|
|
MORE ABOUT GENEAPOGRAPHY's
'CATEGORIES FOR INCLUSION' QUALIFIERS
Copyright 2007-2009 by Ancestry Register LLC and Terry J. Booth
.
All reproduction or reuse is prohibited, in whole or in part, without written permission of the author and Ancestry Register LLC.
As noted in AncestryRegister.com's discussion of Introducing Geneapology, the major distinction between geneapography and genealogy is that geneapography permits the recognition of additional relationships - oftentimes of great historical as well as anecdotal interest - which genealogy's more restrictive standards do not. Even so, strict adherence to the following is required if a Family History is to qualify as a geneapography :
|
When creating a family history, geneapography encourages including persons and relationships that may not meet genealogical standards of proof, PROVIDED that they can help produce a more comprehensive insight into its likely ancestry and origins, and PROVIDED that :
|
1) the preponderance of the evidence can reasonably justify the entry;
2) that the supporting evidence is made available for review in a footnote or elsewhere; and
3) the entry meets one of Geneapology's 5 'Categories for Inclusion' and is appropriately identified.
|
Lest there be any confusion between such family histories and those which rely solely on genealogical standards, ancestries which include one or more Geneapographic labels should always identified as a family history or a geneapography, and never be identified as a Genealogy.
|
| | |
Proper labeling is essential, the defauly assumption being that any entry or relationship meets genealogy's standard of proof (i.e. that it is 'unquestionably true'). Each entry that does not satisfy that standard, but does satisfy geneapography's requirement that the preponderance of evidence justifies its inclusion (i.e. that it is 'more likely than not to be true', must therefore be so labeled so it is readily identifiable as a geneapographical addition.
|
| |
|
There are seven 'quality of evidence' categories and six 'qualifiers' encompassed by the current geneapography standard. The first 'quality of evidence' category is the 'Proven', which as previously noted should not have an entry label since it meets genealogy's 'unquestionably true' test. Only the remaining six categories require a descriptive qualifier, which can only be used if its associated conditions and evidence requirements are met. If an entry would merit more than one qualifier, the most restrictive qualifier should be used.
|
| |
The six permitted additional entries, and their associated qualifiers, are as follows :
| 1. |
'No Harm' Entries.
| | | |
Any person entry whose parentage of partner does not qualify as 'Proven', but whose link to an earlier ancestry by evidence is proven in a book or journal of Genealogy, History or Prosopography (or similar medium) by a recognized scholar, should be identified using the 'No Harm' Qualifier. The word 'No Harm' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com Style Sheet).
| | | |
[Special Note]: Sometimes there is no uncertainty about a person's earlier ancestry, but genealogy must deny linking to it if there is uncertainty about an immediate link. For example, families may repeat a name in several generations (i.e. John Smith m. Mary Jones, who had a son John Smith m. Mary Taylor). There may sometimes be proof that Joan Smith was a dau of one of them, but uncertainty as to which generation. The 'No Harm' qualifier allows an author to assign Joan to the earlier generation (i.e. John Smith and Mary Jones) if they were at least Joan's grandparents. While this denies Joan her Mary Taylor ancestry, it is a lesser loss than denying her John Smith and Mary Jones' ancestry as traditional genealogy requires. Including a 'No Harm' link requires a thorough understanding of the history and social circumstances of the entry's family and neighbors, and may require extensive Notes to be persuasive.
|
|
| 1. |
'Probable' Entries.
| | | |
Any person entry not meeting genealogy's 'beyond a reasonable doubt' test, but satisfying the 'preponderance of the evidence' test as indicated by a cited qualified historian or other scholar in a respected history, genealogy or other source (i.e. a book or journal) - or which the author documents in accompanying notes - should include the 'Probable' Qualifier. The word 'Probable' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com Style Sheet).
| | | |
[Special Note]: Including a 'Probable' person in a database requires a thorough understanding of the history and social circumstances of the entry's family and neighbors, and may require extensive Notes to be persuasive. Entries based solely on similar names, undocumented entries in the LDS or another person's database, or family traditions lacking credible evidentiary support, do NOT merit either this qualifier or inclusion in a family history.
|
|
| 2. |
'Proposed' Entries.
| | | |
Any person entry that does not qualify as 'Probable', but whose existence and relationships are proposed and justified in a book or journal of History or Prosopography (or similar medium) by a recognized scholar, should be identified using the 'Proposed' Qualifier. Authors are NOT permitted to propose such entries unless they can demonstrate an understanding of the methodologies used by historians and prosopographers, and can present persuasive evidence in the entry's Notes. The word 'Proposed' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com Style Sheet).
| | | |
[Special Note]: This qualifier is intended to encompass various 'Descent from Antiquity' proposals like those of respected scholar Christian Settipani. Including a 'Proposed' person in a database requires a thorough understanding of a family's history, social circumstances and locality, and may require extensive Notes to be persuasive. Entries based solely on similar names, undocumented entries in the LDS or another person's database, or family traditions lacking evidentiary support, do NOT qualify for this qualifier.
|
|
| 3. |
'Legendary' Entries.
| | | |
Any person entry that lacks contemporary evidence for their existence, but whose existence and ancestry is attested to in widely accepted later histories or texts, should be identified using the 'Legendary' Qualifier. For example, certain Scandinavian and Anglo Saxon sagas like 'Beowulf' detail events and ancestries for which their is no surviving corroborative evidence. Provided they are properly qualified, their inclusion in a family may add interesting color and insight into a family's early history. The word 'Legendary' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com
| | | |
[Special Note]:This qualifier is appropriate for persons whose existence and relationships are known only from ancient histories or religious texts, but lack corroborative contemporary evidence. Since the further back in time one goes, the greater the likelihood such evidence - even if it once existed - has since disintegrated or been destroyed, only the later texts now remain. Inclusion of anyone based on such sources - whether they be early Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian or French kings, or early religious figures - requires them to receive at least the 'Legendary' or 'Mythical' qualifier.
|
|
| 4. |
'Mythical' Entries.
| | | |
Any entry for a person possessing non-human characteristics (i.e. can control the weather, lived to be 200 years old, can defy scientific principles, etc.) should be identified using the 'Mythical' Qualifier. Such entries are only permitted when they and their ancestry are noted in respected histories of pre-medieval periods, and that a 'preponderance of the evidence' indicates they were accepted as legitimate historical figures in contemporary or near contemporary texts. The word 'Mythical' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com Style Sheet).
| | | |
[Special Note]: Historians and authors may disagree whether a person is more properly identified as 'Mythical' or 'Legendary'. While most have no problem identifying Odin, Siegfrid (slayer of the dragon 'Fafnir') and Thor as 'mythical' (not just because they possessed superhuman skills or lifetimes, but because it is widely accepted they are myths), they may disagree about a figure in a still widely accepted religious text. For instance, some view the biblical Methuselah (who lived 969 years according to Genesis 5:27) as 'mythical'. But since Methuselah also qualifies as 'Legendary' (i.e. since he is only identified in a non-contemporary text and lacks corroborating contemporary evidence of his age), author's are permitted to view statements of superhuman characteristics as metaphors or 'poetic license' that only require the 'Legendary' qualifier.
|
|
| 5. |
'Improbable' Entries.
| | | |
Any person entry that does not meet either the genealogy or geneapography standards - or which respected genealogical or historical authorities have disproved - should preferably be excluded from a family genealogy. But sometimes an Author may wish to emphasize the lack of evidence for a person many others include in 'family tradition' stories, undocumented LDS or other database entries, etc.. All such persons should be identified using the 'Improbable' Qualifier. The word 'Improbable' should appear in the entry's Title Prefix, Title Suffix or Given Name in any database submitted for publication (see also AncestryRegister.com Style Sheet).
|
|
|
|
| |
For an alternate approach to the use of 'proven', 'probable', 'plausible', etc. relationships, see Ford Mommaerts-Browne's 2006 SGM Post. That approach uses dotted lines in pedigrees for less than proven relationships, albeit with little distinction between 'probable' and 'proposed' entries. Since that approach was used with proposed 'Descent from Antiquity' lines, it by design did not encompass 'legendary' or 'mythical' relationships. The separate geneapography terms of 'probable' and 'proposed' would seem more descriptive than the alternate approach's single term of 'Plausible'.
|
| |
In keeping with the above description of geneapography - and out of respect for the value of traditional genealogies - AncestryRegister.com believes that any family history and ancestry incorporating the above qualifier labels should be called a 'Geneapography'. Such histories portray a family's ancestry, history and most likely origins using as much information about the past as respected genealogists, historians and the author can now determine based on both the 'preponderance of the evidence' as well as what traditional genealogy considers to be 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
|
|
We appreciate your support of the AncestryRegister.com Website.
|
|
|
