Donna wrote: >TOPIC #2 Regarding the Pioneers of Madison Co. book, you definitely do >have to be careful with the entries in that book. It is a guide only and >you have to check and recheck other sources, as someone else said. To >connect these 2 topics, "Pioneers" is a secondary source that is not perfect. Some 20 years ago former County Historian Isabel Bracy presented me with a copy of her draft of Tuttle's "10,000 Names of Early Madison County Residents" (published as "Pioneers of Madison County") and I still have it although ragged as Santa's coat on December 26th. Some 7-8 years ago I wrote a book review of Tuttle's "Pioneers of Madison County" saying pretty much the very same thing that Donna just said and I got dragged through the coals from one end of the county to the other. The problem is not that I don't appreciate the work, it is just that I grew up with people negating the validity of my research because "that's not what Tuttle says." As people have since found out through their own research experiences, Tuttle is not perfect and was only as good as his sources (which he rarely listed). An army of local researchers treated it all as a primary document without question. Despite my included praise of the work people only took my warning as cranky criticism, and not a lesson from the experienced. Dan W.

At 10:29 PM 12/17/04 -0500, you wrote: Despite my included praise of the work >people only took my warning as cranky criticism, and not a lesson from the >experienced. > > Dan W. You a cranky critic? I can't believe it. From tales I've heard regarding you, ok, well it was in Cazenovia - you were a godsend. Folks don't like to be told they are wrong or that they've been led down the primrose path, and thus one, even when trying to be helpful, may get some negative feedback. And with that said - I'll make a quick announcement later this morning, then off the wilds of the great plains I head for the holiday. Tim