"...that to describe a genealogical fact as having come from a secondary source tells us NOTHING about its worth and weight..." That is why the genealogical community has for several years been trying to reeducate people not to use the terms "primary source" and "secondary source." They do not exist. A source is either original or derivative, of which there are various degrees. A will recorded in a will book is a first-generation derivative from the original will. A microfilm of the will book is second-generation. A published abstract made from the microfilm is third-generation. Someone's notes of that abstract are fourth-generation. The information in either an original source or a derivative source can be either primary information, secondary information, and is often a combination of both. The evidence in the information is either direct or indirect (which is what Grace had in her examples). "I would add that so long as anyone in positions to judge applications still mouths the words "preponderance of evidence" when measuring quantities of evidence, there will be no standards worth the discussion." Preponderance of evidence (a term borrowed from law) is also a term that should no longer be used in genealogy. This is another step in reeducating people that learned this term when it was "acceptable" in genealogy. Rick Saunders http://genealogypro.com/fsaunders.html -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.11/121 - Release Date: 10/6/2005