical Resource, Evidence Style”.
 
When you ask a question you should always state what you already know, to avoid duplication of look-ups already carried out. Try to be clear about what information you ask for - do you want information about ancestors or descendants etc.
 
You should not use only the Genline identification number (GID number) as a source and identification of a Swedish church book, as that don't tell others which parish and church book the information comes from. Other researchers may use only other means of studying the church books. You should also be aware that a church book may be designated in different ways by Genline, SVAR and the Regional Archives that keep the original book. You can find the correct designation in the National Archival Database of Sweden (NAD) http://www.nad.ra.se/static/intro_eng.html . My comment: Arkivdigital uses the same designation as the National Archival Database of Sweden.
 
 
many spelling mistakes this morning  (as well as many new ideas/aspects popping up)  
(Meddelandet ändrat av edah den 06 oktober, 2008)
 
(Meddelandet ändrat av edah den 06 oktober, 2008)
 
 
(Meddelandet ändrat av edah den 06 oktober, 2008)
 
(Meddelandet ändrat av edah den 06 oktober, 2008)
 
(Meddelandet ändrat av edah den 06 oktober, 2008)