One basic question we ask when doing family history is: Is that the way it really happened? Virtually all our efforts are aimed at searching for snippets of information and putting them together to answer that question. To arrive at the answer, we need to sort through the confusing or conflicting information we’ve collected, and decide what is really reliable.

There is now a new way of looking at the problem that can greatly simplify our analysis. This new approach–considering individual items of information separately from the sources that provided them–has been taught during the past year by many of the leading lecturers at conferences across the nation. The Board for Certification of Genealogists has also adopted the new approach in its Standard No. 21 and No. 22 covering data analysis.

In the past, we were taught to determine first whether the source of the information was primary or secondary. We knew primary sources would give us the most reliable information, but which sources were primary? Is a death certificate with the embossed seal of the vital records office primary? Is the annotated and edited published correspondence of a prominent person primary? With the new approach, we no longer have to be concerned with such distinctions.

Now, we are to classify a source as either original or derivative and each of the individual items of information that come from the source as either primary or secondary.

Thus, a death certificate, obviously an original document, contains both new information about the death from the attending doctor and old information about the departed and his or her parents from an informant who may have learned it from yet another source. We have to consider the two types of information separately in order to properly assess them, even though they both came from an original document recorded very near the time of death.

The sources that are not original are classified as derivative and are, by their very nature, subject to change or loss of data each time they are copied or transferred. However, some derivative records, such as a microfilm copy of an original document, are more likely to preserve the original information. A published book of abstracts made from typewritten transcripts of the originals may not be so accurate. The abstract, with its every-name index, may be an indispensable reference to the original record, but it is still a derivative source.

Most of us started family history research with our oldest living relatives as our sources. In some cases, they were the original sources because they were present when the events happened. But their information, given to us many years after the event when their memories were less reliable, is secondary.

Similarly, not every document we find is an original record. In fact, whole classes of frequently used official records are copies. The bound deed and will books found in county courthouses are copies. In most jurisdictions, the original deed was returned to the buyer of the property. If it survived, it would most likely be found in a collection of private family or business papers.

An original record represents the first time information was captured in fixed form, but it is often not the original source, since it had to be made by a person. That person may have been the original source, e.g., the doctor who certifies a death certificate, but more often that person was recording information given by another person–a parent or godparent at a baptism, for example, or the conveyancer who prepared the deed for a land transfer. Some original records may have been recorded by several original sources. For example, a marriage license application has information in the handwriting of the issuing clerk, the bridegroom, and the bride.

Derivative records may be as close to the original as a photocopy or carbon copy. At the other extreme, the content may have gone through twenty people before being captured in the form we observe. The more generations removed from the original, the more chance for loss or error.

We occasionally use a different type of source in genealogy–artifacts or material objects, from which we can deduce information about the people who used or made them. These artifacts include tools, keepsakes, clothing, and dwellings. Like other sources, they may be original or derivative (casts, photographs, or reproductions of the original). Artifacts do not present their information in words, symbols, or images, but instead, an observer must extract the information and make a conclusion about it. It then becomes a derivative source when passed on or recorded.

By considering the source–original or derivative–we have some idea of how accurately the information came to us from its first expression.

Information is primary if it comes from an informant who directly observed it and who expressed or recorded it soon after. Being primary, however, does not necessarily ensure that the information reflects reality. Because information is initially perceived in the human mind, we must first look into the state of mind of the informant. Did he or she have the knowledge to correctly interpret what was seen? Can we rule out possible conscious or unconscious bias on the part of the informant? When the information meets both these standards, we have the highest possible quality of primary information.

Besides determining if the information is primary, we should also look at the formality with which it was recorded. The most formal, and therefore the least likely to contain unintended omissions or ambiguities, are those made under oath, such as testimonies or written affidavits. Next would be those that take place in public ceremony, such as weddings or public addresses. Oral history interviews are somewhat formal because they provide information that represents the subject’s actual perceptions. In contrast, information imparted in casual conversation may be fully in accord with reality, but doesn’t come with the same degree of assurance.

Once we’ve determined competence and bias of the informant, we then return to our earlier source analysis–whether the source is original or derivative–and decide how faithfully the original came to us. We should also consider whether the information is confirmed by, consistent with, or contradicted by other information derived from independent sources. If our primary information, derived from an original source or derivative image, agrees with information from some other reliable source, we can confidently use it as evidence for drawing conclusions. It is extremely important, however, to verify that the supporting information originated with an independent informant and isn’t just the same information received through two different transmission chains.

In a lecture at the 2000 National Genealogical Society Conference in the States, Dr. Thomas W. Jones, CG, summed up these considerations as they apply to recorded information under four easy-to-remember headings, each beginning with the letter C.