Fact versus Probability:

[Scrums]

Hi,

Just wondering where to draw the line with the above subject....

Fact: My Grandfather's mother was nee Stephenson - this was on the birth certificate of 1876.

An Eliza Stephenson married a Ferguson Whitaker (My GGrandfather's name) in Mar 1874 in Bradford.

An Eliza Stephenson was born of the parents John & Henrietta in Sept 1854 in Bradford

In 1844 in Bradford - a John Stephenson married Henrietta Sheard.......

Henrietta was born in 1822 - "Robertown" - Halifax ?

no contradictions so far, all tie in to any available census evidence....that I've found.

...do I go with this, or am I in danger of making it up as I go along ?

Chris

[Boongie Pam]

Sometimes it is easy to find a marriage or birth that fits your timeframe perfectly but personally I wouldn't be happy without a cross piece to bring it "nearer" to looking like a fact.

Before I put anyone on my tree I require 3 pieces of info that support the relationship.

If ALL the available census tie in and you are confident and there are no other complicating factors then I'd go with it.  One thing that can make you more confident is find all the other people born with a given name over a 10 year period are they in a similar area?  If they are then beware.  You can do the same with the free online census 1881 and 1901.

Pam
 

[gennig]

Hi Chris

I am going to make an assumption here.  From what you have written I am assuming that you have not got the actual certificates except your grandfather's.
So the only way to turn probability into fact is to confirm everything by obtaining each certificate, working backwards from the marriage of Eliza and Ferguson. The census will then help confirm you are on the right track.

Cheers

Genni

[RJ_Paton]

I would agree with gennig here .... my own method of working involves
1. obtaining the information
2.  obtaining the certificates
3. recheck original information against certificates
4. next generation back ......
5. recheck this new information against original and certificates and keep going.

If theres a blip ..... use language towards machine or self which is unrepeatable in reasonable company and start again .... a little wiser 

[Nick Carver]

When dealing with common forenames or surnames, greater circumspection is required. John is a very common forename, Henrietta, less so. Assign a degree of confidence to your findings based on the above and then find supporting evidence as others have said. Once you get back beyond 1837, you will not get certificated evidence, so will have to work on the balance of probabilities then. I have only just uncovered my first Smith in the tree, but as we are back to the 1730s in a small Yorkshire village, I may be able to make more progress. That is what I call a record that requires the addition of a degree of caution. On the other hand, I fully expect that if I can find any evidence of the antecedents of my ancestor with the best name. Hazelrigg Bullman, that I am fairly sure they are correct.