Evidence Analysis Issues

Dear Editor,

Hello,

I am not sure this is the correct place to ask this but here goes.

When you are writing a case study or report and you come across a spelling variation for a  place name should you try and find a reference that lists the specific variation and then cite that source? 

I am assuming some variations are obvious and don't need a citation while others may not be so obvious and may require a reference. I am just not sure about when something is obvious. Just because it is obvious to me doesn't mean it is obvious to someone else!

Hi, I don't know much of anything about microfilm. I'm guessing the answer to the question in the subject is no but wanted to find out more about it. I am not speaking of originals that have been modified and then microfilmed (that has been ruled out in this case) but rather the modification of the finished microfilm itself. This would also include not obvious ways of inserting a new, modified picture onto an existing roll of microfilm that is derived from the unmodified microfilm picture that was removed from the reel (if any of those sort of ways even exist).

Can enlistment dates on a CMSR and in a pension application file be considered independent pieces of evidence?

I am working to differentiate two people of the name Jacob Sommer who lived in Philadelphia county during the Revolution.  The differentiator between the two individuals is mostly place - one lived in Germantown and the other lived in Moreland.

Hi Elizabeth,

I've never been quite sure how to address conflicting birthdates in original sources that contain primary information, specifically, the great number of WW1 and WW2 draft cards that do not contain matching birthdates. I am aware of the reasons why someone may purposely change the date, but the numbers of men I have seems very large. I have many more that do not match than those that do. These dates are sometimes different then the various census records for that person.

All of my Irish immigrants came to Savannah Georgia in the mid 1850's.  They seemed to be very active in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist Church in Savannah and I have been able to obtain baptism and death information from the Diocese of Savannah.  When they send me information, such as baptismal information, it is written on a form.  It is not the copy of the actual register where the entry was entered.

I am using a 1830 Probate record from Tyrrell County N.C. for a client report. It is a photocopy of the packet from Raleigh Archives. It contains several deeds. They are handwritten copies from deed books I believe. The handwritng, including signatures and marks, are of the same hand on all copies. The deeds were made(dated and filed) several years apart. I believe they may have been copied for use during probate. Should they be treated as original documents since they are within the packet or should they be analyized as derivatives, which they are in reality.

I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around the differences between sources, information, and evidence. It seems to me that evidence and information are the same.  If a source gives me information for whatever I'm researching, that’s evidence. If I'm searching colonial correspondence from AC at the Archives Nationales and I found a reference to the colonial official I'm studying, that's information/evidence I can use to build his biography. What's the difference?