Mastering Genealogical Proof – Chapter 2 revisited

August 10, 2013

Chapter 2 – Revisited

Russ Worthington
10 August 2013

Reference:
Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof , (Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society, 2013), p 7-16

Book available from the publisher at http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/cs/mastering_genealogical_proof

If you have been following my Blog on the book, Mastering Genealogical Proof, you may has seen that I put a Source Analysis Report out for Peer Review. Never in my wildest dreams did I expect to receive comments from Elizabeth Shown Mills. I have had the pleasure of meeting her a couple of times, in person, but did not expect to have a review of my struggle with this book.

Her comments were very clear AND very helpful. But what it did for me was to cause me to go back are read Chapter 2 again and see what I was missing. Also, I am using the Evidentia software program to help me learn. That is practice what I am learning. (for me)

When I went back at the chapter AND how I was using Evidentia I missed something that was right in front of me, but didn’t see it. The book, and Evidentia are walking me through the steps, I wasn’t DOING the steps in order.

The report I was running, and putting out for peer review was a Source Analysis Report. But what I was missing, I was creating that report with the eye of one who has already done detailed analysis on the data collected. I had already been through the cycle and was returning to document the analysis. Like reading the last chapter of a book, then judging the book by its cover.

Let me try a different way of explaining this. I see a Container of something, then describing the container after I already opened the package that was inside of the container. If I consider a SOURCE as being a Container, for this report, I should be trying to describe the CONTAINER. Is it Round, is it Square, Did it come by truck, by plane or by boat.

I should be trying to describe that its round or not. If its not round, it could get to me by truck or boat. For the topic at hand, is the SOURCE an Authored Work, or is it a Record, and that Record could be original or it could be derived from records.

The container being Round or Source an Authored Work, it might contain someone interpretation of records, but it will never be a record. The Square container or Record, might come in two forms, an original record or derived, but these two records will never be Round.

Evidentia does help me through this step. I just didn’t see it that way. The opening screen:
Evidentia-0810-01

We start with this screen, then we select Document Source.

Evidentia-0810-02

I have created a Source using the Template Feature, that walks me through the fields that need to be in a Source Statement that will become a Citation later. I must Classify what this Source is. The options are Original Record, Derived Record, or Authored Work. Is the CONTAINER Round, or Square, and if square did it come by boat or truck. Evidentia helps us with that on this screen in that. It asks if we are looking at an Image Copy, then it would be Original, or is it an Image copy that is derived. Derived from something else. Is it a Clerk’s Copy, a Transcript, and Extract, Abstract or an Index, all of which would be derived.

I got that piece right, in that I made a selection, but I was looking at a Registration book. Just thinking about that, perhaps it really is a Clerk’s Copy, and that is based on the fact that the page had names in alphabetical order and would appear that they were written at the same time. I have now changed my choice from Image Copy (Original) to Clerk’s Copy (Derived). I had to go back to that image and look at the fact that the list was in alphabetical order and written about the same time. It would appear that there was some other record or piece of paper that was then put into this Register in the proper order. My Container was Square but came by boat not by truck (Derived not Original)

The next step is to Catalogue the INFORMATION in the Container. Not analyzing the information, but cataloging the information. We start, in Evidentia, by identifying the Claims from the information that we are presented with. Is it Primary, Secondary, or we can’t determine (Indeterminable).

For a US Census Record, until the 1940 Census, we could NOT tell who the Informant of the information was. All US Census until 1940 would be “Indeterminable”. We just don’t know, nor can we guess.

Evidentia-0810-03

Can we determine from each claim who gave the information. That’s simple, or is it? Information collected from that container, could be a mixture of Primary or Secondary. Did the Informant give the information directly, from experience, or from someone else or was told about the information being asked.

In the case of my Civil War Registration record, all of the information that was recorded in that book have been concurred in by other records. So, if James A Wake gave the information to the clerk for recording into that register, the informant and Classification would be Primary.

So far, I have classified the Source as Derived, and the Information as Primary, trying not to confuse the content with the container. My peer review document had confused, but my data entry, the content then the container or source.

I didn’t see any signature, nor statement of who the informant was, so I had selected indeterminable. But the information provided would have been answered by someone who knew or witnessed making it Primary information.

The third step, sticking with this first Container or Source is to evaluate the Information Collected or Evidence from This Source. Evidentia helps with that as well.

Evidentia-0810-02

We have to choices when evaluating the Claims. Direct or Indirect or Negative. The claim makes a clear statement or we have to pull information together or to be able to answer the question.

Lesson Learned: Answer the questions, in Evidentia, in the order asked. Don’t read the last chapter of the book to find out how the story ends, before reading the book.

Lesson Learned:
This experience does NOT mean that the information is correct or incorrect. I won’t find that out until I have followed these steps, in order, several times, before I can analyze ALL of the information that I have collected. That’s the next step AFTER I have found more sources.


Evidentia–Source Analysis Report – Revised

August 10, 2013

As posted yesterday (previous blog post) there was a very lively, VERY informative discussion on this report on Facebook: The dialog include my Cousin DearMYRTLE, developer Ed Thompson, Evidencia User Jenny Lanctot and Elizabeth Shown Mills. What an honor and privilege it was to see her name at the beginning of the discussion and her contribution to this discussion.

At Elizabeth Shown Mills suggestion, I submitted it to the EvidenceExplained Forum for review. It was reviewed with some very helpful recommendations.

I have made the changes, based on ALL of the learning from this experience, and have included them in this updated report.

Source Analysis

Source: U.S. Civil War Draft Registration Records, 1863-1865 Digital Image Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, 26 July 2013 ARC Identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10, NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record.

Source Citation:

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA); Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal General’s Bureau; Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865); Record Group: 110, Records of the Provost Marshal General’s Bureau (Civil War);

Collection Name:

Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records); ARC Identifier: 4213514; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6.

Source Information:

Ancestry.com. U.S., Civil War Draft Registrations Records, 1863-1865 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

Original data:

Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registrations, 1863-1865. NM-65, entry 172, 620 volumes. ARC ID: 4213514. Records of the Provost Marshal General’s Bureau (Civil War), Record Group 110. National Archives, Washington D.C.

Ancestry.com Search URL:

http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=consolidatedlistsofcivilwarreg&rank=1&new=1&MSAV=1&msT=1&gss=angs-d&gsfn=james&gsfn_x=NP_NN_NIC&gsln=wake&gsln_x=NS_NP_NN&msbdy=1828&msrpn__ftp=New+York+City+%28All+Boroughs%29%2c+New+York%2c+USA&msrpn=1652382&msrpn_PInfo=6-|0|1652393|0|2|3244|35|1652382|0|0|0|&cpxt=0&catBucket=rs&uidh=ut2&_83004003-n_xcl=f&cp=0&pcat=39&fh=0&h=899095&recoff=

Information and Evidence Analysis

Citation: “Archival Research Catalog (ARC),” digital image, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed 27 July 2013, ARC Identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10 citing NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

Draft Registration for James A Wake is found on Line 6

Claim: This reference asserts that On the registration the subject’s name is James A Wake. The information is believed to be Primary (meaning the person providing the information was a knowledgeable eyewitness or participant in the event).

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct (meaning it adequate to answer the question directly) when applied to the question of the Name Variation of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake registered in the 6th Congressional District in New York

Claim: This reference asserts that Registration Classification 2. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Military of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was in the Registration Classification 2, meaning married and over 36 at the time of the registration. (see Registration assertion)

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake appeared in the 6th Congressional District Registration record in New York. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Registration of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake registered for the Civil War Registration in the 6th Congressional District in New York.From Ancestry.com: This is a collection of lists of Civil War Draft Registrations. There were four drafts between 1863 and 1865, which included 3.175 million records. Historically, the 1863 draft was one of the most tenuous moments in the Union outside of the battles fought on Northern soil. Most of the concern was due to the draft riots that took place in New York in 1863.

    These records include 631 volumes of registries and are basically lists of individuals who registered for the draft. The records are split into two different classes, Class I are those aged 20-35 as well as those 36-45 and unmarried. Class II is everyone else that registered.

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported his residence to be New York on Christopher Street. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Residence of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake resided in New York, New York on Christopher Street

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake is 36 years as of 1 July 1863 and would have been born about 1827. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Birth of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was 36 as of 1 July 1863

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported Place of Birth to be New York. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Birth of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was born in New York

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported marriage status to be Married. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Marriage of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake is married at the time of the Registration

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported his occupation to be a Foreman at the time of registration in 1863. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Occupation of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was reported to be a foreman

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported No military service James A Wake reported No military service. The information is believed to be Primary.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Direct when applied to the question of the Military of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake had no prior military service

Evidentia–Source Analysis Report (for comments)

August 9, 2013

Evidentia512

Source Analysis Report
Civil War Draft Registration Records
Prepared 09 Aug 2013 by Russ Worthington
Source Analysis

Source: U.S. Civil War Draft Registration Records, 1863-1865 Digital Image Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, 26 July 2013 ARC Identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10, NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record.

Source Citation:

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA); Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal General’s Bureau; Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865); Record Group: 110, Records of the Provost Marshal General’s Bureau (Civil War);

Collection Name:

Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records); ARC Identifier: 4213514; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6.

Source Information:

Ancestry.com. U.S., Civil War Draft Registrations Records, 1863-1865 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010.

Original data:

Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registrations, 1863-1865. NM-65, entry 172, 620 volumes. ARC ID: 4213514. Records of the Provost Marshal General’s Bureau (Civil War), Record Group 110. National Archives, Washington D.C.

Ancestry.com Search URL:

http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=consolidatedlistsofcivilwarreg&rank=1&new=1&MSAV=1&msT=1&gss=angs-d&gsfn=james&gsfn_x=NP_NN_NIC&gsln=wake&gsln_x=NS_NP_NN&msbdy=1828&msrpn__ftp=New+York+City+%28All+Boroughs%29%2c+New+York%2c+USA&msrpn=1652382&msrpn_PInfo=6-|0|1652393|0|2|3244|35|1652382|0|0|0|&cpxt=0&catBucket=rs&uidh=ut2&_83004003-n_xcl=f&cp=0&pcat=39&fh=0&h=899095&recoff=

Information and Evidence Analysis

Citation: “Archival Research Catalog (ARC),” digital image, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed 27 July 2013, ARC Identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10 citing NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

Draft Registration for James A Wake is found on Line 6

Claim: This reference asserts that On the registration the subject’s name is James A Wake. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary (meaning we must assume the informant was not a knowledgeable eyewitness or participant in the event).

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect (meaning the evidence is implied, circumstantial or fails to answer the whole question) when applied to the question of the Name Variation of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake registered in the 6th Congressional District in New York

Claim: This reference asserts that Registration Classification 2. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Military of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was in the Registration Classification 2, meaning married and over 36 at the time of the registration. (see Registration assertion)

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake appeared in the 6th Congressional District Registration record in New York. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Registration of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake registered for the Civil War Registration in the 6th Congressional District in New York.

    From Ancestry.com: This is a collection of lists of Civil War Draft Registrations. There were four drafts between 1863 and 1865, which included 3.175 million records. Historically, the 1863 draft was one of the most tenuous moments in the Union outside of the battles fought on Northern soil. Most of the concern was due to the draft riots that took place in New York in 1863.

    These records include 631 volumes of registries and are basically lists of individuals who registered for the draft. The records are split into two different classes, Class I are those aged 20-35 as well as those 36-45 and unmarried. Class II is everyone else that registered.

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported his residence to be New York on Christopher Street. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Residence of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake resided in New York, New York on Christopher Street

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake is 36 years as of 1 July 1863 and would have been born about 1827. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Birth of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was 36 as of 1 July 1863

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported Place of Birth to be New York. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Birth of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was born in New York

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported marriage status to be Married. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Marriage of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake as married at the time of the Registration

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported his occupation to be a Foreman at the time of registration in 1863. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Occupation of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake was reported to be a foreman

Claim: This reference asserts that James A Wake reported No military service James A Wake reported No military service. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information.

  • The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect when applied to the question of the Military of James A Wake. The Civil War Registration reports that James A Wake had no prior military service

Prepared 09 Aug 2013 by Russ Worthington

Evidentia© 2012-2013


Mastering Genealogical Proof–Chapter 6, Conflicting Information

August 5, 2013

Chapter 6

Russ Worthington
04 August 2013

Reference:
Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof , (Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society, 2013)

Book available from the publisher at http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/cs/mastering_genealogical_proof

Following the Dear MYRTLE Google+ Hangout On Air discussion of Chapter 6, I thought that I would put “out there” my “conflicting” information, looking for some feedback.

