Dear Fellow Researchers, I recently recived an inquiry from a researcher. Some of the remarks in his e-let made me realize that there are many people who are acquiring material from extracted and compiled sources, or finding it on the internet, without properly considering what they are doing and without doing their homework. I wrote what started out to be a short note to him; it turned into something a little bigger than that. I am posting it to this list because I think that many new or inexperienced researchers need to hear it. And even the expert researcher needs an occasional reminder. > . . my problem is that I have so much information on the discrepancies > that I can not form a real picture of who is really the father, son, wife, > husband, of whom! I believe I can tell you what your problem is and how to solve it, but I'm not sure that the answer is one you want to hear. From the information and tone of your e-let ("e-let" is my self-coined term for "e-mail letter"), I get the impression that you are holding a significant amount of information on your BOVEE's, but that you are finding conflicts and inconsistencies in that information. The answer is simple and, though it is not easy, it is the ONE thing that every serious researcher MUST do. That is, you must go back to the original sources yourself. Not physically, of course, but you must obtain copies and look-ups of the ORIGINAL data in order to a) establish it as TRUTH, b) verify that it truly does apply to YOUR family tree, and c) to resolve inconsistencies, discrepancies and problems in the data. You are more fortunate than any of the researchers of the past, since you have 1) the extracted information that is currently confusing you, which probably points to the source of the original information (finding the localities and sources has traditionally been more than half the battle), 2) the technology to instantly communicate with the source of that information and obtain copies of the original documents and 3) the means to obtain this information at a cost which, I would venture to say, is quite modest in today's terms. You owe it to yourself, to the descendants who will receive your work, and to your ancestors, to track down the source documentation, both to establish the truth of the matters which currently puzzle you and because these documents often flesh out the story wonderfully, helping you to understand what KIND of people these folks were, how they felt, what they did in their lives and why. You also need to do it because, as a researcher, you can never afford to trust, unreservedly, ANY extracted or compiled information you ever run across. The world of genealogical research is changing and the impact of technology on the methodology of research can hardly be overstated. It is now possible to find information that would once have required months of correspondence and research, or even personal journeys to the sources of the information, in minutes right from the computer in the researcher's own home. The potential increase in the leverage of one's research time and the acceleration of our ability to acquire this type of information is truly stunning. However, there is one huge pitfall connected with this increase in ease and accessibility and it is a pitfall that many researchers are blindly falling into, often without even being aware of it. That pitfall is the assumption that the complied or extracted information you are seeing is accurate. Even a careful researcher can make mistakes; we are, after all, human and thus by nature prone to errors. Further, it's not unusual for there to be errors in the original source information that we turn to to establish and verify our family data, as anyone who has researched census and vital records can tell you. This is why it is often necessary to find several sources that may brought to bear on a single fact in order to try to conclusively prove it. As an example, a death record my show that the deceased came from Michigan, but four census records, spanning a period of 40 years, may indicate that the person was actually born in Connecticut. In this particular situation, it is probably wise to disregard the death record information (temporarily, at least), since the bereaved family members may not have accurately known the place of birth or may have been emotionally overwrought and not have given the correct information, but the census records, at least one of which was almost certainly given by the subject, would probably be more accurate. Even then, you must go to Connecticut records and try to find the person and the VERIFY that it is the correct one. Failing to find a record there, you would then turn to Michigan and try there. As I said, even a careful researcher can make mistakes. But compounding this problem greatly is the desire of many researchers to take the easy road and simply pick up and use any information that looks as if it is applicable to their research. This applies especially those who are new to genealogical research and don't have a background in traditional research philosophy, techniques and methodology. It also applies to those researchers who are simply bedazzled by the speed, efficiency and power of the new technology to facilitate research. This leads people to simply incorporate material found in books, reported by e-mail or found on the web - often entire GEDCOM files containing hundreds of individuals - into their family history material without even questioning it. It is not at all unusual for this information to turn out to be false or to contain significant errors. But if you are not scrutinizing the data that you discover and going back to the sources to verify it, you will never even know about these errors, much less be able to resolve them. As an example, the story that our branch of the Grant family is the branch from which sprang Hiram Ulysses Grant (of Civil War fame) has been passed down, in our family, for 5 generations. As a researcher, I have had to discount that story until I can prove it. About 3 years ago, I received photocopies of some pages from a book which showed that we WERE connected, through a "John Grant", who was an uncle of U.S. Grant. (I have documentation that takes my Grant's back to a "John S. Grant" in Seneca County, NY, in 1789.) The pages showed the Grant family tree, the connecting "John Grant" and, descending from him, my ancestors!! My family was elated to find this evidence that the connection was true. As a researcher, I could not afford that luxury until I could prove it. I wrote to the U.S. Grant Society which, among other things, records the genealogy of that branch of the Grant family. I also wrote to Beryl Grant, the genealogist for the Clan Grant Society. From these sources, I found that the "John Grant" in question was someone other than my family's "John Grant". This uncle of U.S. Grant had migrated to Texas and had died there, unmarried and childless. When I called the fellow who had put out this "book", I found that he had run across the names, assumed that they were connected, created family tree charts to show these connections (and God knows how many other inaccurate connections!!!) and published them with his desktop computer and put them on his web page. I have no idea how many other researchers now have inaccurate data in their family history files, including entire branches and family lines, all because they failed to examine and verify the sloppy research of this one individual. Now imagine how many other such individuals are probably out there!! I didn't mean to get off into a long-winded lecture on this subject (though I must thank you; I will edit and amend this letter and will use it as the basis of the next article in my "Computers & Genealogy" series, which is currently being published by societies in several states). I just wanted to point out that computers and the technology which they represent will probably NEVER obviate the need for traditional research. They can point you to sources and provide you with much valuable information, but until the day that actual records are all posted on the web, you will never be able to truly trust the information you find there. There are actually some good examples of posting original records on the web. A prime one is the database of Land Grant records posted by the Bureau of Land Management at their General Land Office Records site: http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/ This site contains not only a searchable database which includes over 2.1 million land grants given over the period between 1820 and 1908, but it includes scanned images of the actual documents which you can copy to your computer or print on your printer. You can also get certified copies, printed on parchment, for $1.50 each!! But these are the exception rather than the rule. For the foreseeable future, you will ALWAYS be dependent on traditional methods. And these methods are the most reliable means of resolving the inconsistencies, contradictions and other problems with the data before you. Best Regards, Byron Bray Vice-President, Linn Genealogical Society Linn County, Oregon Listowner: BOVEE-L list ([email protected]) [email protected]