Unless you have a very good reason not to, you should load the biblatex-chicago styles via the dedicated biblatex-chicago package. Use
\usepackage[notes,backend=biber]{biblatex-chicago}
instead of \usepackage[backend=biber,style=chicago-notes]{biblatex}.
If you load the style via its package, some options are set for you; amongst those are the options for citetracking, which are otherwise disabled by default.
The options set for the note style are
\ExecuteBibliographyOptions{%
pagetracker=true,autocite=footnote,abbreviate=false,alldates=comp,
citetracker=true,ibidtracker=constrict,usetranslator=true,
usenamec=true,loccittracker=constrict,dateabbrev=false,
maxbibnames=10,minbibnames=7,sorting=cms,sortcase=false}
I was looking again biblatex-chicago's documentation, and what it says about the case is the following:
The Manual now suggests that, no matter which citation style you are
using, it is “usually sufficient to cite newspaper and magazine
articles entirely within the text” (15.47). This involves giving the
title of the journal and the full date of publication in a
parenthetical reference, including any other information in the main
text (14.206), thereby obviating the need to present such an entry in
the list of references. To utilize this method in the author-date
styles, in addition to a magazine entrysubtype , you’ll need to place
cmsdate=full into the options field, including skipbib there as well
to stop the entry printing in the list of references. If the entry
only contains a date and journaltitle that’s enough, but if it’s a
fuller entry also containing an author then you’ll also need
useauthor=false in the options field. Other surplus fields will be
ignored. (See osborne:poison.)
So it seems that the problem with the missing date is that biblatex-chicago doesn't expect to print it in the bibliography. (Still, for me it prints the year by the author, and month and date later in parentheses).
Anyway, following the documentation, you could use:
\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[authordate]{biblatex-chicago}
\begin{filecontents}{bibliography.bib}
@article{blakeslee1947,
title={`Flying Saucers' Called Forerunners of the New Atomic Folklore},
author={Howard W. Blakeslee},
journaltitle={The Washington Post},
pages={B2},
date={1947-07-20},
entrysubtype={magazine},
options={cmsdate=full,skipbib,useauthor=false},
}
@book{Dorson1971a,
author={Richard M. Dorson},
title={American folklore},
publisher={University of Chicago Press},
address={Chicago},
year={1971},
origdate={1959},
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{bibliography.bib}
\begin{document}
text \footcite[78]{Dorson1971a} \footcite[5]{blakeslee1947}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
Which results in:
I'm not sure that's what you intended, but it seems to be what the current Chicago Manual favors, and what biblatex-chicago implements in practice.
EDIT: what I mean by "make it work for you, even when not following the style's strict guidelines". Try, for example (or something other in similar lines):
@misc{blakeslee1947,
title={`Flying Saucers' Called Forerunners of the New Atomic Folklore},
author={Howard W. Blakeslee},
titleaddon={The Washington Post, 20 July, 1947, p. B2},
date={1947},
}
Best Answer
This citation/bibliography set-up is slightly confusing in that it may be harder to match citation labels to bibliography entries. A reader will only have the author(s) and year of a work to go on when she consults the bibliography. But in a "
notes" bibliography the year is not in the prominent place at the beginning of the entry, instead it comes near the end, especially in entries with several lines one can get lost trying to find the year. With the "authordate" bibliography style the year also comes at the beginning and it is much easier to match citation labels to bibliography entries.Anyway, the styles of the
biblatex-chicagobundle are not supposed to be mixed and matches in this way. There are far too many interdependencies between the bibliography style (.bbxfile) and citation style (.cbxfile), on the other hand there are incompatibilities between the bibliography and citation styles of different substyles, so there is almost no hope of loading and then overwriting a style. In only see two options to resolve this (1) undefine all problematic macros before loading the new style or (2) copy only the relevant bits of both styles into a new style. Both options are doable, but extremely tedious due to the fact thatbiblatex-chicago's style files weigh in at several thousand lines of code each.If you insist on this slightly confusing mix of styles, I recommend you look at
windycity.windycityis a more recent implementation of Chicago Style and its structure gives easier access to the output you want. Note that while the general output ofbiblatex-chicagoandwindycityis quite similar, there will be small (and maybe even larger) differences between two.