(Reposted by request from another mailing board}

Although the entry made in the register at the time when the event was recorded is the "official fact", they were not always recorded correctly. For example, many a father registering the birth of his child did not remember his date and/or place of marriage correctly. I have known cases where the father of a large family has put a different date and place on each certificate. Do not use the date of the parents' marriage from a birth certificate as proof that the marriage occurred on that date in that place (or at all). You need the marriage record.

I have also known many cases where a recent widow(er) could not remember the first names of his/her long-deceased parents-in-law when registering the death of a spouse. Also cases when offspring of a subsequent marriage could not remember the correct names of a parent's previous spouses. Also one case where a stepmother could not remember the name of the child's own mother. (She put his grandmother's maiden name, spelt wrong).

I have also known cases of women being listed as 'widow of so & so' who were never actually married. Many an unmarried mother has had to pose as a widow. A son who registers the death may know that he was illegitimate, but is he going to destroy his family's respectability posthumously ? Do not take anything written on a death certificate as proof of the parentage or marital status of the deceased. It is merely an indication of where to look next.

I have also known a number of cases where a child's birth is recorded with one first name, and a middle name appears later - e.g. on a marriage certificate. (For Catholics, this might have been added at confirmation). Spellings change anyway - many a baby born as Isobel is later married as Isabella. Names go in and out of fashion. A child can't remember what he or she was christened, having been too young to notice at the time. It is only in comparatively recent times that people have had to show their birth certificates when getting married, etc.

There are also many errors due to the recording clerk not having put the names down correctly anyway. This is particularly in the older records, where the people concerned may have been illiterate. For example, one woman named Isabella was put down as Elizabeth on her son's birth certificate (in 1800). Presumably she muttered a bit, or the clerk was a bit deaf. Spelling of surnames varied randomly in the earlier centuries too - it was no good asking someone illiterate how he spelled his name. Some names are spelled differently on every certificate on which they appear. Spelling had not really been invented back then.

Note also that 'of this parish' in a Parish Register does not necessarily mean 'born there'. Families did move occasionally.

I know of a death certificate dated as recently as 1963 where the deceased's mother's name was put down as her middle name (and spelt differently from her birth registration too) - maybe that was what her grand-daughter thought that she was called.

Then there are the Censuses. In Scotland (I don't know about America) it was usual for people to be put down with the name that they were known as, not necessarily the same name as on their other documents. I once spent hours looking for a girl named Catherine. There were about 20 Catherines with the right surname and age in the index. I looked up the entry for each of them, and they all turned out to be the wrong one. I tried different ages, as I knew that she did not die until 1910. Eventually I gave up and moved on to the next sibling. Guess who was staying with him - his sister Kate.

Also, birthplaces on Censuses are not always correct. Many people put the place where they lived during their childhood. Perhaps they were asked 'where do you come from' rather than 'where were you born'. Nobody can remember being born.

In Scotland, many names are interchangeable, e.g. Jane & Jean. These were the same name, spelt 2 different ways but pronounced much the same way. Where a name is written down by somebody else, it is a matter of random chance which one is put down. The same person may be Jane and Jean alternately on different documents, and then turn up as Jennie on the Census.

Then there are the standard contractions of common names - e.g. Wm. for William, Margt. for Margaret, and so many others. Census takers used these as shorthand. Computer search engines use different rules.

this makes me wonder if any of the informaterion I have is accurate.

Wondering is good! That's what makes a good genealogist.

A friend recently said that she attacks each question by trying to prove it AND to disprove it. In doing so, sometimes the correct information becomes obvious. Sometimes she can only prove a portion of the statement, and the remainder is proven wrong, or simply remains a possibility.

The further back you go, the greater the opportunity for errors. That's why genealogists keep emphasizing "original souce documents". The more documents, the better.

Do the best that you can, quote your sources, be sure to clearly identify speculation and rumor. And remember, sometimes three brothers DID come to America together, so don't totally discount the old family stories;-)

Rel@ively,
Patrice
Alias-Board Admin
AKA-List Admin

Thanks for the responses. I do have several "official" documents (births, marriages, death records, etc.) but as it was said, the data may or may not be 100% accurate. I had an experience with a county court clerk just last week, when requesting a marriage certificate that I had finally tracked down. They sent me a "certified copy" of the record, saying that they could not copy the real one. They translated the name of my great grandfather (Oliver), and my great grandmother (Armilda) to something that was totally different (Alonn and Amelia), I suspect because the handwriting was so hard to read. In any event if I had taken their word for it I would have been tempted to throw out the record as being the wrong one. But I requested more information and they kindly "traced" the names of the bride and groom and sent them to me. Although I could see how they came up with their interpretation I could also see, by studying other letter writing, that the name could have been my great grandfather and greatgrandmother's after all, especially since my great grandmother's last name was the same. But I am not 100% sure. So I am assuming something (you know the old saying...).
In any event, I am still very inexperienced at this and I am learning something new every day. I am not an expert on tracking down authentic documentation. I try to document as much as I can, but a good portion of what I have comes from other kind people's research. Hopefully I will not lead my grandchildren down the wrong path in determining who their ancestors were.
I am always open to suggestion.
Leann