APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2006-04 > 1144244120


From: Terry Reigel <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Clerk's copy -- original vs. derivative
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:35:20 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20064593520.422743@Terry3>


On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:21:58 -0400, Craig Kilby wrote:

>That is why I
> like land records. People move, but land doesn't. And
> since 1782, land has been taxed and gone to court over.
> Very little room for error in land records.

Little room for error? Every land record I've seen from historical
times is a hand-written transcription of a hand-written original.
Errors in transcription abound - many are noted by tiny handwritten
inserts, some omissions are obvious, and I expect others exist that
are not. Spelling is often fanciful, if it can even be read.

Further, it appears many transactions in prior centuries never got
recorded, or were recorded years or decades after the transaction, and
are sometimes not included in the index if they were.

Seems to me land records need about as much interpretation as any
other sources. <g>

Terry Reigel



This thread: