This week we've focused on a critical skill for researchers: Taking research notes that do not simply “extract facts” but permits study of the context of those facts. We challenged you to study a “research note” detailing the 1755 processioning of lands. Yesterday, in response to Glenn's and Scott's comments, we addressed clues to landownership vs. leases. Today we tackle the sequence of names and kinship clues.
QuickTips: The Blog @ Evidence Explained
Our past two postings have focused on a critical skill for researchers: Taking research notes that do not simply “extract facts” but also allow us to study the context of those facts. Yesterday, we challenged you to study a research note detailing the 1755 processioning of lands in Augusta Parish, Augusta County, Virginia. Focusing on the long and boring list of names, we asked: What clues ...
This week's "Tuesday’s Test" presented a published version of a 1755 vestry minute from Augusta Parish, Virginia. The minute represented a list of lands processioned according to colonial law. That test presented two versions. ... EE asked which version you would create in your own research notes—and asked for the reason why. The point was this: ...
Let’s say that you are just beginning research in Augusta County, Virginia, which was organized in 1745. You are interested in James Frame. You find a record for him abstracted in a wonderful 3-volume set of published Augusta County resources. Which of the two following options best represent your notetaking practices—and why?
12 February 2014 Historical researchers create various types of "research notes." When we read monographs and articles that present interpretations of the past, our notes typically summarize the author's thoughts. Occasionally, we may copy, exactly, a critical passage or a pithy quotation—with . . .