APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2005-12 > 1134082810


From: Mary Jane Smith <>
Subject: Re: APG-D Digest V05 #365: Reports to Lawyers/genealogy terminology
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:02:20 -0500
References: <200512072326.jB7NQvWC001009@lists2.rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <200512072326.jB7NQvWC001009@lists2.rootsweb.com>


Donn,

Not to inform you who needs no informing about this matter, but for
any who are still confused: In responding to someone's query back in
2004, ESM wrote the following:

"Source: Original or derivative
Information: Primary or secondary
Evidence: Direct to indirect"

I immediately clipped the message and have had it posted just above
my computer screen where I can refer to it as I compose reports or
what have you. It has been a wonderful help! Thank you Elizabeth, and Donn.

Mary Jane

At 06:26 PM 12/7/2005, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 00:13:57 EST
>From:
>Subject: Re: Reports to Lawyers
>To:
>Message-id: <>
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>X-Message: #3
>
>DeeDee King writes:
>
><<Don't use the terms "primary source" and "secondary
>source" as to a lawyer the first means "the law" and
>the second means "something/someone writing about the
>law".>>
>
>As genealogists, we shouldn't be describing sources in these terms at all,
>whether to lawyers, historians, or the public at large. The proper terms are
>"original source" and "derivative source." Only individual items of
>information obtained from the source should be characterized as "primary" or
>"secondary."
>
>This has become the accepted usage in genealogy, because it avoids much
>potential confusion. It is reflected in Standards 21 and 22 of *The BCG
>Genealogical Standards Manual.*
>
>
>Donn Devine, CG, CGI
>Wilmington, Delaware, USA


This thread: