Czech Out Your Ancestors
Menu
  • About
  • Contact
  • Resources
  • DNA
  • Czech Book Club
Menu

Secondary information on an original document

Posted on 2 December 2016 by Kate Challis
Sometimes genealogists get into the habit of believing that because something was an “original source” or handwritten, it is therefore always correct.

While there is some truth in the idea that the more a document is transcribed, the more likely it is to contain errors (since at every stage of the transcription and/or translation process, there is a high likelihood of introducing errors.) But it’s a logical fallacy to apply this principle in reverse; just because a document is original does not mean that it is correct.

In fact, what does it even mean for “a document” to be correct? Truly, documents do not speak for themselves, but rely on the interpretation of humans. Even a single piece of paper with one scribbled word in pencil might contain multiple layers of information. When you are a genealogist, you have the pleasure (and responsibility) of putting on your Sherlock Holmes detective hat and trying to deduce all the multiple layers of meaning you can from a document. “Wow, this record looks like it is burnt on the edges. I wonder what happened to it.” “My ancestor signed his name but he spelled it ‘wrong’; why?!” “Oh, the father’s name is written in different handwriting. What does that mean?” Actually, it is not tedious or boring in the least; this is precisely what brings these documents to life and helps you to gain a closer connection to the humans of the past.

Here is an example my brother pointed out to me last night:

Frank Charles Janda was born in Texas to Josef Janda, one of the first settlers of Fayetteville (a distant “knee” relative, aka an n-th cousin, like basically everybody else from this town!) On his death certificate, however, there is an error. It says his father is “Frank Charles Janda Sr” when we know that it was really Josef.

Now, consider for a moment. Was “the death record wrong”, or was “a piece of information on the death record” wrong? Clearly, it is the latter. Information, not records, can be right or wrong.

The informant here was someone with the last name of Hruska, perhaps a married daughter? Was she a first-hand witness to the death? Well, whether or not she was in the room, she apparently was present sometime immediately surrounding the death, as she was the one who apparently filled out the paperwork.

But is it likely that she was also present at his birth? Well, if this was his daughter (I don’t know if it was), then obviously not. Perhaps she witnessed it from the heavens , but that memory was obviously veiled when she was born on earth (a metaphysical, not a genealogical, issue). So basically, what the witness knew about his birth is directly tied to their relationship. If she was his daughter, at best she heard about the birth second-hand.

Another clue for this being an error is the fact that it is written as “Frank Charles Janda Sr.” Somehow, this makes it seem like the witness didn’t know, and was just guessing. Or perhaps she was under duress during a difficult period of grief.
The fact is, documents contain information that we, as genealogists, must evaluate. The information’s validity/truthfulness is related to how the informant received that information, whether they were a firsthand witness, or they heard it through the grapevine.

This leads to an interesting philosophical question: can one really have first-hand knowledge of one’s birth? Technically, we were all present, but since we cannot remember it, is our knowledge secondhand?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search

Categories

Archives

  • March 2025
  • July 2021
  • January 2021
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
©2025 Czech Out Your Ancestors | WordPress Theme by SuperbThemes