Genealogical Proof Standard #3 - Thorough Analysis and Correlation

Even when we search broadly, locate original records, and carefully cite every source—those records do not automatically give us an answer.

In Mastering Genealogical Proof, Thomas W. Jones explains "Analysis and correlation test genealogical evidence."

Analysis helps us evaluate the reliability of each source and each detail contained within it. Correlation compares those details across multiple records to identify agreements, conflicts, and patterns. Together, they help prevent us from reaching conclusions simply because they match our expectations. 

When we find a record, it can be tempting to focus on the one piece of information we were looking for.

• A death certificate that gives us that elusive birth date.
• A census gives us a birthplace.
• A marriage record gives us the name of a spouse.

But genealogical analysis requires us to look more closely and ask:

• Who created this record?
• When and why was it created?
• Who provided the information?
• Would that person have known the answer firsthand?
• Was the information recorded near the time of the event?
• Is the record an original record or a later copy or transcription?

Analyzing Records

Most importantly, we need to remember that a record is not the same thing as a fact. A record contains information and the information becomes evidence after we evaluate its reliability.

Start by Analyzing the Source

Sources fall into three categories: 

Original records are the first recorded form. A good quality digital copy or photocopy may be considered an original record, unless it has been altered (cropped) or unreadable.

Derivative records are transcriptions, abstracts, indexes, or other reproductions. For example, an original handwritten marriage register kept by a county clerk is different from a published transcription of that register. The transcription may be perfectly accurate, but each copy introduces the possibility of error. 

Authored works are different. They are compiled interpretations or summaries created from multiple sources, such as family histories or genealogies. 

Derivative records and authored works can be extremely useful. Sometimes they may even be the only surviving source available. But when an original record exists, we should try to examine it ourselves.

Not All Information in the Same Record Is Equally Reliable

Within any record, information varies in reliability. Information falls into three categories: 
Primary information comes from someone with firsthand knowledge of the event. For example, a mother providing information about the birth of her child is reporting something she personally experienced.

Secondary information comes from someone who learned about the event from another person or source. A son reporting his mother's birthplace on her death certificate many decades later may know the answer—but he was not present at her birth.

Undetermined information is provided by an unknown informant, meaning we cannot assess its reliability. When a record does not identify who provided the details, we cannot determine whether the informant had firsthand knowledge, secondhand knowledge, or no knowledge at all. 

Census records are a common example. Most U.S. censuses do not indicate who spoke to the enumerator. For example, it could have been an older child, a second wife, a neighbor. There is no way to determine the reliability of the information given. The only exception is the 1940 U.S. census, where enumerators marked the informant with an X, allowing us to assess whether the information likely came from someone knowledgeable. 

A single record may contain both primary and secondary information. A common example would be a death certificate. An attending physician may have had firsthand knowledge of the death or its circumstances. The information concerning the death is therefore likely to be primary information.

The deceased person's birth date, birthplace, or parents' names may have been supplied by a grieving spouse, child, neighbor, or other informant decades after the person's birth. For those events, the informant was probably relying on secondary information.

It is important to evaluate each piece of information separately. It is also important to remember that primary does not automatically mean the record is correct, and secondary does not automatically mean it's wrong. Someone with firsthand knowledge can make a mistake, while information passed down through the family may turn out to be completely accurate.

Then Comes Correlation

While analysis looks at individual pieces of evidence, correlation looks across them and brings the evidence together. It asks:

• Where does the evidence agree?
• Where does it disagree?
• What patterns emerge when records are compared?

Suppose several records give birth years of 1882, 1884, 1885, and 1887. Which one is correct? We cannot simply choose the date that appears most often. We need to consider whether the information is primary or secondary, who provided it, when it was recorded, and how it compares with the other evidence. 

• Perhaps the 1882 date appears on a death certificate created 70 years after the birth.
• The 1884 estimate comes from a census.
• The 1885 date appears in a Bible entry that seems to have been written years later.
• But the 1887 church baptismal record was recorded shortly after the child's birth.

Correlation requires examining all evidence—both supporting and conflicting. Only then are we able to evaluate the information and begin forming a hypothesis.

Create a Working Hypothesis

Genealogical conclusions should be based on the best available evidence—but remain open to revision if a new record appears. As evidence accumulates, we form a working hypothesis and test it by asking:

• Does the age fit?

• Does the location fit?

• Do the family relationships fit?

• Does the chronology work?

• Do the names make sense?

• Do the records contradict one another?

• What evidence would we expect to find if our hypothesis were correct?

• What evidence would prove us wrong?

Thorough analysis and correlation help us understand what our evidence is—and what it is not. When conflicts remain after this step, the next task is not to ignore them or force agreement, but to resolve them. That process is the focus of the fourth component of the Genealogical Proof Standard.