All Evidence Must Be Considered

If you have served on a jury in either a civil or criminal case you know that you had to deal with “evidence” as allowed and presented in the case. And, if you recall, much of the time in the jury room was spent “weighing all the evidence” to reach a verdict.

Proving a pedigree--say, for example, proving that your father, Charles Endicott, was the son of a particular William Endicott--requires that you gather evidence to support your “case.” You must analyze this information and present it to all who may someday want to know how on earth you arrived at the conclusion Charles Endicott was the son of William, when they have evidence that Charles was the son of Ebenezer.

Evidence simply means information. The information may be correct. It may be false. But a genealogist must consider all evidence when compiling a pedigree. A genealogist is really a one-person jury who must consider what information to accept or reject. Conclusive proof is not possible in genealogical research.

You may be able to prove Charles was the son of Mollie Clark Endicott (if there was a credible eyewitness to his birth), but that still will not prove his paternity, even though said Mollie was the wife of William at the time, and presumably the father of the child.

In the absence of personal knowledge for most genealogies, the rule is that ancestry may be established by a preponderance of the evidence. This does not mean that if six sources say Charles is the son of William that is “preponderance.” Preponderance means the quality of the evidence, not necessarily the quantity of it.

For example, if you find a valid will in which William named Charles as his son, that is considered very reliable evidence. And even if 10 other sources (of lesser quality) disagree, the preponderance of the evidence is that found in the will.

In genealogy identifying individuals is always a problem. There may have been three or four William Endicotts--of similar age and living in the same locale--who could have been the father of your Charles. You must check out all these individuals. Even if you find only one William Endicott in the right place and time and of the right age, you must establish his identity in order to “prove” he is the father of your ancestor.

Genealogical evidence has another problem: the validity of references. If references are given--and too many genealogies being compiled today do not even include references, let alone proper citation of them--you must check the original sources. Do not rely on secondary sources used as references. Many mistakes in genealogies have been perpetuated for generations and reprinted numerous times. Be aware that there has been fraud, honest error, negligence and incompetence in the compilation of genealogies, local histories and record sources.

The best book on this subject, a book all serious genealogists should read, is Noel C. Stevenson’s “Genealogical Evidence: A Guide to the Standard of Proof Relating to Pedigrees, Ancestry, Heirship and Family History,” available from Aegean Park Press, P.O. Box 2837, Laguna Hills, Calif. 92654 for $20.80 postpaid. (California residents must add sales tax.)

Myra Vanderpool Gormley is the author of a recently published book titled “Family Diseases: Are You at Risk?” It is available from Genealogical Publishing Co., 1001 N. Calvert, Baltimore, Md. 21202 for $17.45 postpaid.