TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-06 > 1023105098


From: Lee Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Place of death
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 07:51:38 -0400
In-Reply-To: <a.1fcaadc6.2a2c5ec5@aol.com>


wrote:
>If you don't bother to note that Great Aunt Ida's bible was the source, then
>who's to know that you didn't just pick a date and place out of the air? I
>try to source everything. So what if another researcher can't find that old
>family bible? At least they know (from my citation) that it once existed.

Yes, but then there was my 21G-GF's Bible --
Hoffman family, [ITAL:]The Holy Bible containing the
Ould and New Testaments: Translated out of The Original
Toungues: and with the former translations diligently
compared and revised.[:ITAL] (Mainz, Germany: Hans
Gutenberg, 1254); John M. Hoffman, Camargo, Kentucky

In other words, if someone were going to forge a date, they could easily
forge a Source to support that date. <g>


Still, I agree that if someone sees information in an obscure document,
that document should be referenced even if it later turns out to be
lost. So if I did see my ancestor's Bible, some courthouse record, or
whatever document making notes from it enough to create some kind of Source
record, then I should cite that Source that supports the information. This
remains true even if the document is later lost. All I can do is record
what I saw at the time. If I later learn that the document is lost, I
should probably find the circumstances of the loss and relate those in my
citation. But as you say, this would provide some indication that the
document did exist.


Up until about five years ago when I came into possession of my 2G-GM's
Bible, the only record that she married my 2G-GF was a listing in a book of
Re-constructed Marriages in the county taken from gravestones because
marriage records were burned in 1864. The gravestones were used to
_assume_ a marriage and thus I was relying on an assumption from someone
else (probably a Surety of zero). Even so, that assumption was (and would
be) fairly valid given that the stone has "wife of" and her death date was
earlier than his. Still that stone could also be forged. <g>


Lee Hoffman/KY
TMG Tips: <http://www.tmgtips.com>;
My website: <http://www.tmgtips.com/lhoffman>;
A user of the best genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG)

This thread: