I hope Elizabeth chimes in on this, because she explains it much  
better and just did on the APG list. Actually, the professional  
genealogical community has shifted its approach to evaluating sources  
in the last few years and its terminology for describing the process.

Sources are either original or derivative. If it's not the original,  
then it's a copy and derived from the original. Pleased bear in mind  
these are genealogical terms, not legal terms.

The information contained in sources is either primary or secndary. A  
date of birth on a birth certificate, signed by the attending  
physician, is primary information. A date of birth written in a  
family bible years after the event is secondary information.

Evidence is what the information gives us and is either direct or  
indirect. Either the evidence directly states that a person's birth  
date is 16 January 1771 (for example), or it indirectly gives the  
birth date by stating that the person was 80 years old when he/she died.

So, an original source with primary information and direct evidence  
has more weight.

Didn't intend to turn pedantic on everyone. But this is the current  
view from the professional genealogy world. And not all professionals  
are up to speed on this either.

_________________
Donald W. Moore, CG(sm)
Antecedents(r) LLC
http://www.antecedents.com

Certified Genealogist and CG are service marks of the Board for  
Certification of Genealogists® and used here under license.

Antecedents is a registered service mark of Antecedents LLC.

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html