3,602
edits
Added Content
(120) |
Jamestanner (talk | contribs) (Added Content) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
*''events'' described | *''events'' described | ||
*''directness'' of the evidence | *''directness'' of the evidence | ||
Here are some sample types of questions you may wish to ask: | |||
*When and where was the record created? | |||
*Who created the record? | |||
*Why was the record created? | |||
*Who provided the information for the record? | |||
*How was the information recorded? | |||
*How was the record preserved? | |||
*What kind of information is missing or incomplete in the record? | |||
*Are there any other records that are usually associated with the record? | |||
*Which records came just before and after this record and would they give further information? | |||
*Is the record part of a series of records that may contain further information about the family? | |||
*Where are other associated records located? | |||
*How reliable is the information contained in the record? | |||
*What other information is suggested by the record but missing? | |||
Evaluating all of these elements together will help you determine what level of proof you have found, and if more research is needed. The [[Genealogical Proof Standard|Genealogical Proof Standard]] shows how to evaluate and use all the evidence to create a credible proof statement. | Evaluating all of these elements together will help you determine what level of proof you have found, and if more research is needed. The [[Genealogical Proof Standard|Genealogical Proof Standard]] shows how to evaluate and use all the evidence to create a credible proof statement. | ||
| Line 31: | Line 46: | ||
*'''''Original records''''' tend to be more accurate than derivative records. They were written close in time to the events they record. However, on occasion the recorder may have made a mistake. Infrequently an original record is deliberately falsified, such as "back dating" a marriage to account for the early birth of the first child. Even a source recorded close to the time of the event may have errors. | *'''''Original records''''' tend to be more accurate than derivative records. They were written close in time to the events they record. However, on occasion the recorder may have made a mistake. Infrequently an original record is deliberately falsified, such as "back dating" a marriage to account for the early birth of the first child. Even a source recorded close to the time of the event may have errors. | ||
*'''''Derivative records''''' tend to be easier to use and contain more information. However, they represent a reiteration of information from one or more other sources. The author may not have had enough information to adequately interpret the other sources. On the other hand, the compiler may have known of errors in the other sources and corrected or explained them in the compilation.<br> | *'''''Derivative records''''' tend to be easier to use and contain more information. However, they represent a reiteration of information from one or more other sources. The author may not have had enough information to adequately interpret the other sources. On the other hand, the compiler may have known of errors in the other sources and corrected or explained them in the compilation.<br> | ||
*'''''Finding aids''''' sometimes contain mistakes that can mislead the researcher, such as wrong page numbers in an index. | *'''''Finding aids''''' sometimes contain mistakes that can mislead the researcher, such as wrong page numbers in an index. | ||
*'''''Background information''''' is sometimes misinterpreted or applied incorrectly to individual cases. For example, just because most immigrants joined friends or relatives in their new country does not mean your ancestor had relatives when he arrived in his new country. | *'''''Background information''''' is sometimes misinterpreted or applied incorrectly to individual cases. For example, just because most immigrants joined friends or relatives in their new country does not mean your ancestor had relatives when he arrived in his new country. | ||
{| | {| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" align="center" style="width: 494px; height: 41px" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | bgcolor="#ffff99" align="center" | | ||
'''Even a source recorded close to the time of the event may have errors.''' | '''Even a source recorded close to the time of the event may have errors.''' | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 46: | Line 61: | ||
Photographic copies, including microfilm, microfiche, digital, and photocopies are virtually as good as the actual document, although they may sometimes be hard to read. Be on the watch for deliberate alterations. Any errors would be the fault of the person who made the record. | Photographic copies, including microfilm, microfiche, digital, and photocopies are virtually as good as the actual document, although they may sometimes be hard to read. Be on the watch for deliberate alterations. Any errors would be the fault of the person who made the record. | ||
Copy error may be introduced if the document was transcribed, extracted, or abstracted. If such copies are printed or published, the researcher must also consider possible typographical errors. Generally the further removed the copy is from the actual document, the more errors are likely to have accumulated. See "[[View the Records#Formats_of_Records|Formats of Records]]." | Copy error may be introduced if the document was transcribed, extracted, or abstracted. If such copies are printed or published, the researcher must also consider possible typographical errors. Generally the further removed the copy is from the actual document, the more errors are likely to have accumulated. See "[[View the Records#Formats_of_Records|Formats of Records]]." | ||
== Nature of the Information == | == Nature of the Information == | ||
| Line 52: | Line 67: | ||
A key to interpreting information is determining how close in time it was recorded to the event it describes. ''Information'' is the statement(s) of fact(s) in a record, not the record itself. It is either primary or secondary. | A key to interpreting information is determining how close in time it was recorded to the event it describes. ''Information'' is the statement(s) of fact(s) in a record, not the record itself. It is either primary or secondary. | ||
'''''Primary Information''''' was recorded at or near the time of the event by someone closely associated with it. It is usually found in original records. However, ''not'' all information in an original record is "primary." For example, a death record usually contains primary information about the death, but secondary information about the person's birth. If the information does not come from a primary account of the event, consider it suspect. If you cannot determine where the information originated, it is undocumented, and therefore less reliable information.<br> | '''''Primary Information''''' was recorded at or near the time of the event by someone closely associated with it. It is usually found in original records. However, ''not'' all information in an original record is "primary." For example, a death record usually contains primary information about the death, but secondary information about the person's birth. If the information does not come from a primary account of the event, consider it suspect. If you cannot determine where the information originated, it is undocumented, and therefore less reliable information.<br> | ||
{| | {| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" align="center" style="width: 221px; height: 34px" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | bgcolor="#ffff99" align="center" | '''Prefer primary information.''' | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 77: | Line 92: | ||
'''''Direct statements''''' give a straightforward fact. For example, a baptismal record may state the birth date of the child being baptized. Whenever possible, try to find records that directly state specific facts as proof of a genealogical event or relationship. | '''''Direct statements''''' give a straightforward fact. For example, a baptismal record may state the birth date of the child being baptized. Whenever possible, try to find records that directly state specific facts as proof of a genealogical event or relationship. | ||
{| | {| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" align="center" style="width: 221px; height: 34px" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | bgcolor="#ffff99" align="center" | '''Prefer direct evidence.''' | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 113: | Line 128: | ||
Even if the events were clearly recorded, you must also determine if the events described in the records really could have happened. Some events, such as joining the military at the age of ten or twelve, being born on the father's birthday, a probate inventory showing a considerably larger estate for a person than recent tax lists or census records indicated, are less credible than others. Such events are possible, but unlikely. | Even if the events were clearly recorded, you must also determine if the events described in the records really could have happened. Some events, such as joining the military at the age of ten or twelve, being born on the father's birthday, a probate inventory showing a considerably larger estate for a person than recent tax lists or census records indicated, are less credible than others. Such events are possible, but unlikely. | ||
If the records present an unlikely situation, you may have stumbled across records of two unrelated people with similar names. Evaluate the chronology of the situation: could this event have happened as the record says it did? If a man's will was proven on 28 November 1754 and his death record gives a death date of 15 December of the same year, one of the records is wrong, or does not pertain to the same person. | If the records present an unlikely situation, you may have stumbled across records of two unrelated people with similar names. Evaluate the chronology of the situation: could this event have happened as the record says it did? If a man's will was proven on 28 November 1754 and his death record gives a death date of 15 December of the same year, one of the records is wrong, or does not pertain to the same person. | ||
== Establishing Proof == | == Establishing Proof == | ||
| Line 129: | Line 144: | ||
In most cases, evidence in an original record created closest to the event is most likely to be correct. However, if several credible records (original or derivative) of a later date suggest different information, the evidence that the first record is incorrect may be clear and convincing. Sometimes this is called the preponderance of the evidence. | In most cases, evidence in an original record created closest to the event is most likely to be correct. However, if several credible records (original or derivative) of a later date suggest different information, the evidence that the first record is incorrect may be clear and convincing. Sometimes this is called the preponderance of the evidence. | ||
{| | {| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" border="1" align="center" style="width: 358px; height: 40px" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | bgcolor="#ffff99" align="center" | '''Proof is the accumulation of acceptable evidence.''' | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 144: | Line 159: | ||
For further suggestions about evaluating evidence see— | For further suggestions about evaluating evidence see— | ||
Mills, Elizabeth Shown. [http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titledetails&titleno=1407003&disp=Evidence+explained%20%20&columns=*,0,0 ''Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace'']. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing, 2007. (FHL book 929.1 M625ee) | Mills, Elizabeth Shown. [http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titledetails&titleno=1407003&disp=Evidence+explained%20%20&columns=*,0,0 ''Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace'']. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing, 2007. (FHL book 929.1 M625ee) | ||
=== Genealogical Proof Standard === | === Genealogical Proof Standard === | ||