Paula, The probable year of birth when calculated from a census is not necessarily that given in, say, Ancestry’s index. Consider the English Census which is usually taken around the end of March of the census year. If in 1911 the age of someone at the time of the census is 50, then Ancestry will give the year of birth as 1861 (1911-50). I would suggest that this is wrong because the actual dob lies between 1 Apr 1860 and 31 Mar 1861, so there is a 75% chance that the actual year of birth is 1860, which is the year I would use.
However, having said that, the census ages of the English seem to be rather like Easter – a moveable feast – so at the end of the day I doubt if it makes much difference. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ From: Paula Ryburn Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 4:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] "Facts" Thanks, Connie, for all this detail. I run into this "calculating the best date based on multiple somewhat conflicting sources" issue a lot and appreciate your insights. To the OP: Sometimes the age on census is a year different just because of the date the census was taken, at least I've found that to be the case with some of my ancestors. --Paula in Texas Researching: Adair Baker Beasley Benson Betz Bigley Blagrave Burton Chapman Clement Clough Coppernoll Costine Daulton Dinwiddie Doody Ellis Exline Field Floran Floyd Gates Goodale Gordon Gump Hale Harbaugh Hind Hopkins Hughes Hurdle Jones Klein Koyle Laswell McDonald Misner Passwaters Pelton Roberts Roche Ryburn Short Singer Sullivan Weller Williams -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Connie Sheets <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wed, August 17, 2011 4:14:50 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] "Facts" It is perfectly acceptable to use the "best" source for a fact. For example, if I have an original marriage record, I cite that for the date and location of a marriage, rather than a book of compiled marriage records. Or, if I've been to a cemetery and saw a tombstone with my own eyes, I cite that for the date of death and place of burial, rather than a book of cemetery inscriptions or FindAGrave. I cite the derivative sources (sometimes called secondary sources) only until I've found the original source (sometimes called primary source). The example you gave is a bit more complicated, however, because it involves conflicting evidence, not just original vs. derivative sources. For a date of arrival/immigration event, I would cite the steamship arrival records (assuming they are originals, or images of originals) and related immigration records, not the census. However, I would still have a census or residence event, and I would cite the census for that. In my transcription of the census, I would transcribe it exactly, and probably make a separate note or source detail comment that I know the date of immigration in the census record is wrong because of the passenger list. This assumes that you're certain there wasn't a second person of the same name who arrived on a different date. I am of the firm belief that no genealogy program is the only tool one can or should use in genealogy. For more complicated situations, I write a separate detailed research report, proof summary, or proof argument in a word processing program, with tables, charts, and proper source citations. Then, I cite that document in my database, with a brief summary and link to the document. For example, I have this summary in Legacy: "John Doe could have been born as early as Jun 1807 or as late as 1 Jun 1815. Based upon currently available data, however, the most likely range for his birth is about 1811 to 1812. This seems to be the most frequently calculated date, and is consistent with the ages recorded in the earliest available documents. Only one record, the 1900 census, explicitly states a birth year (1809), but given his advanced age, his illiteracy, and the fact that he was an "inmate" of the county poor farm, it is probably not as credible as the ages recorded in earlier census records." I entered his birth as Abt 1811-1812, and my source citation for his birth date reads: "Solomon Morgan Age Data," report prepared by Connie Sheets, (address), 10 Feb 2011; compiled from ages stated in obituary, state, and federal census records. Because the obituary, state, and federal census records are entered, transcribed and cited in Legacy as separate events, and because my Word document also contains detailed source citations, I don't see the need to cite them again for his birth date. Others will choose differently, but this is what works for me. Connie Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
