Sorry, Ed, but I must disagree. I don't think it's quite as simple as you suggest.
Under Primary Sources --which you suggest are "proof", you list Vital Records. My Canadian-born grandmother, whose family had never registered or naturalized after migrating to the USA ca. 1885, lied on my father's birth certificate and claimed her own place of birth was Minneapolis. I can't tell you how many times I wrote to courthouses in MN for a copy of her own birth certificate, all in vain. Finally, I was able to locate her death certificate, which, based on information provided by a daughter, listed her place of birth as Canada. Sure enough, I found she was born in St. John's, NB., Canada. In the meantime, the false birth location was accepted and approved on behalf of a cousin by both DAR and one of the Mayflower Descendants groups. Not only was the place of birth in error, but the wrong people were listed as her parents!
Re. this same grandmother, following your items under Secondary Sources:
Family Genealogies (published only): One published by a cousin gives the wrong birthplace and the wrong parents. All things being equal, do you mean that my own genealogy reports --until I published online-- were somehow not as "reliable" as that published (hard-back book) by my cousin?
In all of the Federal or state census records, including those enumerated in the Territory of Alaska, WA and CA; and in the marriage account pub. 1909 in a Fairbanks Newspaper, it clearly shows my grandmother and/or her parents, lied about her place of birth, and theirs! I knew this grandmother, I have her family bible, where she carefully wrote, "Minneapolis, Minnesota" for her place of birth.
I can give examples that go back generations, but have chosen this more contemporary ancestor because I knew her and could have testified that she told me in person and in mail that she had been born in Minnestoa.
I haven't found more deliberate lies among the errors in "Primary and Secondary" sources, but errors based on ignorance, e.g. an ancestor who thought her father-in-law was born in Ireland, and told that to the census enumerator, who, unable to spell the surname correctly... It ended up a real bit of mis-information. And who among long-time researchers hasn't come across the wrong dates on a tombstone?
Joanne
[log in to unmask] wrote:
Ladies & Gentlemen:
There are three types of accepted "proof."
1) Primary Sources
2) Secondary Sources
3) Circumstantial Sources
1) Primary Sources:
Vital Records (birth, marriage and death certificates)
Church records
Bible records which provide relationships
Marriage bonds and licenses
Deeds
Probate records, Guardianships or orphan’s court records
Military or pension records
Cemetery and morticians records (usually for deaths)
Contemporary
Family letters and diaries (contemporary, means containing
time of the Event)
2) Secondary Sources:
County or town histories
Family Genealogies (published only)
Federal or state census records
Newspaper obituaries
Newspaper marriage accounts
Photos or photocopies of gravestone inscriptions (gs photo)
Affidavits (depending on time period)
3) Circumstantial Sources:
Circumstantial evidence is that which does not state any
family
relationship, but leaves it to be inferred, or pieced
together, in
conjunction with other bits of evidence.
Best wishes,
Ed Sherman (SC)
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1˘/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
