Steve's Genealogy Blog

A few days ago, I wrote about using A Preponderance of Evidence to come to a conclusion in genealogical studies, and in that article I provided the definition of Original Source as published in The BCG Genealogical Standards Manual:

“original source:  the person or record whose information did not come from data already spoken or written .  The original is the most authoritative source .  Often, however, it no longer survives or its preservation dictates that it be examined only as an image copy (microfilm, digitized image, and so on).”

The Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual (Orem, Utah: Ancestry Publishing, 2000), 8-9.

According to The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual, the definition of Derivative Source is:

“derivative source:  a person or record that supplies information that is repeated, reproduced, transcribed, abstracted, or summarized from something already spoken or written .  Because every repetition or recopying of data is an opportunity for error, the closer the derivative is to the original the more reliable the data are likely to be.”

The Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual (Orem, Utah: Ancestry Publishing, 2000), 9.

In 1999, a workshop on Evidence Analysis was held at the NGS Conference in the States where Helen F. M. Leary, CG, CGL, FASG, FNGS, the President of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, elaborated on these definitions .  She defined Original Source as:

“ORIGINAL SOURCE:  one that contributes written, oral, or visual information not derived from a prior written record or oral communication .  “Original” in this sense refers to the form in which the information is found or was created – not to its quality, reliability, or other characteristics.”

Helen F. M. Leary, “Part 1: Definitions” Evidence Analysis, A Workshop, 1999 NGS Conference in the States, National Genealogical Society (Arlington, Virginia: NGS, 1999).

She also defined Derivative Source as:

“DERIVATIVE SOURCE:  one that contributes information copied, transcribed, abstracted, summarized, or repeated from information in a previously existing source .  Derivatives may be created (a) contemporaneously with the source (e.g., index entries made when the deed were transcribed into the official record book) or years or centuries later (e.g., a person’s “record set: in a genealogical data base); (b) by officials in the course of performing their duties or by private parties pursuing their own interests (e.g., describing the results of a genealogical investigation); and (c) in handwritten, typed, electronically recorded, computer-generated, or exact-image form.”

Helen F. M. Leary, “Part 1: Definitions” Evidence Analysis, A Workshop, 1999 NGS Conference in the States, National Genealogical Society (Arlington, Virginia: NGS, 1999).

One other useful definition that Ms. Leary provided was for Exact Image:

“EXACT IMAGE:  the form of any record that captures its appearance and all the information it carries – as by microfilm, photograph, photocopy, or computer-scanned image .  An exact image is a DERIVATIVE SOURCE whose value depends on its technological quality (e.g., a clear, complete, unaltered reproduction of the ORIGINAL RECORD, in photocopy or microform, carries the same information) .  With the same appearance, the image can stand in place of the original.”

Helen F. M. Leary, “Part 1: Definitions” Evidence Analysis, A Workshop, 1999 NGS Conference in the States, National Genealogical Society (Arlington, Virginia: NGS, 1999).

From these definitions, Original Sources are rare, indeed .  In fact, I don’t think I have any source documents that can be considered Original Sources if Exact Images are Derivative Sources.

George Morgan and Drew Smith discussed Original Sources and Derivative Sources on the June 1, 2006 edition of the Genealogy Guys Podcast .  In that podcast, the Genealogy Guys indicated that a reproduction of an Original Source could also be considered an Original Source.

Today, in an online chat with Brenda Dougal Merriman, CG, CGL of the National Institute for Genealogical Studies, I asked the Brenda whether exact images were Original Sources or Derivative Sources .  Brenda answered that exact images could be considered Original Sources, especially these days when so many Original Sources are available as digitized images.

At this point, one more definition may be useful - Original Record:

“ORIGINAL RECORD:  the first paper writing created in response to a specific event or situation .  An ORIGINAL SOURCE can be an ORIGINAL RECORD if written or electronically recorded .  An original record is unique – the can be only one “first” – and therefore irreplaceable .  The original record should not be confused with a DUPLICATE ORIGINAL or an OFFICIAL COPY .  Although “original” is sometimes used to refer to any record of which a copy has been made or from which information has been taken, a more-appropriate term in those case in simply SOURCE”

Helen F. M. Leary, “Part 1: Definitions” Evidence Analysis, A Workshop, 1999 NGS Conference in the States, National Genealogical Society (Arlington, Virginia: NGS, 1999).

There are some conflicting views here .  Is an Exact Image an Original Source or a Derivative Source?

Tomorrow:  New Definitions of Original Source and Derivative Source (A Proposal)

When evaluating the quality of genealogical information and the sources in which that information appears, genealogists are often confronted with conflicting data .  Thus, the concept of a preponderance of the evidence has been adopted from the legal profession and applied to genealogical analysis, whereby the accuracy of information and the reliability of the sources must be evaluated in order to come to a conclusion.

For genealogists, the evidence must be carefully evaluated and documented before coming to a conclusion about a genealogical fact or event .  The Board for Certification of Genealogists has established the Genealogical Proof Standard as a guideline for evaluating the credibility of genealogical data.

The Genealogical Proof Standard states that:

“(a)  We conduct a reasonably exhaustive search in reliable sources for all information that is or may be pertinent to the identity, relationship, event, or situation in question;

(b)  We collect and include in our compilation a complete, accurate citation to the source or sources of each item of information we use;

(c)  We analyze and correlate the collected information to assess its quality as evidence;

(d)  We resolve any conflicts caused by items of evidence that contradict each other or are contrary to a proposed (hypothetical) solution to the question; and

(e)  We arrive at a soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion.”

The Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual (Orem, Utah: Ancestry Publishing, 2000), 1-2.

So, what does all this mean?

In short, the Genealogical Proof Standard is a guideline for evaluating the preponderance of the evidence .  The five tenets of the Genealogical Proof Standard require that the genealogist find all relevant information, document the sources of that information, analyze the information and evaluate the quality of the information, resolve any conflicts between different sources of information, and come to a conclusion.

That’s quite a job!  Obtaining from reliable sources all information relevant to the genealogical question at hand is no small task .  Even assuming that one has obtained all relevant information, the next step is equally daunting:  properly citing the sources.

Tomorrow:  Citing the Sources of Information on Great Aunt Mary’s Birthdate

In attempting to determine my Great Aunt Mary’s birthdate, I had to acquire a large number of documents and evaluate the birth information contained therein .  In U.S. civil courts, the idea of “preponderance of the evidence” is often used to decide cases, while in criminal courts, the concept of “beyond a reasonable doubt” is required to convict.

In genealogy, we are often unable to come to a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt and must rely on a preponderance of the evidence .  This preponderance does not simply refer to the amount of evidence, but rather to the likely truth and accuracy of the evidence.

With the evidence that I uncovered to determine Great Aunt Mary’s birthdate, it became clear that the evidence supported two different birthdates: January 12, 1884 and March 12, 1887 .  By far, the date March 12, 1887 is supported by the greater number of documents, but none of the documents supporting this date provides primary information about Great Aunt Mary’s birthdate .  Primary information is:

“data contributed by a knowledgeable eyewitness to or participant in the event that is the subject of the record or by an official whose duties included making a full, accurate record of it.”

The Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual (Orem, Utah: Ancestry Publishing, 2000), 9

In addition to the requirement that the record be made by an eyewitness, participant, or official, the record should have been made close to the same time and place as the event and should have been recorded accurately and without bias.

Furthermore, many of the sources for Great Aunt Mary’s birthdate are not original sources .  An original source is:

“the person or record whose information did not come from data already spoken or written .  The original is the most authoritative source .  Often, however, it no longer survives or its preservation dictates that it be examined only as an image copy (microfilm, digitized image, and so on).”

The Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCC Genealogical Standards Manual (Orem, Utah: Ancestry Publishing, 2000), 8-9

Let’s examine the sources for Great Aunt Mary’s birthdate:

1. Marianna’s Birth and Baptismal Record, a Church Record from Poland
2. Marjanna’s Hamburg Passenger Record
3. Marianna’s Passenger Arrival List
4. The 1910 Census
5. The 1920 Census
6. The 1930 Census
7. The Copy of Record of Marriage
8. The Return of a Birth for Mary’s son John
9. Mary’s Petition for Naturalization
10. Mary’s SS-5 Application for Social Security Account and Tax Number
11. The Social Security Death Index
12. Information from Mary’s daughter Fran
13. Mary’s Cemetery Burial Record
14. Mary’s Gravestone Epitaph

The only document that contains primary information on Mary’s birthdate is the Birth and Baptismal Record, a Church Record from Poland .  All other documents provide secondary information because they were not recorded by an eyewitness, participant, or official whose duty it was to record the event .  Sure, Mary was a participant in the event, but she is not likely to have remembered the actual event when she provided her birthdate for later documents .  Furthermore, only Mary’s Birth and Baptismal Record was prepared at the time and place the event occurred.

None of these sources are original sources .  By definition, an original source contains information not derived from some other source .  Only one original can exist.

Several of these sources are exact images (microfilm copies, photocopies, photographs), but they are also derivative sources . Â Derivative sources are copies of the originals, but exact images can be the excellent sources if the quality of the image is high and the image is unaltered .  Mary’s Birth and Baptismal Record is an exact image of an original source (a church register in Dubiecko, Poland) .  Mary’s Petition for Naturalization is also an exact image of an original source.

The rest of the sources are derivative sources generated by transcription, information passed on verbally or information passed on in writing.

The birth information provided in the exact image of the original source of Mary’s Birth and Baptismal Record is by far the highest quality source for Mary’s birthdate, since this record contains primary information .  While Mary’s Petition for Naturalization is also an exact image of an original source, the Petition does not contain primary information about Mary’s birth.

Tomorrow:  The Genealogical Proof Standard

Copyright © 2006 by Stephen J. Danko

John Jwanauski served in the U.S. Army in World War I .  He was stationed in the Gérardmer Sector, Vosges, France and was deployed in the Meuse Argonne Offensive, the battle that led to Germany’s signing of the Armistice on November 11, 1918 .  Today, November 11 is celebrated in the United States as Veteran’s Day and in Canada as Remembrance Day.

Several years ago I traveled to France and visited Verdun, site of one of the worst battles of World War I .  Verdun is located not far from the location of the Meuse Argonne Offensive that ended the war with Germany .  The treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28, 1919, and the final peace treaty with the Ottoman Empire (today known as the Republic of Turkey) was signed at Lausanne on July 24, 1923.

World War I Bunkers at Verdun
Photograph copyright 2001 by Lewis Michaels, used with permission

The trip was an adventure, not only because it was my first trip to France, but because I flew there shortly after the terrorist attacks on America .  My flight to Paris was cancelled and I had to book a flight on another airline .  While in Europe, SwissAir went bankrupt, and again my flight was cancelled .  Then, the day before I was to return home, the United States invaded Afghanistan.

Bunkers and Barbed Wire at Verdun
Photograph copyright 2001 by Lewis Michaels, used with permission

I toured France with Lewis Michaels, a colleague from work .  Lewis served as my tour guide and interpreter in France and arranged for us to visit Verdun .  I was completely unprepared for what I saw there .  The Battle of Verdun lasted from February 21, 1916 to December 1916 .  During that time 26,000,000 bombs were dropped on the area, and at the end of the battle, 300,000 French and German soldiers were missing.

Steve in the Douaumont Cemetery
Photograph copyright 2001 by Lewis Michaels, used with permission

Much of the area is maintained as a memorial to the battle .  Craters where the bombs fell are still in evidence .  Unexploded shells are still found in the woods surrounding the area .  The Douaumont Ossuary and Cemetery was constructed as the final resting place of those French and German soldiers killed in the battle, with the remains of those who could not be identified interred in the Ossuary.

The Douaumont Ossuary
Photograph copyright 2001 by Lewis Michaels, used with permission

Tomorrow:  Searching for John Jwanauski in the Ellis Island Records