I have mentioned that I am using Evidentia for this project. I am trying to determine IF James A Wake served in the Civil War. From my research, so far, this James Wake appears to be a good candidate. However, I can’t determent if this James Wake is the Jame A Wake are the same person. That piece of conflicting information is not being addressed here. James A Wake, according to a Congressional Registration was 37 as of 1 July 1863, which would suggest that he was born about 1826.

My research has found a James Wake as described below. This report is directly out of Evidentia from my data entry, to date. This James  Wake was found with the same family members in the 1860 and 1870 census, and it appears in a household which may be that of his parents and siblings in the 1850 census.

There is the Evidentia report to date:

Evidentia512

Genealogical Proof Report

for the Birth of James Wake

Prepared 05 Aug 2013 by Russ Worthington

Summary of Findings

14 July 2013 – Updated based on the 1870 Census – James Wake was 40 in this Census and would have him born between 26 Jun 1829 and 25 Jun 1830 in New York. The updated hypothisis for his birth range is now 2 August 1828 to 23 June 1831, in New York.

14 July 2013 – Looking at the 1850 Census, James Wake was 21 which would have his birth date between 02 Aug 1828 and 01 Aug 1829. This is earlier, by almost a year, from the 1860 census found initially, but still born in New York.

14 July 2013 – Based on the 1860 Census James Wake was born 24 Jun 1830 and 23 Jun 1831 in New York.

Itemized Research Findings

6 assertions from 3 sources were considered in evaluating this claim.

The 1860 US Census – James Wake[1] asserts that James Wake is 29 years old on 23 June 1860 which would mean born about 1831. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary (meaning we must assume the informant was not a knowledgeable eyewitness or participant in the event). The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect (meaning the evidence is implied, circumstantial or fails to answer the whole question).

In the 1860 US Census, James Wake 29 years old when the census was taken on 23 June 1860. This would indicate that he was born between 24 Jun 1830 and 23 Jun 1831

The 1860 US Census – James Wake[1] asserts that James Wake was born in New York. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information. The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect.

The 1860 US Census claims that James Wake was born in New York

The 1850 US Census – James Wake[2] asserts that James Wake is 21 years old on 01 August 1850 which would mean born about 1829. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information. The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect.

In the 1850 US Census, James Wake was 21 years old when the census was taken on 1 August 1850. This would indicate that he was born between 2 Aug 1828 and 1 Aug 1829. This date range is earlier then the 1860 Census of 24 Jun 1830 and 23 Jun 1831

The 1850 US Census – James Wake[2] asserts that James Wake was born in New York. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information. The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect.

The 1850 US Census claims that James Wake was born in New York

The 1870 US Census – James Wake[3] asserts that James Wake is 40 years old on 25 June 1870 which would mean born about 1830. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information. The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect.

The 1870 US Census claims that James Wake was 40 years old when the census was taken on 25 June 1870. This would indicate that he was born between 26 Jun 1829 and 25 Jun 1830. This date range falls between the 1860 Census and the 1850 Census

The 1870 US Census – James Wake[3] asserts that James Wake was born in New York. The source reviewed was a clear unaltered Image Copy of an original record. It is indeterminable whether the information being considered is Primary, and must be treated as Secondary information. The evidence supporting the claim is considered Indirect.

The 1870 US Census claims that James Wake was born in New York

Recommendations for Continuing

  • Locate James Wake in the 1830 US Census
  • Locate James Wake in the 1840 US Census
  • Locate James Wake in the 1850 US CensusLocated 14 July 2013

     

  • Locate James Wake in the 1860 US CensusLocated 14 July 2013

     

  • Locate James Wake in the 1870 US CensusLocated 14 July 2013

     

  • Locate James Wake in the 1880 US Census
  • Locate James Wake’s death date for further Census Records
  • James Wake’s age in the 1850 Census was 21, the 1860 Census 29, and the 1870 Census 40. There seems to be a conflict in the reporting of his age at the time of the Census. This may be a conflict

End Notes

11860 U.S. Census, New York Ward 9, District 1, New York, New York, Population Schedule, Page 175, Lines 10 – 13, dwelling 628, family 1358, James Wake; digital mage, Ancestry.com (Digital Image : accessed 14 July 2014); citing NARA microfilm M653, roll 797, Image 180, Familiy History Library Film: 803797

21850 U.S. Census, New York Ward 8, New York, New York, Population Schedule, Page 203A, Line 11 – 16, dwelling 344, family 863, James Wake; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 14 July 2014); citing NARA microfilm M432, roll 542, Image 10.

31870 U.S. Census, Hudson County, New Jersey, Bayonne, Population Schedule, Page 314A, Lines 30 – 35, dwelling 486, family 567, James Wake; digital mage, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 14 July 2014); citing NARA microfilm M593, roll 863; Image 84, Family History Library Film: 552362.

Prepared 05 Aug 2013 by Russ Worthington

Evidentia© 2012-2013

The question is two fold: 1) Do I have a conflict? and 2) Based on the evidence presented in the census records am I able to resolve the conflict. Please note that the To Do list is included in the report, under Recommendations for Continuing.

What is your reaction to such a report?


Mastering Genealogical Proof Study – Tracking

August 5, 2013

In Preparation for Chapter 6

Russ Worthington
04 August 2013

Reference:
Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof , (Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society, 2013), viii.

Book available from the publisher at http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/cs/mastering_genealogical_proof

I have been using Evidentia software for my study of this book.I have collected some data, actually a far amount of data, but I wanted to keep track of that somehow. I can do that in my genealogy database, but I am not ready for that yet. So, I created a Spreadsheet.

Here is what I want to capture:

  1. A Subject ID for Evidentia, to keep names straight
  2. Surname
  3. First or Given Name
  4. Middle Name, if any
  5. Birth Date
  6. Birth Location
  7. Marriage Date
  8. Marriage Location
  9. Death Date
  10. Death Location
  11. Record Search Order
  12. Record Searched
  13. Residence

I think that the Order that I find the records may become important, so I want to track that. Having it in the order I searched may help out later in my project.

The Record Searched, I called it above, but in my EXCEL worksheet, I just say Record. What record did I find information, OR not find information. I found a Civil War Registration Record, but I didn’t find a Civil War Service Record. I want to remember that.

Residence is to help develop family groups. I am NOT using my genealogy database, at this point, but I wanted a way to sort to show the family groupings by the Residence Claim.

Sorting is key here.

I am creating a Subject ID for each different person I found or identified. They will help when or IF I need to merge two subjects. I couldn’t tell the difference from the Record and what it claimed, but during the analysis I may be able to resolve that conflict, two different names.

This is for TRACKING purposes for me:

Evidentia-MGP-Tracking

This is sorted by Name. The yellow hi-lites are reminders that I have some conflicts to resolve. Almiria or Elmira; was she born in New York or New Jersey.

It’s not hi-lighted, yet, because I don’t know if James Wake and James A Wake are two people of ONE person. I am started with the Civil War congressional registration record for James A Wake, and the question I am trying to answer, did he serve in the Civil War?

I won’t infer (using what I learned with the study of Inferential Genealogy) anything here. That will be done in Evidentia. Also, not all of the data (claims) I find will be tracked at this point.

I’ll also be able to spot holes in my research. For example, the last entry is Wi


Mastering Genealogical Proof – Case Study – Step 1

July 27, 2013

Step 1: Source Citations (case study)

A few weeks ago, a friend of mine gave me a piece of paper, as she wanted me to look up her Civil War ancestor. She didn’t have a lot of detail, only this sheet of paper.

CWDraftRegistration-Wake_JamesA-p1

The citation page was attached:

 CWDraftRegistration-Wake_JamesA-p2

I had not seen this type of record before, but my first place to look was to go to Fold3.com to see if there was a Civil War Record. I searched and browsed based on the information in these two pieces of information. Nothing was found.

Since this image came from Ancestry.com, I wanted to locate it and “see for myself”. Found it quickly, but I wanted to know more about this collection.

I went to “About U.S., Civil War Draft Registrations Records, 1863-1865” to see what it might tell me. (Ancestry.com Operations 2010)

This is a collection of lists of Civil War Draft Registrations. There were four drafts between 1863 and 1865, which included 3.175 million records. Historically, the 1863 draft was one of the most tenuous moments in the Union outside of the battles fought on Northern soil. Most of the concern was due to the draft riots that took place in New York in 1863.

These records include 631 volumes of registries and are basically lists of individuals who registered for the draft. The records are split into two different classes, Class I are those aged 20-35 as well as those 36-45 and unmarried. Class II is everyone else that registered.

The registry contains information including:

  • Class
  • Congressional district
  • County
  • State
  • Residence
  • Name
  • Age on July 1, 1863
  • Race
  • Profession
  • Married status
  • Birthplace
  • Former military service
  • Remarks

The actual draft registration records are available in NARA regional archives and sometimes contain more information than the consolidated lists.

In the case of James A Wake, he was listed in Schedule II of the Consolidated List, on page 201.

Looks like I better start a project on this person. As I have learned through the study of Mastering Genealogical Proof (Jones 2013), I need to craft a Question, actually, I will create a couple of questions:

  1. Did James A Wake serve in the Civil War?
  2. Can I place him into a family?
  3. How is James A Wake related to the person who gave me this paper?

I am going to use the software program, Evidentia to help build my case for these three questions.

Here is what I suggested earlier, for my process.

clip_image004_thumb.jpgFor this case study, I am going to start with what I know, based on the source listed above.

I will create a Source Template for this image, as there wasn’t one provided, based on Evidence Explained, page 555 (Mills 2007).

That is difficult to read, but here is what I looks like, with I generate a report in Evidentia.

Evidentia

Claims by Source

CW Draft Registartions Records

Prepared 27 Jul 2013 by Russ Worthington

Below you will find the claims you have documented for the selected source.

Source Listing: U.S. Civil War Draft Registration Records, 1863-1865 Digital Image Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, 26 July 2013 ARC identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10, NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

First Reference: “Archival Research Catalog (ARC),” digital image, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed 27 July 2013, ARC identifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10 citing NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

I then entered the information from this image, as Claims in Evidentia.

Here is what I read this source to claim:

Civil War – Draft Registration Records 1863 – 1865

  • James A Wake appeared in the 6th Congressional District Registration record in New York
  • James A Wake reported his residence to be Christopher Street
  • James A Wake is 36 years as of 1 July 1863 and was born about 1827
  • James A Wake reported marriage status to be Married
  • James A Wake reported his occupation to be a Foreman at the time of registration 1863
  • James A Wake reported Place of Birth to be New York
  • James A Wake reported no former military service

This was entered as individual claims into Evidentia, which now looks like this.

Now the Claims are linked to a Subject.

{Registered}              James A Wake

{Residence}              James A Wake

{Birth}                       James A Wake

{Marriage Status}      James A Wake

{Occupation}            James A Wake

{Birth}                      James A Wake

{Military}                  James A Wake

The Claims based on the Source Report now looks like this.

Below you will find the claims you have documented for the selected source.

Source Listing: U.S. Civil War Draft Registration Records, 1863-1865 Digital Image Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, 26 July 2013 ARC Idenifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10, NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

First Reference: “Archival Research Catalog (ARC),” digital image, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2010, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed 27 July 2013, ARC Idenifier: 4213415; Archive Volume Number: 3 of 6, Record Group: 10 citing NARA; Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Povost marshal Generals Bureau Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records)

This reference asserts that:

  • James A Wake appeared in the 6th Congressional District Registration record in New York.
  • James A Wake reported his residence to be Christopher Street.
  • James A Wake is 36 years as of 1 July 1863 and was born about 1827.
  • James A Wake reported his occupation to be a Foreman at the time of registration 1863.
  • James A Wake reported Place of Birth to be New York.
  • James A Wake reported no former military service.
  • James A Wake reported marriage status to be Married.

So far, none of the questions can be answered. A negative source entry will be entered on the Name, James A Wake, as not being found in Fold3.com by Searching and Browsing.

