tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749871.post7130933415478203564..comments2023-10-11T14:30:33.234+01:00Comments on Anglers Rest: Genealogy Proof, Fact and SourcingJulie Goucherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11368170005503879489noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749871.post-11656414732537045462013-12-31T15:31:24.292+00:002013-12-31T15:31:24.292+00:00Russ, thanks for commenting.
I am a real novice ...Russ, thanks for commenting. <br /><br />I am a real novice at DNA and do wonder at the value of it. I think though it is useful in a wider sense and I plan for 2014 to get to grips with the fundamentals of it and the Orlando DNA study.<br /><br />In terms of my own Orlando DNA I really need a male from my line to assist me and that is not going to happen any time soon. Frustrating? You bet it is.<br /><br />In terms of proof. I think we have to accept that some documents have simply not survived. The period you refer to especially is really hit and miss as this is around the Commonwealth Period, so many events may not have been recorded and if they did, have they survived. Sometimes you need to think outside of the box.<br /><br />Carrying on further with the proof element. I think all you can do is provide the paper trail you have, with the hypothesis you have. Just because you can not prove absolutely does not mean that what you can prove is not worthy. The evidence must speak for itself and then when the evidence runs out you can add a hypothesis and statement of understanding. All the while keeping an open mind about the events. Perhaps write a blog post - documenting the evidence you have and the hypothesis and see what falls out in terms of people with ideas or examples. Someone may come forward with something, that I describe as evidence X - something you have yet to discover. Julie Goucherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11368170005503879489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749871.post-37633468002999897482013-12-30T23:13:43.861+00:002013-12-30T23:13:43.861+00:00Julie,
I like your question: "are we making ...Julie,<br /><br />I like your question: "are we making genealogy too complicated?"<br /><br />I think that when we follow the guidelines in documents like Evidence Explained and Mastering Genealogical Proof, we can prove, to the best of ability, what event took place, when, and where. Can we PROVE it, meeting Tony's standards? I won't be able to. I can only present the Evidence that I have so far. My presentation of the evidence, hopefully, will improve as I understand those two books.<br /><br />My example is the parentage of my 7th Great Grandfather. For years and years, I have seen many documents making the claim as to who his parents are. The evidence presented it these documents haven't stood up in "my court". I see conflicting information. But I keep looking for 1650 era records in the UK. I have seen some of them.<br /><br />My issue now, event if I was convinced that some of these records and documents were Evidence, a simple DNA test, may have tosses all of the evidence out the door.<br /><br />Too Complicated? maybe, and if I only followed the paper trail, I may be able to "prove" his parentage. But the DNA ... not so sure.<br /><br />Thanks for your view of this discussion.<br /><br />RussCousin Russhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326890362591254874noreply@blogger.com