To be honest, this is a bit of a muddle if you compare UK practice to US practice and it's only a guide anyway, but.... On 21 December 2015 at 23:12, D C Banks via < family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > ... It is the document or 'source' of the information that is primary, > secondary etc., not the content. ... > I beg to differ totally. Primary and Secondary have always (rash statement that, since it's not true for David!) been in the context of whether the information (i.e. content) is primary or secondary relative to the event or attribute that it is providing the evidence for. Thus a Death Certificate provides primary evidence for the date of death (under all normal circumstances) but only secondary evidence (usually indirect, secondary evidence at that) for the date of birth (under all normal circumstances). (A death close to birth could be argued to be a different case). Whether the whole source document is original or a copy is not what primary / secondary is about (though it might feed into it) - instead the Americans would classify their source documents as original or derivative (i.e. some sort of a copy / extract / summary, etc.), which helps decide the potential for errors. The muddle, I believe, between Americans and us over primary and secondary, comes over whether the passage of time makes a difference or not. I have seen it said that a 90y old mother recalling the birth of her child is still counted as primary evidence for the birth - and the writer immediately admitted that would need to be considered carefully in case of memory problems. And that really is the point - primary and secondary are **just a step** along the way to answering the question - can we trust this data? I have a birth certificate for my GF that gives primary evidence for his date of birth. But the consensus from his baptism a couple of years later on (which recorded his birth date) and my Mum's stories, is that his parents adjusted his DoB to be within the legal reporting limit and so the primary evidence is (in my view) wrong and the secondary evidence (in my view) right. So, frankly, I can't get too excited over whether it's primary or secondary evidence..... Adrian

I would disagree with the statement that Census documents are primary evidence as, with the exception of the U.K. 1901 Census, all you can generally see is the is the Enumerators' compilation and interpretation of the individual household schedules, which were the primary sources, but which have all been destroyed. Mervyn Sent from my iPhone > On 21 Dec 2015, at 23:12, D C Banks via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Hi Dennis > > If the Death Certificate is an original or a 'stamped' copy of an original > then it is Primary evidence. Likewise an image of the 1881 census is also > Primary evidence. However, when I use only a transcription of a Death i.e. > from FreeBMD then I cite that as Secondary. Likewise a transcription of a > census. It is the document or 'source' of the information that is primary, > secondary etc., not the content. > Take the different ages on Census as an example. We have up to nine census > to give us an age, the chance is that we can deduce a different birth year > for each of the nine. The census image is still the Primary source at that > point in time even though you think the content is suspect. The > transcription by the local history society or Find My Past will always be at > best case Secondary evidence. > So, to answer your particular question, regardless of the content, if the > certificate is a true copy of a GRO entry then it is the best you can get > without finding the original register so, yes, it is Primary. The fact that > the informant couldn't count is neither here nor there, it is what they > thought at the time, you can't rewrite history. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis > Hawkins via > Sent: 21 December 2015 22:36 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: [FHU] Primary Evidence > > I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is > this primary evidence of birth date? > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I would be guided by who gave the information, i.e Is the informant likely to have had first hand knowledge, or were they only likely to have known what they were told by someone else? Mervyn Sent from my iPhone > On 21 Dec 2015, at 22:35, Dennis Hawkins via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is this primary evidence of birth date? > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Dennis If the Death Certificate is an original or a 'stamped' copy of an original then it is Primary evidence. Likewise an image of the 1881 census is also Primary evidence. However, when I use only a transcription of a Death i.e. from FreeBMD then I cite that as Secondary. Likewise a transcription of a census. It is the document or 'source' of the information that is primary, secondary etc., not the content. Take the different ages on Census as an example. We have up to nine census to give us an age, the chance is that we can deduce a different birth year for each of the nine. The census image is still the Primary source at that point in time even though you think the content is suspect. The transcription by the local history society or Find My Past will always be at best case Secondary evidence. So, to answer your particular question, regardless of the content, if the certificate is a true copy of a GRO entry then it is the best you can get without finding the original register so, yes, it is Primary. The fact that the informant couldn't count is neither here nor there, it is what they thought at the time, you can't rewrite history. David -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins via Sent: 21 December 2015 22:36 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] Primary Evidence I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is this primary evidence of birth date? Dennis Hawkins ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Peter What you say is true. It was my brother who reported our fathers death and he said 1889 instead of 1891 Victor On 21/12/2015 10:54 PM, Peter Hirons via wrote: > Unfortunately the birth date on a death cert Just reflect what the reporter > "thought" the deceased's age was. Often even family members were not sure. > About as reliable as ages on censuses ! > > Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis > Hawkins via > Sent: 21 December 2015 22:36 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: [FHU] Primary Evidence > > I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is > this primary evidence of birth date? > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Unfortunately the birth date on a death cert Just reflect what the reporter "thought" the deceased's age was. Often even family members were not sure. About as reliable as ages on censuses ! Peter -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins via Sent: 21 December 2015 22:36 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] Primary Evidence I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is this primary evidence of birth date? Dennis Hawkins ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

You have to remember that the information given on a death certificate is given by a third party and as such what is written on it must always be viewed as suspect. The only person who knows the correct information (or sometimes not) is the person who died. My grandmorther always said she was two years older than she was until we obtained her birth certificate. Regards Jackie -----Original Message----- From: Victor Markham via Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 10:45 PM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] Primary Evidence I would say no. My fathers birth date shown on his death certificate is wrong. It made him 2 years older Victor On 21/12/2015 10:35 PM, Dennis Hawkins via wrote: > I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is > this primary evidence of birth date? > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I would say no. My fathers birth date shown on his death certificate is wrong. It made him 2 years older Victor On 21/12/2015 10:35 PM, Dennis Hawkins via wrote: > I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is this primary evidence of birth date? > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have a death certificate which lists the birth date of the subject. Is this primary evidence of birth date? Dennis Hawkins

I offer for your convenience a link to Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map: https://www.evidenceexplained.com/content/quicklesson-17-evidence-analysis-process-map ESM says: *Primary information*: that is, information based on *firsthand *knowledge. > Primary informants tell us about events or circumstances they were > personally involved in or witnessed. They might provide that information at > or about the time the event occurred or at a later date. A time lapse might > affect the quality of the recollection, but it does not alter the primary > nature of the information. > How does this come into play with Dennis' death certificate? When I get a look at any death certificate or register I always ask who the informant was, and I always try to identify that person. As Adrian said, and as ESM says in the quote above, we need to take into account the time which has passed between the event that was described and the recording date of the document. But - take into account the following scenarios. A) A mother giving the information on the birth of one of her children. B) A child giving the information on the birth of her mother. In Case A, the mother is a first-hand witness to the event and so her information is first-hand knowledge. In case B, the daughter cannot be an eyewitness -- the only information she can give is second-hand knowledge. The most likely scenario for having primary knowledge of someone's birth reported on a death certificate is when the informant is older than the deceased -- the mother, the attending physician (a family doctor might have attended both the birth of a person and their death), or (perhaps) the father. Most of the time the birth information on a death certificate will be secondary -- the informant will be reporting what had been told to them by other family members. Be careful with the 1911 and 1940 Census, where we know the informant. It is tempting to assume that those records are more accurate than the censuses where we don't know who gave the information -- but that doesn't give us a free pass to skip evaluating the information just because we know who gave it. Jan Murphy packrat74@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Adrian Bruce via < family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > On 21 December 2015 at 23:44, Mervyn Ashby via < > family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > I would disagree with the statement that Census documents are primary > > evidence as, with the exception of the U.K. 1901 Census, all you can > > generally see is the is the Enumerators' compilation and interpretation > of > > the individual household schedules, which were the primary sources, but > > which have all been destroyed. > > > > It's a good point, but if we take it to its logical conclusion, we'd > probably need to declare all documents to provide secondary evidence only - > GRO certificates are copies; we never see the certificates at > superintendent registrars - but a photocopy might count; parish registers > are probably written up after the event from the priest's notes; WW1 > Soldiers' Records are compiled by clerks from letters long since lost.... > > And if we do all that, what's the point of a classification that makes 99% > of stuff secondary? As I say, this is just a step along the way to deciding > if it's evidence that we can trust - so we do need to worry about > enumerators' errors, absolutely we do - but we might as well put the > primary / secondary boundary somewhere that obviously distinguishes between > (say) microfilm of the 1881 enumerators' forms and the LDS transcription of > the 1881. > > Adrian > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Mike That was what I really meant as Pedro mentioned v5 One note is great for many things and those who have it should make the most of it Victor -----Original Message----- From: "Beryl & Mike Tate via" <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Sent: ‎21/‎12/‎2015 14:06 To: "family-historian-users@rootsweb.com" <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [FHU] Family Historian 6 Upgrade -Help No Victor you do not need to install any earlier versions to install a V5 to V6 Upgrade (nor for a V4 to V5 Upgrade). But you do need two sets of licence details and saving them on OneNote is a good idea. I suggest you also save the Email address and date of purchase from Calico Pie. Then if you lose the downloaded installation file you can request them to send it again using those purchase details. Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- Subject: Re: [FHU] Family Historian 6 Upgrade -Help Pedro I think you have to install version 5 first then upgraded it from there. Mails have in the past referred to registration key. If you have One Note installed on your computer you can store you registration key on here. Just create a Registration key tab then add new sub tab called Family Historian and ad all the FH version keys on here. You can also add more sub tabs for other software registration keys. Victor ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

No Victor you do not need to install any earlier versions to install a V5 to V6 Upgrade (nor for a V4 to V5 Upgrade). But you do need two sets of licence details and saving them on OneNote is a good idea. I suggest you also save the Email address and date of purchase from Calico Pie. Then if you lose the downloaded installation file you can request them to send it again using those purchase details. Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- Subject: Re: [FHU] Family Historian 6 Upgrade -Help Pedro I think you have to install version 5 first then upgraded it from there. Mails have in the past referred to registration key. If you have One Note installed on your computer you can store you registration key on here. Just create a Registration key tab then add new sub tab called Family Historian and ad all the FH version keys on here. You can also add more sub tabs for other software registration keys. Victor

Hi Pedro, To install to V5 to V6 Upgrade you need three things: (1) The V5 to V6 Upgrade file you downloaded in 2014 named something like "upgrade_fh_v5_to_v6.0.0-dl.exe" (2) The V5 licence details you used to install V5 (3) The V6 licence details you used to install V6 You do NOT need to install any earlier versions. This is all explained in the FHUG Knowledge Base Installation Guide: http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:family_historian_installation_details It advises that you create an archive of your FH installation downloads and licence details for just these circumstances. Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- Subject: [FHU] Family Historian 6 Upgrade -Help Hi Everyone, I have one question. In 2014 I have bought an upgrade from Family Historian version 5 to verson 6. I have now formatted my laptop and want to reinstall my software. I have downloaded the software from the website and it says my license is not valid to family historian version 6 direct installation. How do I manage this situation? Regards, Pedro

On 21 December 2015 at 12:03, Pedro via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > wrote: > I have downloaded the software from the website and it says my license is > not valid to family historian version 6 direct installation. > > How do I manage this situation? > To install using the upgrade licence you must install the upgrade program. If you did not keep a copy of the upgrade program (assuming you purchased a download) you will need to request Calico (support@family-historian.co.uk) to re-send a link for the upgrade program so you can download it again. Once you have it you will need to enter both your V5 and V6 licences during the install. -- Jane. Jane Taubman | www.rjt.org.uk | www.taubman.org.uk |www.fhug.org.uk

Pedro I think you have to install version 5 first then upgraded it from there. Mails have in the past referred to registration key. If you have One Note installed on your computer you can store you registration key on here. Just create a Registration key tab then add new sub tab called Family Historian and ad all the FH version keys on here. You can also add more sub tabs for other software registration keys. Victor On 21/12/2015 12:03 PM, Pedro via wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I have one question. In 2014 I have bought an upgrade from Family > Historian version 5 to verson 6. > > I have now formatted my laptop and want to reinstall my software. > I have downloaded the software from the website and it says my license is > not valid to family historian version 6 direct installation. > > How do I manage this situation? > > Regards, > Pedro > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Everyone, I have one question. In 2014 I have bought an upgrade from Family Historian version 5 to verson 6. I have now formatted my laptop and want to reinstall my software. I have downloaded the software from the website and it says my license is not valid to family historian version 6 direct installation. How do I manage this situation? Regards, Pedro

Thank you for the heads up - I have updated the KB. Regards, Mike Tate Sent from my Hudl Paddy Buckley via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: >Jane >Since Ancestry has altered the way it opens, the advice in FHUG may now be >slightly outdated. I'm not an expert, but this is how it works for me; >open Ancestry >Trees> Create & Manage Trees> click on the tree you want to >export as a gedom> export as gedcom> download >Paddy Buckley > >On 18 December 2015 at 09:27, Jane Taubman via < >family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > >> To send questions to the List please use the family-historian-users@ >> rootsweb.com address and not the admin one. >> >> On 15 December 2015 at 16:54, Jacqueline Roberts <jacqueline@vocks.org.uk> >> wrote: >> >> > a) can I take a GEDCOM from my private tree on Ancestry? >> > >> >> Yes, please see >> http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:import_from_ancestry >> >> >> >> >> > b) can I enter it in FH? >> > >> >> Once you have the file downloaded use the New Project option to create a >> Project from it. >> >> >> >> > c) if I can, will my sources go with it? >> > >> >> Yes, but attached media will not be sent. >> >> >> >> -- >> Jane. >> >> Jane Taubman | www.rjt.org.uk | www.taubman.org.uk |www.fhug.org.uk >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This type of problem and many others are covered in the FHUG Knowledge Base Installation Guide: http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:family_historian_installation_problems Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- Subject: [FHU] Family Historian has stopped working.. Good afternoon, I am using FH 6.0.4. Whenever I click on any of the ancestor relatives Diagram options I get the following message and then Windows (7) shuts down the programme "Family Historian has stopped working.." Can anyone help please. Thanks, Stuart

Good afternoon, I am using FH 6.0.4. Whenever I click on any of the ancestor relatives Diagram options I get the following message and then Windows (7) shuts down the programme "Family Historian has stopped working.." Can anyone help please. Thanks, Stuart

On 18 December 2015 at 12:23, Stuart Shearer via < family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Whenever I click on any of the ancestor relatives > Diagram options I get the following message and then Windows (7) shuts down > the programme "Family Historian has stopped working.." > Do you have a Samsung Laser Printer (or FOX IT PDF) as your default windows printer? If so if you change the default printer to another printer (say Family Historian PDF) printer this should stop the problem. To fix the Samsung problem, just go to the Samsung site and download the latest Universal Driver and install it to upgrade the Windows driver for the printer. I don't know a fix for the FoxIt one, but just change the default and FH should be fine. -- Jane. Jane Taubman | www.rjt.org.uk | www.taubman.org.uk |www.fhug.org.uk