Presumptions? I see no other way to evaluate any evidence. At the very least, we must presume that the material presented is what it purports to be. Still though, the eminently clear point is that none of us - no one, no matter how experienced - can evaluate evidence in the abstract. While it is difficult to articulate, clear and convincing evidence only occasionally will be found in a single document. Perhaps, the death date as written by the attending physician who signed the death certificate, who actually was present at the death and did the certificate then or very shortly thereafter, would be as close as we might come to a clear and convincing single source for that date. Further, while the NEHGS article might be sufficient to be labeled "clear and convincing" by me, you, Ms. Mills or any other person, whether or not some still other examiner would have the same view, and thereby be satisfied with that source, simply can NOT be predicted by other than that examiner. Then too, while I may need to prove a birth only to my family, I might instead be called upon to meet the tastes of a much more critical person such as a D.A.R. examiner. "Clear and convincing" (or any other measure of evidence, for that matter) is not like a lightning bolt that suddenly zaps us when we come across it. It also is not like a crystal, immutable and unchanging, that hangs at the desk so that when we have something before us that looks like that, we may shout "Eureka, I have it!!" Rather, that measure of evidence is found only in the very subjective opinion that the material presented to us is sufficient under our own rules and reasoning to firmly establish the fact suggested by the submitter. Accordingly, while the Ms. Pat's Inet site would in no way be satisfactory proof of anything to me other than its mere existence, you or some other examiner might be so well acquainted with and trustful of the research of the person who made that post that the reference would be proof enough. As an extreme example, would any of us give equal credence to the writings of Brent, Dr. McCarty, and Weynette Haun, as we would to the opinions of someone who has been at research for a month? Surely not!! Similarly, would we view the decisions as to proof made by John Bennett Boddie 50 years ago as of equal worth to those of Mrs. Mills??? I can not say for sure, but I do suggest that their standards surely would be different from each other and surely even more different and more exacting than those of some local researcher who has set out to please only his mother and cousins. In short, only if I know the rules in depth of your society can I even begin to predict whether or not you would accept this or that as adequate proof. Those of us who have examined hundreds of submissions of evidence perfectly well know that your ideas as examiner in behalf of "Founders and Patriots" as to how some hypothesis must be proved likely will be very different than mine in behalf of our local society. Paul Genealogy without documentation is nothing. Paul Drake JD Genealogist & Author <www.DrakesBooks.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Daryl Lytton To: VA-ROOTS@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 2:19 PM Subject: Re: [VA-ROOTS] When are internet documents considered accurate? Paul Drake wrote: > I might add that as Past Registrar of TN S.A.R. for three terms, > I would accept the NEHGS article as quite weighty evidence, > presuming it was written some considerable number of years in > the past, and also presuming that the original materials are not > now available. So...basically it's, "Documentation is nothing without presuming" :) Daryl To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/301 - Release Date: 4/4/2006 -- ---------------------------------------- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 1911 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!

Hi... Seems like everyone has at least one situation where documents don't agree. I've had to have two death certificates corrected in the past three years, both being errors made by the funeral homes involved. (One listed my grandmother as someone I never heard of; the other listed the wrong city and state for my father's birthplace.) Fortunately, I caught them both before the documents were recorded so I didn't have to go through the usual process of correcting. I do have a situation which I don't exactly know how to handle. In the family Bible, my grandfather's birth name was recorded as Willie Wade. He always used Wade Hampton as his legal name; that's the name on his marriage license, his delayed birth certificate used for Social Security, his death certificate, etc. That's the name my mother always knew; in fact, she was shocked when I found the record in the Bible, and she had never heard that his name was originally Willie Wade. I'm sure the Bible entry is his; the birth date is correct, and there are no other entries except his immediate family. Also, the handwriting definitely is his mother's. Since there were no birth certificates in NC in 1877, I can't check that source. Could people arbitrarily change a child's name without any registration in that era? I'm assuming so; if they weren't legally "registered" in the first place, there wouldn't be anything to change at the courthouse. How do I handle the name change in docume! nting him as my grandfather? You're going to think my great-grandmother was a little loopy (which I don't think she was from the business records she left and from what I know about her), but there is another discrepancy not quite as important. The date in that same Bible (also in her handwriting) for my great-uncle's death is 2 days off from the date on his tombstone. As I said, I don't think that is as important as my grandfather's name, but it is an error. I'm bringing up these instances of errors just as examples of how records can be inaccurate. Except for my grandfather's name, the errors are human; but someday they could throw a genealogist into a tizzy. ' Thanks for any thoughts you have for handling my grandfather's name! Caroline