ALT-GENEALOGY-L Archives

Archiver > ALT-GENEALOGY > 2000-08 > 0965455287


From: "Richard A. Pence" <>
Subject: Re: on Genealogy Warning
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 02:01:27 -0400


Pieter, all I can do is repeat what I wrote in the message to which you are
replying:

> Actually, Pieter, by your own description, the documents you
> have prove nothing pertaining to a name change; they merely
> reveal different spellings of the name.

That is to say, the conclusions you have reached might well be true, but the
evidence you have cited does not "prove" it.

You may want to read my article on "Sources, Citations, Documentation and
Evaluating Evidence in Genealogy" at:

http://www.pipeline.com/~richardpence/classdoc.htm

Regards,
Richard Pence

"borray" <> wrote in message
news:X_Ei5.574388$...
> Hello Richard,
> I have in my possession more than 50 documents (copies of the
> originals) by the citycouncil the public notary and outoff the
> churchbooks with the same spelling of borra over a period of
> more than 300 years . One time there was 1 exception, borra
> was written borre. The changes de borrai, borray to borra I
> have mentioned before were from 1613 and 1680.

> This happened in the city of Utrecht.

> This is not my profession or my hobby but what is going on
> here? A clerck with an age of more than 300 years I never met,
> lol.

> This was not my own investigation. A cousin of my father
> working at the citycouncil made this familyregister. I have no
> reason to give another perception of these papers. My only
> problem with the stuff was that in the introduction of this
> family register a prof. Van Praag (jewish) told that the origin of
> the name was jewish. For that reason for more than 40 years I
> lived with the opinion that it was a hebrew name.

> I had no reason to doubt that story, why shoud I?

In genealogy you learn to doubt a great deal of what you are told.

> pieter borra.

This thread: