Ancestry Magazine

It’s easy to understand why researchers are advised to look for original records as sources of information for their family history. Compared to information from copies, abstracts, or summaries, the information in original records is less likely to have been changed, either accidentally or deliberately, in the process of being repeated or copied. But that doesn’t mean that all the information in an original record reflects what really happened. We need to look carefully at the record itself, and at the sources that provided the information it preserves, by asking a few key questions about both.

About the Record
Purpose: Why was the record made in the first place? Few of the records we use for genealogical research were created with family historians in mind, unless they were made by other family historians. They were generally created by organizations or individuals to meet some internal need for preserving information in a form that would best allow its recovery for their own purposes. Knowing why it was made can tell us a lot about the information that was considered most important, and for which the most effort was given in collecting it.

Think of the differences, for example, between a death certificate, where the information was collected primarily for studying public health problems on a statistical basis, and a military muster roll, where the purpose was principally to determine the number of soldiers who would be available for various types of duty.

The U.S. Census, the indispensable tool for American family history research, was initially made to accurately count the people in order to apportion seats in the House of Representatives. Over time, additional questions were added when various government departments, and later private industries, realized the census was a golden opportunity to gather information important for their interests. For the most rec ent censuses, even the needs of future genealogists have been considered and some steps have been taken to address them.

Quality: Does the record contain indications that it was recorded in less than a careful and attentive manner? Was the recorder subject to a system of supervision or oversight? Corrections, entries out of sequence, and signs of hurry or distraction like omitted or abbreviated words often suggest that a particular record may be less reliable than others of the same kind.

A look at the organizational rules or guidelines for maintaining a particular type of record will show whether there were standards or procedures for maintaining quality. For example, Roman Catholic bishops are required to inspect parish registers as part of their periodic supervisory visits, often documented with the signed and dated notation visus. (seen) following the most recent entry reviewed. For some federal censuses, an enumerator crew chief visited a statistical sampling of households already counted, and if the discrepancy rate was too high, the work would be done over.

Formality: Was the record prepared with some ceremony or formality that would impress on all concerned the need for accurate and truthful information? Statements made before witnesses, or sworn before a public official are examples. We are usually justified in relying more upon such documents than ones made more casually, like personal letters. Documents that transfer property or create legally binding obligations–deeds, wills, contracts, bonds, and checks, for example, are other examples of documents made with some formality that helps assure their reliability. Sometimes the form itself contributes to the reliability, by specifying quantities in both words and numbers, or by stating subtotals and totals, so that any mistake in those elements is immediately apparent on the face of the record.

About the Sources
An individual record–whether a paper doc ument or recorded in some other medium–usually contains information from more than one source. We must first try to determine what source provided each item or class of information in the record, either specifically or by type.

Next, to help us decide how much faith to put in a particular piece of information, we then need to ask a series of questions about each source.

1. Knowledge: How did the source come by the information?

2. Immediacy: How soon after the event was the information recorded?

3. Understanding: Did the source have the background or experience to properly interpret what was observed?

4. Bias: Did the source have any personal interest that could have colored the reporting of the information in any direction?

Applied to a Death Certificate
Here are the questions and answers we might find when we look at a death certificate filed with a governmental vital records agency. In most cases, we will not be working from the original paper certificate itself, which has to be protected from unnecessary handling for its own preservation. Instead, we will usually be looking at a photocopy provided by the governmental agency or filmed at its offices. While this is really a derivative source, not an original one, it is considered a satisfactory equivalent if it is legible and no information has been lost. This is so because there is reasonable assurance that it accurately represents the unaltered original. (More recent death certificate photocopies may have medical conditions and cause of death blocked out for privacy reasons, but this is not an alteration of the part that has been furnished.)

Some state vital records offices may furnish a photocopy death certificate with the registration office seal and certification that it is a true copy, but other states may send only a photocopy stamped “For Genealogical Use Only.” In either case, by accurately reflecting the ori ginal, it can be considered equivalent to the original.

Other states are beginning to use certificates printed from an electronic database. Unlike photocopies, these are not adequate substitutes for the original for family history purposes, even though they are certified by the agency as true and correct, because they represent a data technician’s interpretation of the entries on the original.

Sometimes the only available source is a certified paper certificate with information transcribed from old books or ledgers not suitable for photocopying. These are similarly not as reliable for family history purposes as photocopies of the original, even though they are legally equivalent official records.

Using our photocopy, which shows the information as recorded on the original certificate, we will take up the questions in order.

Purpose: Death certificates are a way to gather information for public health purposes about dates and causes of death, and age at death. They may also contain information about residence and ethnic or geographic origins that could be related statistically to causes of death. The names of an individual and his or her parents are principally useful to distinguish among individual certificates.

Quality: A physician who attended the deceased, or a pathologist who examined the remains, must certify the time and cause of death. Because of its importance and their legal responsibilities, the physician or pathologist can be assumed to have exercised a high level of care unless there is some indication otherwise.

Formality: A high degree of formality surrounds the document, which is prepared on a state-mandated form and is required by law to be filed within a specified time.

Identification of sources: There are usually two sources for the information in a death certificate–1) the physician who certified the time and cause of death, and 2) another informant who is identified by name and relati onship to the deceased. This individual provides the information on residence, length of residence, occupation, age, date and place of birth and, when asked, names and birthplaces of parents. Here’s what we might find upon questioning each source about knowledge, immediacy, understanding, and bias.

Physician as source: The physician’s knowledge of the subject’s health is from firsthand observation, either before or after death. The information is recorded within hours or days of the death, and the physician has the necessary background to make correct inferences from his observations. Bias would be a factor only if he or she attempted to cover up a medical error.

Related informant as source: Only a relative some years older than the deceased could have firsthand knowledge of age, birth date, and parents, and even this would not constitute primary information because it was not recorded near the time of the event.

Unrelated informant as source: It is very likely that the informant’s primary information about the deceased was limited to residence, occupation, and perhaps length of residence, with all other answers representing secondary information that may have been garbled in the course of the repetitions through which it eventually reached the informant.

A death certificate is an excellent illustration of a usually high-quality original record that contains information from more than one source, with individual items of information ranging from very reliable to highly questionable. Asking the right questions about an original record and each of its sources can help determine what information you can rely on as representing what actually happened, or what the true relationships were.

Donn Devine, CG, CGI, a genealogical consultant from Wilmington, Delaware, is the archivist of the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington. He is a director of the National Genealogical Society and chair of its Standards Committee, and a t rustee of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®.