> > > Then no conclusions can be drawn. Lack of evidence only > > > proves a lack of evidence. > > > > My probable ggg grandfather left no record of purchasing or > > selling land. He did not mention land in his will. His > > estate inventory did not mention land. > > > > I'd say that clues pointing in a specific direction, with lack > > of evidence to the contrary, allow one to make logical > > conclusions. In this case he almost certainly did not own > > land. > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > You can't prove a negative, so you can't prove he did _not_ own > land. All you can accurately state is that you have no evidence > that he ever did own land. It's a subtle distinction, but a very > real one. > > "Christopher Jahn" <[email protected]> Although if you can show that you know who the assorted landowners were in the area at the time he was alive, and he's not among them, you can be pretty certain. Stop looking at him and look at the folk around him. Lesley Robertson "Lesley Robertson" <[email protected]>