Since there is only one Source entered so far, AND we haven’t reviewed Chapter 5 of Mastering Genealogical Proof (Jones 2013). I will do some searching for US Census, as we know at this point, that James A Wake was born about 1827 in New York, and was still in New York in 1863 when he registered with the 6th Congressional District.

At this point, I am only reporting and entered into Evidentia, this one Source information. Not enough information to evaluate, and am not even sure that it’s the right person. Basing the “right person” from the person who gave me the information.


Mastering Genealogical Proof – And Suddenly the light bulb went on ….

July 23, 2013

And Suddenly the light bulb went on ….
Russ Worthington
22 July 2013

Reference:
Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof , (Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society, 2013), viii.

Book available from the publisher at http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/cs/mastering_genealogical_proof

The Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) has been a mystery to me. I think that every time I hear someone speak on this topic, and in this book, I “hear” or “read”

clip_image002

A couple of the terms may be different, depending on who is presenting.

Please understand that I am not saying that there is anything wrong with this, and in fact, I think it is very accurate. But, sometimes have issues with theories. Not good in higher level math classes. In taking courses when I would go to school for my job, some classes were a waste of time, especially computer software. The instructors were excellent, but they taught using examples that I couldn’t relate to.

Today I was working on Chapter 5 of Mastering Genealogical Proof, when the Light Bulb Turned ON. (Can’t say “went off” based on some comments that were made with we were talking about Chapter 4, with Dear MYRTLE).

I have been trying to understand where the genealogy software program(s) fit into this theory. The terms were also confusing to me. Conclusion? I’ll probably never have a conclusion on anyone in my family tree. That term to me, is the end of the line, I am done, I have concluded that …… Not in my life time.

Slowly but surely, the study of this process has introduced a new way of thinking about what it is that I do.

Somehow, from the very beginning of my research I heard “cite your sources”. In fact, back in the PodCast days, I probably heard that from Dear MYRTLE, and I am sure others. It didn’t take me be a couple of days to figure out why that was so important. I turned “cite your source” to “where did I get THAT information from?” I got it. The quality of the sources, not so much, but I could almost get back to where I found that piece of the puzzle.

I have an almost 9,000 person database, pretty well document family tree that I can tell you where I got the information from, but the presentation of the citations left lots to be desired. Luckily Evidence Explained (Mills 2007) came out, my genealogy database software embraced what was included in that book, so I don’t have to worry, so much, about how to generate a credible citation. Spent most of 2012 reviewing and updating my Source information. Still have lots to go, but “working on it”.

I am getting my genealogy database in shape, but now I am trying to understand this thing called GPS. Working through the steps seen earlier, I was trying to figure out where my program fit in. I also use two other Genealogy Programs, Evidentia and GenDetective, and trying to see where they fit in.

I think I had made a blog post earlier that I have no plans for starting over, but to pay more attention to the GPS process, and Evidentia and GenDetective fit into GPS, I think. I know that they both have already helped me in my research, but I was still trying to fit that linear chart above, into my day to day family research.

Today, studying Chapter 5 (Jones 2013), it dawned on me, that I had the wrong picture. What if it looked like this:

clip_image003

Oh, not this made sense to me. It wasn’t linear after all, it was a circle. If I have written a “conclusion”, start around the circle again, find no more new sources to cite, I can stop going in the circle FOR NOW. That doesn’t mean that I don’t get back into the circle when / if I find a new source of information. Because as I go, I am writing as I go. Not just Citing the Source, which is what I had been doing, but spending time with it, writing down the analysis, and whatever follows Chapter 5, but I am guessing, especially that last step, Writing a Conclusion, will have some more work for me to do. I’m OK with that. BUT, it’s still a circle. Where do I START became my first question.

What if this was my chart: …..

clip_image004

Backing up to my homework for Chapter 4, that was the output of the Source Citation circle above.

I may now have to back up to Chapter 4 again, to see where Evidentia, GenDetective and Family Tree Maker fit in. They are in there somewhere.

There must be a couple of more blog posts in there somewhere, to explain this process, as I understand it, so that my research can be improved.

References

Jones, Thomas W. 2013. Mastering Genealogical Proof. Arlington, Virginia: National Genealogical Society.

Mills, Elizabeth Shown. 2007. Evidence Explained. Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Company.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,676 other followers

%d bloggers like this: