You may also like to read:

If you enjoy reading this blog, you may also like to read the articles I write each week as the Springfield Genealogy Examiner and as the Ozarks Cultural Heritage Examiner. Be sure to subscribe so you don't miss a one. You may also enjoy reading about the family stories in my novels at The Homeplace Series blog. You can sign up for e-mail reminders.

Friday, April 8, 2011

Follow Friday - 8 Apr 2011

Follow Friday
8 Apr 2011

My recommended article this week comes at the question, "What is genealogy research?" from one direction. I'd like to interpret what I see in this fine article from a slightly different perspective. It seems to me there are two primary objectives in doing what we do: 1) build a 'family tree' for ourself, or for others, that as nearly as possible 'mirrors reality,' and 2) is based on independently verifiable sources and 'best evidence available.' The professional genealogist uses 2) to accomplish 1). We should all aspire to do the same.

To me, whether "it has been done before" is not relevant. Even if a report, a tree, a family story or carefully cited genealogical compilation in a respected journal has information relative to the family under study, each fact and relationship must be analyzed and demonstrated to 'mirror reality' in order to be used. The professional must be compensated for doing that. The non-professional must do it to accomplish the goal. Each and every time we may be tempted to 'short-cut' any element of 2), for whatever reason, we reduce the likelihood of achieving 1).

The article for this week:
"What if it Has Already Been Researched?" posted by Kory Meyerink, with ProGenealogists: Official Ancestry.com research firm


I look forward to your thoughts and comments.


Families are Forever!  ;-)

2 comments:

  1. Since we each bring different backgrounds and perspectives to the research, we each frame what we are doing in different ways. Though several people may start with the same basic "facts" we tend to be asking different questions about our families and thus a family history is told very differently by different researchers.

    P.S.--The link to Kaye Meyerink's article doesn't seem to be working.

    P.P.S. I'm getting better with the technology and, assuming you get this, have figured out how to post comments. :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you, Sheryl.
    Fixed the link... sorry, something Blogger and I are having an issue with... ;-(

    I agree on your first paragraph. VERY well stated, also. ;-)

    ReplyDelete