User Profile

new vocabulary: sepoy

an Indian soldier serving under British or other European orders

Element 5 off the GPS is a written conclusion, which is chapter 7 in Mastering Genealogical Proof.

First kind of conclusion is a proof statement. Proof statements are appropriate when direct evidence from credible sources agree perfectly with the conclusion. A proof statement can be expressed as a footnote/citation. It must meet 6 criteria:

1. The citations are clear, complete & accurate.
2. The citations in the footnote or the context (the larger work) identify at least 2 independent sources supporting the conclusion.
3. The sources are ones competent genealogists would consult to support the conclusion.
4. They cite at least 1 original record.
5. They refer to at least 1 primary information item.
6. No authored or derivative work, or secondary information remains that could be replaced by original works or primary information.

Oddly, this form of written conclusion (the shortest) is the toughest for me to grok, since it elides sources in favor of the "best" sources. Only if they all agree, but still, it feels weird. Additionally, the explanation is mostly assumed, since only direct information is allowed in a proof statement. I do get it for very supported items that don't have or need a lot of evidence. So, where there's a marriage certificate and a newspaper write-up and a religious record, I want to include all of them, for instance.

The portion of chapter 6 on assembling evidence doesn't really make sense to me. It's just a 5 item classification of conflicts & resolutions. It's not wrong, but it's not really "assembling evidence".

1. Direct evidence and no conflict.
2. Resolved conflicting direct evidence.
3. Resolved conflict between direct evidence and indirect or negative evidence.
4. Indirect evidence, negative evidence, or a combination of the two; an absence of direct evidence; and no conflict. No known source answers the research question directly, but the assembled indirect or negative evidence agrees on one answer.
5. Resolved conflicting indirect evidence, negative evidence, or a combination; and an absence of direct evidence. No known source answers the research question directly, indirect/negative-evidence items disagree on the answer, and the genealogist resolves the disagreement.

One of the requirements for BCG certification is demonstrating one's ability with research questions where items 4 or 5 apply. At least in this chapter, Jones doesn't go into how to "assemble" evidence. He gives examples, but no "how".

Back to the chapter I just finished on resolving conflicts. The "process" detailed is:

1. Identifying two or more answers in conflict
2. Listing or describing the evidence supporting each side of the conflict
3. Demonstrating that the conflict is resolved by lack of corroboration, quality of evidence, explanation, or a combination

Notes three ways of resolving conflict: lack of corroboration, quality of evidence, and explanation. That last one is broad and Jones provides little guidance for it.

At the end of the guidance on conflict resolution, Jones notes that if there is an unresolved conflict, there can't be a conclusion that meets the Genealogical Proof Standard. At best, a researcher can state an opinion or a probably. [ Perhaps in a note indicating future research. ]

Correlation is the process of comparing and contrasting. Basically, showing how the the various pieces of evidence corroborate or conflict with other pieces of evidence. No rubric or definitive process is laid out here. Just suggestions of tables, timelines, maps, etc. Jones does say to group dependent pieces of information/evidence together.

Correlation is something that is done across multiple sources, so it needs too be done per research question, not per source.

Resolving conflicts & drawing conclusions is part of GPS items 4 & 5, not 3. I.e., do the analysis on each item and the compare & contrast separately from trying to resolve the conflicts or drawing conclusions.

Going back to chapter 3, Jones offers the following rubric for testing if research is reasonably exhaustive:

1. At least two independently-created evidence items in agreement.
2. All sources competent genealogists would examine. (this is the hard one)
3. Some primary information.
4. Some original records.
5. Relevant authored works, derivative records, and secondary information replaced by findable corresponding originals and primary information.
6. All findable sources that relevant sources and indexes suggest.

This rubric does not appear in the 2019 edition of Genealogy Standards in any form that I can find, so I'm going to take this as a guideline. A good guideline, but just a guideline.

What Genealogy Standards (2019 edition) says with regard to reaasonably exhaustive research is:

Thorough research attempts to gather all reliable information potentially relevant to the research question, including evidence items conflicting or consistent with other evidence items. Thorough research, therefore, aims to consult all potentially relevant sources. It emphasizes original records containing primary information, which may be used as direct, indirect, or negative evidence.

As I note above, "all sources competent genealogists would examine" is the hardest of those 6 rubric items. It's very dependent on the research question, the area, the time, the family, etc. I can consult guides research guides, but it's still going to be very subjective and variable.

Note: one rubric that I have been told both by other researchers and even a genealogy instructor was "3 sources". Jones doesn't explicitly refute this rubric, but his 1st point indirectly conflicts because 3 sources may not be independently created. For instance, my birth certificate, drivers license and passport are not independently created. If my birth certificate is wrong, the other two are also going to be wrong. Those 3 sources are really just 1 source because they are dependent on each other.

This element of the GPS is very interdependent with the 3rd element (analysis & correlation). Which is why I went back to comment on this after reading the chapter on the 3rd element.)

Chapter 5 covers analysis & correlation, the 3rd element of the Genealogical Proof Standard.

Tests—through processes of analysis and correlation—of all sources, information items, and evidence contributing to an answer to a genealogical question or problem

Analysis is something that is performed on individual items of evidence: 1. is the item original, derivative, or authored? 2. is the information contained primary, secondary, or indeterminable? 3. why was the source created? 4. how long after the event was the source created? (memories fade) 5. was the record professionally created? (e.g., birth certificate vs. family bible) 6. was the record subject to challenge or verification? 7. is there any sign of alteration? 8. is the informant reliable?

(non-exhaustive list above)