August 1999

WOW! You just found that final link that ties you back to the Mayflower, and you are so excited. You copy the information carefully, then dash to your genealogy program to enter the new information. You update your pedigree charts, you print out new family group sheets, and ... voila ... you're done, right? WRONG!

You have forgotten one little detail.... documenting your sources and validating secondary information. It's not enough to say, "but I know it's from a reliable source." Nobody else knows for sure that your source is reliable, since you haven't provided any proof. (And, by the way, how do YOU know your source is reliable unless you have checked to make sure he/she has cited sources?) Without a source, information is basically worthless ... yes, I said worthless. Information without documentation is no better than a fairy tale. However, information with proper documentation of valid sources is considered FACT.

Let's start with a few definitions. For the purposes of this discussion regarding genealogy, we'll use the following definitions (from Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster Inc., 1989):

• Clue - a piece of evidence that leads one toward the solution of a problem
• Documentation - the provision of documents in substantiation of evidence
• Fact - a piece of information presented as having objective reality
• Primary Source - direct, first-hand information recorded at the time of the event
• Reliable - suitable or fit to be relied on
• Secondary Source - compiled information, derived from primary sources (or other secondary sources)
• Valid - well-grounded or justifiable, at once relevant and meaningful

Now, let's try this again: what should you do when you find that Mayflower link?

First, write down EXACTLY what you found. Make sure you check for context and explanations preceding or following the section, in footnotes, or in the appendix, and include those. Be sure to indicate the page number for all of the above. Then make sure that you have copied the full citation of the source (see the bibliography below for sources that show you how to cite a source properly - the Mills book is the most recent and specifically geared toward genealogists).

Next, determine if this is a primary record. That is, a record created by a witness of the event at the time of the event for a purpose related to the event - usually a vital record or sometimes a church record meets this definition - newspaper articles generally do not, since they are not recorded for a purpose related to the event (and usually are not written by a witness). Compiled genealogies obviously do not, since they are prepared after the event. Note that strictly speaking a birth date or place indicated on a death certificate is NOT primary evidence (except in the case of a stillborn child), since it was recorded after the event for a purpose different than the event itself (the information also is rarely provided by a person who was a witness to the birth). This may seem confusing or nitpicking, but it is just good common sense. Do you remember your sister's birth? If she's older, obviously you only know the date celebrated by your family. If she's younger, you might remember the event, but can you be absolutely positive about the specifics? Maybe when you were 20, but what about when you're 80? If it wasn't recorded at the time, one can never be sure that it was recorded correctly later, thus primary records are the objective.

If it is not a primary record, does it indicate where the information was obtained? If so, that's where you should go next. Check that source ... not just to verify that it was recorded correctly, but to get all the other "good stuff" that the other person may have missed. Maybe they got it from a birth record, and in addition to the birth date it gave the mother's maiden name and birth place (but they didn't record that, since it didn't meet their purposes). Now remembering that those items are not primary information on the child's birth certificate, what would you do? Sure, you would look for validating sources for that information - but at least now you have clues. Never undervalue a clue - without them, how would we ever know WHERE to look?

If it is a compiled or secondary record and does NOT give a source, hmmm... take it as a clue and try to glean from it what you can. Do NOT rely on this information as fact - keep an open mind and look for validation in other sources.

OK, so you now have recorded that information, cited the source, verified the information from primary sources and documented those. What's next? Now you can share your information with others (with the permission of any living people for information about them, and with permission of sources cited for any copyrighted or private information), confident that you have done the best research documentation possible. With your carefully researched and documented information, others can build on it and not "reinvent the wheel" since you have provided reliable data and demonstrated your care by documenting carefully. You have also provided yourself a useful piece of information to avoid repeating the research you've already done, and possibly found lots of other clues.

By the way, when you're documenting sources, be sure to document sources where you didn't find anything .... Why? Who wants to look at the same thing twice if it isn't going to help?

Now you've heard my "mantra" ("cite your sources") and you're on your way to preparing good solid genealogy for your family!

More Reading (please!):

I am always interested to hear from readers, so if you have any comments, suggestions, or questions, please email me at: talkgenealogy@aol.com. Stop by next month for more Pilgrims, Pioneers & Aliens! Happy Hunting!