tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post6526287175659004738..comments2024-03-21T19:08:05.737-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: Expanding Our View of What is Possible in Genealogical ResearchJames Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-29770248511595711722015-04-14T10:57:56.320-07:002015-04-14T10:57:56.320-07:00Much of what I learned collecting stamps has helpe...Much of what I learned collecting stamps has helped me with my genealogical research. You make some very good points that give me some ideas about future posts. Thanks so much. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-88071724698095744432015-04-14T09:30:49.544-07:002015-04-14T09:30:49.544-07:00It is one thing finding many new links to 2nd and ...It is one thing finding many new links to 2nd and 3rd and even 4th cousins, and expanding a tree sideways but it is quite another for most people trying to break backwards from certain known difficult points; for example London prior to the census, England & Wales during the rise of nonconformism between the late 17th century and 1753 Hardwicke's Marriage Act, and during the English civil wars when documents were destroyed. I know that counties in some of the US states have also suffered great loss of records and it is only the most painstaking work bringing together many sources and with deep investigation and weighing of evidence that allows small inroads be made into the genealogy puzzles and conundrums that those record gaps leave. <br /><br />Most of the "matches" on Ancestry don't help with these problems, often leading to other people's trees that are obviously erroneous. We may drown in unsifted information that the algorithm thinks is correct but I will be impressed if an algorithm can pick up clues from original documents (assuming that machines can be taught to read old style handwriting) using names and places that are spelled in a fluid manner and the sort of evidence that is obvious to a human but less so to a machine. <br /><br />Now, maybe it will come to pass that one day we will all be researching in the 17th century and earlier because we have built and confirmed all our trees back to that date, but somehow I doubt it, there are just too many record gaps, too much confusing evidence that needs to be weighed up and too much record context that needs to be taken into account. There are also too few people who are serious about getting their genealogy back this far. <br /><br />In my personal research I am far more interested in going back on each direct ancestral line than collecting cousins, and eventually all researchers get stuck with each line. I have sticking points from the 19th century on some lines and the 10th century in others, and all the other centuries in between. Like many people I have ended up choosing one or two family lines to really concentrate on finding out about, historical context, deep documentary research, although I will be excited to go backwards where I have previously got a little stuck due to records not yet being available online. I know many other researchers who feel the same way - names are one thing but it is the documentary historical research puzzle that is the really interesting part. If you take away that puzzling it out aspect then genealogy becomes something like stamp collecting. I believe there will still be a place for evidence based scholarly research, professional or amateur, even after the algorithms have connected everyone together.<br /><br />Mostly though I eagerly await the online translation service that will flawlessly translate medieval and early modern Latin documents into English. That I will get excited about!<br /><br />Helen Osbornhttp://osbornresearch.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-76272880989204131002015-04-14T08:51:02.133-07:002015-04-14T08:51:02.133-07:00Hey, that might be worth a shot! :) But then there...Hey, that might be worth a shot! :) But then there would not be as many family historians around for us to talk to. Thanks for continuing to provide great, informative commentary.Discover Genealogyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10751791688359495496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-85934161383321581182015-04-14T07:37:33.082-07:002015-04-14T07:37:33.082-07:00Of course, the points you make are valid. But do w...Of course, the points you make are valid. But do we lock genealogy up into a "profession" like law or medicine and start prosecuting people for the unauthorized practice of genealogy?James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-24918763741718022142015-04-14T07:15:35.173-07:002015-04-14T07:15:35.173-07:00James,
Everything you say is (sort of) true. Yes ...James,<br /><br />Everything you say is (sort of) true. Yes it is easier to search online and there is an enormous amount of data available in various websites that can be helpful. One of the reasons, though, that you find it easier and quicker to use technology is that you spent all those decades going through documents and checking facts, so you know what is useful, what is accurate and what pertains to your particular family.<br /><br />The main problem now is that everyone getting into the game is not so knowledgeable. Many people think that doing genealogy is a walk in the park – just plug in a name and away you go, instant family tree! <br /><br />No matter what is said about the Internet, not all information about the people who may be your relatives in online. Far from it! And I think I have even seen you comment about that. There of thousands of pages of information in thousands of record office, libraries, court houses, government warehouses, etc. that have yet to be digitized; they probably never will be.<br /><br />If you do not learn what information is relevant to your family history studies and how to go about finding it, then your results will be nothing but shallow summaries of the real story, the kind we see every day in published family trees.<br /><br />Technology may be taking over much of the mundane work of sourcing some information but it won’t replace the considered thought processes of putting it all together no matter what those who think that there are or will be computer programs that can link everything seamlessly. If that were even possible all you would have to do in plug in your own name and a family tree going back hundreds of years would magically appear.<br />Discover Genealogyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10751791688359495496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-53533443938960623782015-04-07T14:20:39.358-07:002015-04-07T14:20:39.358-07:00I love this article.
Yes, the old way is gone. L...I love this article. <br /><br />Yes, the old way is gone. Long live the new way.Louis Kesslerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11704667321407909489noreply@blogger.com