* Sheer number of sources!

[arthurk]

One further thought about the idea of combining sources/citations into a single item:

This is admittedly a rather extreme example, but one of my ancestors worked as a tailor for about 55 years in the same place. In that time he and his wife had 20 children; 12 married, and 11 died and were buried. I haven't worked out the exact figures involved, but that could give me around 30-40 parish register entries as sources for his occupation and/or residence.

Few of us, I guess, would object to combining the occupation and residence information from the register entries into a single fact (or two) and assigning a date range, rather than having 30-40 single-date snapshots of residence and occupation.

What I struggle with is that a similar kind of combining of sources/citations is either not possible, or at least not recommended. This was the 19th century, so the sources already include 5 censuses and a handful of BMD certificates. Am I really going to add another 30-40 separate items to the list of sources...?

[ColeValleyGirl]

In that circumstance I'd consider whether the extra 'occupation' facts were needed at all.

Although, I have on ancestor whose occupation varied back and forth between Glazier, Painter and Photographer multiple times; and he moved around a lot -- Kidderminster, Marylebone, Hitchin, Kidderminster again, Plumstead, Cheshunt, Birmingham, Lichfield. And his name was very very common -- John Wright.

Recording the occupation at the time of each of his childrens' birth was the only way to verify that I had the right census entries for him.

[arthurk]

In that circumstance I'd consider whether the extra 'occupation' facts were needed at all.

Sorry - not sure what you mean here. I do have just the one occupation fact, with address attached, and a date range for it. The question is how to attach the 30-40 register entries that support it.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Few of us, I guess, would object to combining the occupation and residence information from the register entries into a single fact (or two) and assigning a date range, rather than having 30-40 single-date snapshots of residence and occupation.

I wouldn't do this -- either I'd record them as individual facts (given that I can't be sure that an individual followed the same occupation all the time between the dates in question -- I have lots of examples where this wasn't the case); or if I was certain that the individuals was (say) an Ag Lab in the same village all their life, I wouldn't cite every possible source against the fact, just enough to demonstrate that it was a life-long occupation.

[tatewise]

I guess the answer depends on how rigorous you wish to be in citing all sources, and that is a personal choice.
If the sources are from only a handful of Method 2 Source records, then the technique you proposed earlier might help, where one Citation holds several Where within Source references, or less rigorously literally says something like "See the Marriage & Death Certificates of all his children."

[arthurk]

If the sources are from only a handful of Method 2 Source records, then the technique you proposed earlier might help, where one Citation holds several Where within Source references, or less rigorously literally says something like "See the Marriage & Death Certificates of all his children."

That's the only way I can think of. And if you were mostly using Method 1, then as far as I can see, you'd need this extra Method 2 source for use in such cases.

[tatewise]

Or as Helen says only cite "just enough to demonstrate that it was a life-long occupation".