TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives
Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-02 > 1267216131
From: <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] BCG Standard #21 [Bible vs church record]
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:28:51 -0600
References: <20100225065035.6be8dfbc20d2e7d5fe2bfc59d59114c3.61229f6a9a.wbe@email02.secureserver.net> <229467.93126.qm@web35905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100225123023.05790950@seanet.com> <733953.70322.qm@web35904.mail.mud.yahoo.com><7fc590ab1002260810t44ed9ddcpc4018e9e4ddfbaf9@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7fc590ab1002260810t44ed9ddcpc4018e9e4ddfbaf9@mail.gmail.com>
Karen Green wrote:
> could it be that the father did not have access to a calendar and was
never quite sure of the date? The priest, working with dates every day,
would probably know the date accurately. When the parents said the baby was
born "last Friday," he consulted his calendar and wrote down the "correct"
date.
>I've also seen a diary where it appears that a farmer thought that every
month had thirty days. For over three years, every month had thirty days,
then it was suddenly corrected. He was living in his own world!
Love that example, Karen!
In working with new researchers in both genealogy and history, I find that
one of the hardest things to overcome can be "presentism"--that natural
human tendency to evaluate situations by our experiences in the modern
world. Everyone recognizes that unschooled ancestors would have been
handicapped by the inability to read and write; yet many researchers don't
intuitively grasp that those forebears would have also lacked knowledge of
other things we totally take for granted today. Thanks for an on-point
reminder!
Elizabeth
-----------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
Tennessee
This thread: