Have You Really Proved Your Ancestry?

Researchers often feel they've proved ancestry because they located family in one or more online trees.

But tying into a database doesn't suffice as proof. For that, you need to verify an author's sources and references – whether they are from original or derivative documents – and whether they can be treated as primary or secondary sources.

Original vs. Derivative Documents
The first term is easy, as original records must be original and not copies. Examples are birth, marriage and death certificates created by attending physicians or officiates, any hand-written or original typed document / letter and first time photographs, which are not scans or reprints.

Derivatives imply that documents came from (e. g., were derived from) other sources. This applies to, but is not limited to, abstracts, articles, scans, copies, transcriptions, family histories, card files and online databases.

Derivatives can establish viable evidence of ancestry, but only

1. if citations are accessible for examination
2. if they are not too many steps removed from the original -- such as a fact referring to a reference which was not verified (e. g., a copy of a copy of a copy)

Rule of thumb: 
Any document, database or citation which is one or more steps removed from the original, must be evaluated as to whether the intermediary author examined the original or a reliable reference referring to the original.

This doesn't mean we should discount all online data. Just treat it as possible leads (not proof), and find source documents for verification. After all, most of us would not be able to pursue so much of our ancestry, without these valuable clues.

Primary vs. Secondary Sources
Primary sources are those created close to the time of an event, assuming the originator had the proper expertise and authority to create it. Some examples are:

• birth, marriage and death certificates
• maps
• artifacts, such as military badges
• commemorative plaques
• certain ephemera (e. g., playbills, advertisements)

Secondary sources are all those created after an event, including:

• delayed birth registrations
• abstracts, summaries, etc.
• tombstones
• obituaries

Some documents have both primary and secondary elements, depending upon the information. For example, a passenger manifest is a primary document in regards to the details of the voyage, but a secondary source for birth dates, addresses, etc. The same issue relates to birth dates on tombstones, which are always secondary. And depending upon when the monument was erected (or replaced), a death date can be secondary.

Diaries, whereby events were recorded on a day by day basis, are considered primary, but an author's memory of the past is secondary.

And a dilemma exists in regard to Bible records, whereby the author and date of the entry is uncertain. As a result, many lineage societies note whether a title page with publication date is available, and whether the handwriting and ink changes from item to item.

One might think that original documents are always primary sources – and that derivatives are always secondary. But in reality, it is possible for either type to be primary or secondary. For example,

A hand-written letter discussing family births is an original document, but the source is secondary, since it occurred after the original events. 

A film created of an original document (such as those made by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) is a derivative treated as a primary source, since the copy is a reliable representation of the original.

Preponderance of the Evidence vs. the Genealogical Proof Standard
The final step in proving ancestry lies in the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS).

Until recently, researchers cited evidence based upon the legal principle of preponderance of the evidence – meaning that if definitive proof documents could not be located, and if all evidence pointed in the right direction, then a lineage or relationship was accepted as true.

But there are numerous examples of why this might not be true. In my own ancestry, there were three William Harrells, recorded on early census records in Wythe Co., Virginia. A logical assumption might be that they were kin, given that they shared names and lived in the same vicinity. But DNA studies imply that they share a more distant relationship, despite the preponderance of the evidence.

Although certification is not a requirement for proving ancestry, you may wish to review the five elements of the GPS, established by the Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG). They recommend that a strong genealogical proof should include:

• a reasonably exhaustive search;
• complete and accurate source citations;
• analysis and correlation of the collected information;
• resolution of any conflicting evidence; and
• a soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion.

As you search through records on RootsWeb, and other sites, keep in mind that you can’t be sure of the information until you have seen the evidence. Happy sleuthing!

Previously published in RootsWeb Review: 
8 September 2010, Vol. 13, No. 9

Tips for Organizing Genealogy

As our research grows, so do our documents – and rather than become mired in duplication of records, choose a filing system that is effective. 

Some family historians group by document type (e.g., wills in one file, birth certificates in another) and others try other methods, such as surname or location sorting. But whichever method you choose, there is certain to be a dilemma. For example,

Should documents for women be stored with parents or spouses?

Should sibling records be grouped with direct ancestors or separately?

Should vital record copies be kept separately?

In selecting an organizational system, let your goals guide you. For instance,

If joining a lineage society, consider sorting files by generation.

For projects, such as a transcription records, try sorting by location and surname.

Family groupings may work well for surname studies.

And if authoring a book on ancestors or descendants, then sort accordingly.

In all probability, you'll choose a hybrid system, which can differ for computer and paper copies. And within your system, remember to add summary reports, so information is easily cross-referenced.

Perhaps my organizational methods will assist in developing your own system.

Paper Files

Paperwork is stored in a variety of boxes, 3-ring binders, files and plastic tubs.

• Color-coding is used for ancestral groups (for example, green for Dad's and red for Mom's ancestry)
• 3-ring binders are used for surname documents with dividers marking each generation
• Portable / accordion files contain current projects, such as lineage society applications
• Tubs help for larger projects and ancestors with voluminous quantities of material
• Archival boxes store original documents, with copies filed elsewhere
• Archival quality sleeves protect documents, with notations added as to whether a scan has been made
• Pedigree and / or family group sheets are added for cross-referencing
• TODO lists are placed prominently with check lists of what has been scanned

Computer Files

• Directories are created for major surnames
• Subdirectories (or subfolders) are established showing the names of each couple
• A third level may be added for children or type of document (for example, military files)
• So that I don't have to consult a genealogy program, numbering indicates the descent from an ancestor (in the example, one can see that I am 15-generations in descent from Nicholas Wilder)

• Files are backed up to external hard drives and copies shared with family members
• GEDCOMS are uploaded to WorldConnect, so they can be shared with others – but equally important, is they serve as backups in case of computer issues

In developing your own organizational methods, we recommend reading these ideas found on RootsWeb.

How to Organize Your Paper Files - Pierre-Fort Pierre Genealogical Society

Genealogical Record Keeping or "Now that I've found it, what do I do with it?" - by William Dollarhide and reprinted on Wendy Loveless Waldron's page

Some tips on organizing your genealogy research - The Gene Pool

Previously published in RootsWeb Review: 
13 October 2010, Vol. 13, No. 10

The Value of Original Records

If you are a seasoned genealogist you have probably heard the old joke about the new monk in the monastery who is put to work transcribing documents. He notices that all of the monks are diligently making copies of copies. He asks where the original documents are kept and is directed to the cellar where he sets to work copying from the originals. Later, he runs upstairs and excitedly proclaims "the word is celebrate!"

While the joke is to meant to make us laugh, for family history researchers there is a deeper lesson to be learned. While copies or undocumented family trees can be a starting point and show what records to look for; obtaining original records establishes proof. 

I've encountered many instances in my personal research and research I've done for others where obtaining originals solved long-standing mysteries and provided different information than the copies or hearsay evidence provided. Some examples follow:

1. Recently I was helping a DAR applicant with her papers when I noticed she hadn't included a birth record for her grandmother. She had submitted other evidence of birth but there was always the possibility that the birth record which should have been available for her mother's birth year might disagree with the evidence we had. Sure enough, when the birth record arrived it disagreed with the other evidence. Grandmother had been born one year earlier than all other records indicated!

2. A long-standing brick wall in my own research was my York County, Pennsylvania ancestor, Henry LEIB. There were several LEIB families in the area. Who were Henry's parents? I had a book of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania will abstracts and in the book was the abstract of the will for Ulrich LEIB. Henry was not listed among the heirs of Ulrich LEIB. On a hunch (or maybe out of desperation) I obtained the original will. There was Henry mentioned only in passing as being the eldest son who had been given land by his father, Ulrich, in York County when he married. 

One final word of caution if you are obtaining an original document for the purpose of making a signature comparison with other records, be sure to specify you need the signature because not all "originals" actually include the signature and could have been written by a scribe. 

Obtaining original records to support the facts in your family tree can have you celebrating cracking through many a brick wall.

Previously published in RootsWeb Review: 
11 May 2011, Vol. 14, No. 5

Original Records Can Be Wrong

Whilst agreeing with the need to obtain full copies of original records, even those can not be trusted absolutely.

In a death record, the informant, son of the deceased, gave the names of the wrong persons as being the parents of the deceased, i.e. the informant did not know the correct names of his paternal grandparents.

The names given did occur in the family; but they were not married and there is no evidence of extra-marital relationships.

The correct persons disappeared from the records, with a last mention some 25 years before the informant was born; and the deceased died about 27 years later. So a large time gap prevented any direct contact across the generations. This provided a possible reason for the error.

--------------------

In a separate case, a bride gave the names of her parents to be a genuinely married couple; but both would have been under 10 years old at the birth of the bride.

The bride’s birth record gave a differently-named couple as being her parents. There was other evidence to confirm the likelihood of the birth record being correct.

-------------------

In both of these cases, only the parental surname was correct. Thus one should always try to confirm such secondary information from other records and sources.

Thanks to Alex Dow in Cowdenbeath, Fife, Scotland

Previously published in RootsWeb Review: 
8 Jun 2011, Vol. 14, No. 6