tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post4607859566256763967..comments2024-03-26T12:01:39.690-07:00Comments on A Family Tapestry: Back to That Research PlanJacqi Stevenshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-35969215480573599492013-09-28T22:39:04.539-07:002013-09-28T22:39:04.539-07:00Well, if you leave enough of a find-able trail, a ...Well, if you leave enough of a find-able trail, a <i>careful</i> researcher in the future will realize the mistake. We've all run across errors from past records--even government documents and headstones, for crying out loud!--and know that you can't just rely on the information on one solitary record.Jacqi Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-76513539759201893702013-09-27T08:41:09.485-07:002013-09-27T08:41:09.485-07:00I don't know it seems like a chronological lis...I don't know it seems like a chronological list..unless, someone messed up, the certificate was found and entered out of sequence. It is one year or the other. <br />Recently I went back to my Father In Laws obit, that my Mother In Law wrote, it gives his graduation date as 1933 when it is in fact 1932. I am certain it will mess someone up someday. Hopefully I have left enough 1932 info behind that someone runs across the correct info. Far Side of Fiftyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07995757632158408442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-9667379932694489492013-09-25T23:14:48.127-07:002013-09-25T23:14:48.127-07:00Ah, those little puzzles of the research life...I ...Ah, those little puzzles of the research life...I guess this is one of those times when I get to insert one of those phrases like "the preponderance of the evidence..."Jacqi Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-91769852076403640652013-09-25T23:12:01.709-07:002013-09-25T23:12:01.709-07:00It does seem odd. That's why I was hoping the ...It does seem odd. That's why I was hoping the logic of it all was that they needed to insert some "1895" dates in the midst of the journal entries for 1896. Go figure. At least I have confirmation that they were married, whether the one date or the other.Jacqi Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03471698670217119444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-88989765520464829752013-09-25T14:19:44.297-07:002013-09-25T14:19:44.297-07:00I don't know -- the record certainly seems chr...I don't know -- the record certainly seems chronological. I can't even imagine the circumstances that would cause someone to insert an old record in the middle of a new record. I realize that often such records were compiled after the fact, but ....Wendyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17863357756727783017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5034998384799920884.post-88233712183902377462013-09-25T06:27:49.382-07:002013-09-25T06:27:49.382-07:00That is an interesting record. It's odd that ...That is an interesting record. It's odd that they would write the year in the places that they did. It seems like "fill in the blanks" at random times. It looks like a "6" to me. *scratches head*Intense Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08441598926026727682noreply@blogger.com