tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post7233395944549272777..comments2024-03-21T19:08:05.737-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: Can I read this stuff? Part Five of the limits of genealogical researchJames Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-720944368709345092011-04-09T10:43:48.633-07:002011-04-09T10:43:48.633-07:00I was pleased to get a referral to this - a very t...I was pleased to get a referral to this - a very thought-provoking article which I enjoyed reading. I like some of your phrases e.g. "Copying is not research" and "Genealogy without verified sources is nothing more than fiction in pedigree format". Many thanks for reminding us all.ScotSuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01412874349376253984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-24757256105655144552011-04-08T19:16:10.057-07:002011-04-08T19:16:10.057-07:00Always interesting. Again, what constitutes proof...Always interesting. Again, what constitutes proof and evidence for what time period? Is the Bible merely a religious book or does it have historical meaning as well. That is, because the four gospels are written before the end of the 1st century by men who either knew Jesus or knew someone who knew Jesus, we accept that Jesus existed. However, there is no other historical evidence for his existence. The first known reference to Christians as a sect of Judaism comes from Josephus who lived in the late 1st century. But he never talks about Jesus himself.<br /><br />So, using historical and genealogical proof standards, did Jesus exist? I think yes, because I can treat the gospels as diaries or first hand accounts of contemporary events. Not everyone would agree. <br /><br />So, how far back can you go? As far back as the paper trail can take you (for western Europeans probably no earlier that 500-600 AD) and that's with royalty thrown in. <br /><br />Do you have to verify your sources--yup. Do you have to verify all secondary work? Nope. Some lines I have were researched by outstanding genealogists and I trust their research. It is sourced and carefully thought out. I choose to rely upon it. I do that because my time and resources are limited. For secondary works not sourced and by people I don't regard that highly I do verify. I've often found them to be greatly mistaken. Then I write an article to correct the mistake and someone else will have to decide whether or not to rely upon me.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17205797878738290997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-1109566378038731582011-04-07T21:36:43.549-07:002011-04-07T21:36:43.549-07:00Keep this series going, it's great stuff. But ...Keep this series going, it's great stuff. But I do have to take issue with a couple things you wrote. First, it's not that little was written during the 7th-10th centuries, but little survived. Second, "Dark Ages" was a pejorative description from people in the 17th century onwards looking back. They thought the people of the Middle Ages were backwards. We could use the term just as easily to describe the 17th century, but it would be just as inappropriate now as it was then. No credible medieval historian uses the term today, except in historiographical discussions.<br /><br />Finally, there are thousands of medieval manuscripts that have barely ever been studied, if at all. Plenty of scholarship on medieval sources in French, German, and other languages exists that's never been translated into English. Previously unknown manuscripts are still discovered every once in a while, in archives, monasteries, libraries, private collections, or loose leaves stuck in the pages of separate, unrelated manuscripts. There's probably little of genealogical value in any of them, but as you're so aptly pointing out, that's true of medieval records in general.MNFamilyHistorianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219791448054464725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-86170773412181041262011-04-07T06:57:41.680-07:002011-04-07T06:57:41.680-07:00Very interesting series, James. I do agree with yo...Very interesting series, James. I do agree with you. Personally I just don't understand the need to trace your ancestors back to Charlemagne or anyone else that far back in history.Nira Porter Chamblisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01915093344759096886noreply@blogger.com