Lanita Reichman: Yes. The thing of it is, most "lineage books" as you call them were written in the 1800s or before due to the fact that it takes so much time to compose. People now have no patience to spend 20 - 30 years or longer writing a book.And, would you include the Doomsday Book in your list? I have ancestors listed in that book. As well asA Martin Genealogy, Tied to the History of Germanna, Virginia by William A. Martin, Heritage Books, Inc. © 1995the 2-volume "Annals and Antiquities of the Counties and County Families of Wales: Containing a record of all ranks of the gentry, their lineage, alliances, appointments, armorial ensigns, and residences; ancient pedigrees and memorials of old and extinct families; notices of the history, antiquities, physical features, chief estates, geology, and industry of each county; rolls of high sheriffs and members of Parliament for three hundred years, etc., etc. Second issue, revised and much enlarged" by Thomas Nicholas, M.A! ., Ph.D, F.G.S., &c.Copyright 1872, 1875.Books by the Burkes (they were father & son) who wrote several genealogy books.I know people keep saying proof, or records, etc., but such do not exist. If you have been on this site much, you know what I mean: birth/marriage/death certificates with errors (there is one now wondering why the father was not named) and on and on and on. Official records, with few exceptions, began in the late 1930s after Social Security demanded more details about family than most people knew.As to "unsourced" family trees, I am interested only in the info, not who takes credit. E.g., IAW with 3 different sources through 3 different offspring, I am descended from Charlemagne. If you google "who is descended from Charlemagne" the answer will be all, or almost all, living persons of European extraction.No matter what anyone claims about having "proof" or "records", the fact is that everyone makes assumptions, the first of those being "I think, therefo! re I am". So far, no one has been able to prove what life is o! r even if anyone or anything exists. Maybe it is all a dream, as in those sci-fi movies?So, use a lawyer's "proof": if the shoe (glove) fits..." In other words, if you find an unsourced tree that has all the correct names/places/dates as what you have, it must be good info....Show more
Gene Debell: Great answer, Boomer. I am absolutely the same way. I have no interest in unsourced family trees that just lead me to ANOTHER unsourced family tree. In the book I'm reading, he mentions speaking with the grandson of the ancestors he is mentioning. I have already verified my line to this grandson, so I'm basically taking HIS word for who is grandparents were....Show more
Mee Blumenfeld: Bingo, this is the most philosophical question that genealogists face.Probably the most difficult thing about genealogy is the methodical analysis of the validity and context of the "evidence" you encounter, followed immediately by the sweat of properly citing sources.Check this discus! sion about analysis of evidence and the Genealogical Proof Standard from the Board of Certification of Genealogists: http://www.bcgcertification.org/certification/faq....I've got oral history family lore, secondary accounts, and primary documents that are incorrect.I've got plenty of the same that check out independently with other sources. I prefer personal knowledge and family documents. I love old history books, like you do, but I prefer the ones that site their sources. That way you can dig up and see the source documents themselves just to make sure the research wasn't flawed. I avoid "other people's trees" on the net entirely if they aren't sourced. I'll only look at them if I'm brick walled seeking clues.Have a blast....Show more
No comments:
Post a Comment