TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2003-09 > 1062718828
From: "Dennis Norton" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] OT Early Sources and Surety Values
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:40:28 -0400
References: <010f01c37334$1db85860$173e2844@DennisDell340> <005201c37338$79bc1d00$6601a8c0@MOM>
Thanks for your thoughts, it was very helpful and pretty much reflected my
concerns with sourcing in these publications. As I'm reading this, it
occurs to me that it might be a great Off Topic discussion, so I'll move it
to OT and get it started. You say that you would assign a 2 to Torrey but
only a 1 to Banks and Savage. It would be interesting to hear from others
about what surety they would consider assigning to these and others of the
old "Tried and True", well known genealogical publications from many years
ago, the ones many of us have used extensively to "get started". Which ones
would be considered the "best" with the highest surety level?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bobbie Hall" <>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 7:01 PM
Subject: Re: [TMG] Early Sources and Surety Values
> Hi Dennis,
> I work a lot in New England records, and though I would trust Torrey
> more than I would trust myself, I'd still rate his work no higher than a
> since the work he did is definitely secondary or even tertiary
> If you look at his work, you'll find that his sources were in some cases
> Vital Records, or Court records, but some were also published genealogies,
> certainly some of questionable content.
> When I cite Torrey, I include in my <[CD]> field his source(s) for the
> data, so if I need to (and I have many times!) I can go and find the
> original records. He is high quality, but not infallible. When the
> records are located and cited, then I'll go to a "3".
> Savage & Banks to me usually rate a "1" and then I will *always* try to
> the true original record.
> Bobbie Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dennis Norton" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 5:29 PM
> Subject: [TMG] Early Sources and Surety Values
> > I'd like some opinions from some of the "power users" of TMG on some of
> the early, well known genealogical publications.
> > Regarding early sources and surety values in TMG: Would information
> out of "New England Marriages prior to 1700" by Clarence Torrey be
> considered a "source" with a surety of 3? Or would it be considered
> a compilation of data from other sources which must be checked first
> assigning a surety of 3 in TMG? Seems to me this question might apply to
> number of other early genealological "dictionaries" such as Savage and
> Banks. Do we assume these well known, major, long studied and referenced
> publications are accurate? Are they true sources? If so, should I
> the Torrey book itself as the source? Or handle the Torrey book in some
> other way than a true source?
> > Thanks for your thoughts on this,
> > Dennis
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> Send all messages and replies to <>.