What is Negative Evidence in Genealogy and Family History

[@melissabarker2128]

Great advice! Also remember, archives are constantly getting records donated. While they may not get processed and ready for researchers very fast, genealogists should be asking about archives "unprocessed collections". This is from The Archive Lady!

[@GenealogyTV]

Oh good point Melissa! Thanks.

[@ladytessca]

Very helpful video...thanks so much!!! I had a hard time wrapping my head around the concept of negative evidence - it's clearer now.

[@GenealogyTV]

Glad it was helpful!

[@germanslice]

@@GenealogyTV this is why I keep a tracking list of the brick walls (negative lines with no info) so I can backtrack later and check the line periodically for any new records that may pop up and that's how I deal with the brick walls.

[@nancyvonseggern1280]

I'm just beginning, and I feel like I've found a wonderful resource in your videos! Today, I hope to find something to indicate what happened to my paternal grandmother's first husband that no one in the family knew about until I found their marriage certificate. 😮 Thank you for guiding me through this.

[@deborahleroy5323]

Always look for free sites like Family search to help you on your journey.

[@GenealogyTV]

Glad you’re here.

[@ConcettaPhillipps]

Connie, great idea for a video. I disagree with you about research logs, however. For a potentially difficult search like this, a research log can really help you track not only what you have checked but when you last checked it. You can then check it again later against the last collection update to know if updates were made since you last checked. It saves me a lot of time to go onto the collections that *have* been updated since I last looked.

[@GenealogyTV]

All good points

[@lonniecurl7670]

Searching more than one platform is good advice! I've broken a few walls on family tree alone. And human error in records should always be on your mind when searching. Scotland records has my great grandfathers birth as April 21 1882. And after exhaustive research I found his death cert, parents are the same, location is the same, the year is the same except for California recorded his birth as Aug 12 1882 on the death cert. My great grandmother is the reporting person but I still went back through his childhood, and adulthood census comparing parents, children and spouse, and only at that point could I set it in stone so to speak.

[@portialancaster3442]

My first thought was that a reasonably exhaustive search had not been done. County and township boundaries were still changing at that time. In Pennsylvania they were still changing decades later. I would have researched the formation of counties in the state of New York and looked for boundary changes. I also would have checked if they lived with their in-laws at that time.

[@GenealogyTV]

Agreed

[@Red__Penguin]

After tons of searching, I just re-found the disc for my Great-Grandparents wedding in 1951, what do you think I should look out for and should I see if I can see any of my ancesters on it. Basicly, do you think it will help in my research, Thanks :)

[@GenealogyTV]

Are you referring to a video file? Is so, consider transferring to an MP4 or other digital video file that you can save. See this video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iZzafmVqpdqteac

[@Red__Penguin]

​Yes I am referring to a video​@@GenealogyTV thanks! This was really helpful. It is still very good quality for 73 years old and I think a lot of the family would like to see it as it is the oldest video footage I have

[@1SassyCrafter]

I’m curious. The viewer stated they searched the entire county in NY for 1840. Did they search neighboring counties and check county boundaries???

[@GenealogyTV]

Good point

[@caseyzahn3226]

Thank you, Connie, for that fabulous explanation. I heard ESM's talk last year on Negative Evidence and thought I had a grasp of the concept. This made it clearer. Loving the AI Tool on Family Search! I had to take a break from it because I wasn't getting my chores done! LOL! Seriously, I have been able to add more information to my research project and learned wonderful stories that are slowly coming out-like my ancestor's home burned down and another ancestor building a cider mill on the property that was owned by HIS uncle and my ancestor. We certainly are living in a genealogy heyday.

[@GenealogyTV]

Chores can wait. Have fun! 😆

[@caseyzahn3226]

Lol! Yes! The dust of my ancestors are regenerating into ancestral dust bunnies! Have a wonderful day.

[@whyaskwhybuddry]

@Genealogy TV, Connie, what can you tell me about the Rowland Family of Rowan Co, NC?

[@johndoylemc]

I searched for 40+ years for two of my Great Great grandparents (my mother's mother's mother's parents). G.G. grandmother died when Great G. was 7 (1879/80). G. Grand's father died ca. 1886 when she was 14. I found ONE record on him in a newspaper. NOTHING ELSE!

[@GenealogyTV]

Try the new FamilySearch full Text Search. I did a video on it here. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y3WZlGSci7pmgrM

[@barbarah5756]

Another great video, very informative and much appreciated. I do have a question about another matter...On Ancestry, when working on trees, what is the best way to use the Common DNA Ancestor tag? It basically applies only to persons you have had a DNA match with, right? What about their parents? Is it appropriate to tag the name of the parent or parents (if there is a match to both) as well, or is this too confusing? I understand the difference between Common DNA Ancestors and Direct Ancestors, but want to add as much information to each ancestor as possible. I like to think doing so will aid the algorithm for Ancestry and give us better hints. What is your take on this? Thanks so much. Barbara

[@GenealogyTV]

I don't use that tag. It doesn't make sense to me. I make my own custom tags that are logical to me.

[@barbarah5756]

@@GenealogyTV Thamks

[@BenAlembik]

Question: Sould I add the spouses of the other children of my ancestors in my family tree?

[@GenealogyTV]

That’s entirely up to you.

[@kathleenkelley1299]

Very thorough explanation- thanks

[@suenorton6032]

the older version of family tree maker allowed you to print out a report of everyone in your index. Family tree maker 2019 doesn't seem to have that or am I missing something? It allows for individuals only? I want to print out a full report of everyone i have added. Can you help? Also want to say i find familysearch more user friendly than ancestry.

[@GenealogyTV]

In FTM go to Publish (top tab)>Collection (left side tab)>Person Report>Custom Report and build the report you want.

[@christenehoffert4804]

How would you classify a census record that was missing the place where the family lived like the 1891 UK census for the residence of my Grandmother when she was born. I do have her birth registration and baptism and that of her younger sister to confirm the address?

[@GenealogyTV]

Look to the front of the roll or section to see if the place is identified. Also look in the source citation. It might give you location information.

[@barbarabrusatori8585]

How do I find the full text research? I do subscribe to Family Search.

[@GenealogyTV]

FamilySearch>Sign in> Home Page> Scroll down> View Experiments> Left side box is the Full Text Search.

[@jeanksiazek9223]

Wow that was awesome Connie. Thank you for another great video.

[@GenealogyTV]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@feliciagaffney1998]

I have one family who seems to have disappeared from... well most records. They aren't a primary couple I'm researching right now, but it's very annoying. They moved from NC to Arkansas... and... whatever Census I am first missing them in... they show up on the farm schedule. I went line-by-line to compare the farm schedule with the population schedule and my family is simply missing from the population schedule. Which is SOOOO frustrating! I don't understand how the enumerator could add them to the farm schedule and forget them on the population. Shouldn't the population schedule be filled out first??? Grrrr! If I remember correctly, that is (currently) my last record for them. But, as I say... they aren't a primary family for this project. But it would be really nice to know when they died! 😕

[@GenealogyTV]

Have you tried extracting the census roll and searching on Excel? Here's a video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/p5i2hIyiatR9mrc

[@feliciagaffney1998]

@@GenealogyTV I watched a video of yours on that last year. But if I went line by line comparing the two... would my folks still be in there? I mean... I guess I didn't look at the whole county or township. Just the page where the neighbors were on the farm schedule. I feel like that was more effort than I was ready at the time to put into just for this one couple. I can put that on my to-do list for future researching. Lol

[@exdus235]

TYVM ❤❤❤

[@wandajohnson4753]

I have had a hard time finding a death record for my grandfather and marriage records for him and my grandmother. I have gone to Kentucky and Tennessee Archives and Health Departments, and County Clerks office for both states. He is in the 1930s census living in his parent’s home. He died in 1938, so he isn’t on the next census with his family. His name is on my dad’s birth certificate and I have found his grave. Other than that, I cannot prove he is my grandfather. Would this be considered exhaustive research?

[@GenealogyTV]

Possibly. Keep in mind that we can't always find a perfect record, like a death certificate, in your case. Evidence of the event works. For example, you found his grave. While it is not the best evidence of his death, it is evidence. Think about where he died. Could he have died in a neighboring county? You have another question, that is you want proof that this guy is your grandfather. Sometimes you need evidence of the relationship between him and your father along with other records to cobble together a logical proof statement. You have that with your father's birth certificate stating he is your fathers', father. This is strong evidence. This along with your own birth certificate stating your own father's name or your personal knowledge works too, if you knew your father. Lastly, certificates can be wrong as well. If you have done a DNA test and you match with others in the same line with this grandfather or even higher in the family tree, then that also supports your hypothesis. Good luck Wanda!

[@kathyastrom1315]

I have been looking for evidence that my great-great-grandmother was actually married to her second husband. I have searched throughout the Michigan marriage records for 1897, the year the 1900 census has them married. I then called the county seat library for assistance, looking for any additional records or newspaper archives, and they had nothing going back that far. Then, I thought to look for the divorce record in Chicago, where they had moved by 1899. The Chicago Tribune published all court cases, including divorces, so I searched for all Martin v. Martin divorces in a 4-year span and then had a genealogist who knew the county clerk’s system look those all up, and she found nothing that could have been my ancestor. She also did an independent search for the names outside of the paper’s findings, and again, nothing. So, I am currently leaning towards the idea that they were living together and just said that they were wed. She had gone through a really horrific divorce and custody battle with husband #1, so that might explain a reluctance to go through that again.

[@suenorton6032]

that happened alot back then, i have a cousin whose mom was supposidly married 3 times and it turns out she never was married to anyone. Weird!

[@GenealogyTV]

It's possible. It happened with my grandmother who swore they were married, but I never found any proof... I have not given up trying to find the record. That reminds me, I need to go try the new FamilySearch Full Text Search... off I go... thanks for the reminder.

[@susannayeakel5447]

Silver Blaze, the Sherlock Holmes short story that was quoted.

[@GeraldM_inNC]

I should clarify that leading probability scholar David A. Schum performed a detailed analysis of Holmes' reasoning for his negative inference and concluded that it was conditioned upon several key facts. Holmes would first have examined the watchdog and ascertained its health, age, alertness, arriving at a conclusion as to whether it was a reliable witness to the entrance of strangers into the barn. If and only if the dog was young, healthy, energetic and inclined to bark at every stranger would he have drawn the argument from silence that no stranger had entered the barn of Silver Blaze that night. Schum concluded that in such case the barks of the dog constitute a complete database of the entry of all strangers into the barn, and that any argument from silence must constitute a complete database of evidence for the question under consideration. Prolific logician Douglas Walton devoted an entire book to this subject and drew precisely the same conclusion as Schum, heavily influenced by the A-I experiments of Raymond Reiter. If holes can be spotted in the evidence's coverage of the issue under consideration, the argument from silence is less convincing and becomes more and more unconvincing the more incomplete the evidence is shown to be. I'll exemplify the limits of arguments from silence with the controversial issue of whether "King" Arthur ever really existed or was just a fairy tale. Most historians now insist he was a fairy tale, pointing to the lack of evidence for him in contemporary sources. Yet, the fact is that there are no literary sources preserved from that period that would treat of Arthur if he had existed. The historians' insistence upon demanding contemporary proof when no contemporary records exist betrays that they simply don't understand what an argument from silence is and how it functions. It is as if Sherlock Holmes' watchdog was deaf, dumb and blind and Holmes still drew the argument from silence anyway. I should add that the classic "Historians' Fallacies" by David Hackett Fischer outright condemns the use of negative evidence under any circumstances. He urged historians to find positive evidence.

[@GeraldM_inNC]

It is, of course, extremely subjective whether the available evidence is sufficient to justify a negative inference. I will give you an example from my experience to show how ticklish the judgment can be. The Register of the German-speaking Reformed Church in Lancaster PA records a child Philiip baptized by David Stephan in 1765. No other record -- taxes, real estate, inheritance, marriages, baptisms, state & federal censuses -- makes reference to a German immigrant (or son of an immigrant) named David Stephan. No Germans surnamed Stephan/Steffan were in the area of Lancaster City at such an earlier date, and the Stephan who arrived shortly after that was not a David. There was an Anglo Quaker named David Stephan, but he lived far from Lancaster City in the section of the county that would be partitioned off into Berks County. There are records of his taxes and real estate. So this Anglo Quaker from the future Berks County can hardly be identified with the German Calvinist who baptized a child in Lancaster City. In fact, there is not an iota of evidence that any such German as David Stephan was living in Lancaster County in 1765 nor that any German family surnamed Stephan was living there so early. As Sherlock Holmes said, after you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains must be true no matter how improbable. My conclusion is that the name was a pseudonym. (I did verify that the original document does indeed say David Stephan.) At this point I need to clarify that this Philip Stephan was baptized on the very same day that is recorded as a birthdate on the headstone of Philip Stephan/Stephy of New Holland PA, Virginia and finally Indiana. All German Stephans in northeastern Lancaster County as of 1765 were closely related to Johan Philip Stephan who emigrated with two young sons in 1737. Aside from that circumstantial evidence, there are at least 500 DNA matches between two known descendants of Philip Stephy of PA/VA/IN and descendants of Johan Philip Stephan's children George, Michael, Peter and Frederick. Thus, if we are to assume that the birthdate on Philip Stephy's headstone is his baptismal date, then "David Stephan" must have been very closely related to Johan Philip Stephan the immigrant and patriarch of the family. If we juxtapose the fact that "David Stephan" must have been a pseudonym with the high probability that the child he baptized was very closely related to the 1737 immigrant, the reasonable inference would be that "David" was trying to hide that the child was not born in lawful wedlock. A suspicious eye would be cast upon Michael b.1747 and Peter b.1749 as the child's teenaged father. "David" would probably be either their older brother George or Lorentz, making the long trip from Cocalico Township to Lancaster city where either of them could pose as "David" without being recognized. Improbable though this may seem, I think it is preferable to hypothesizing that the 1737 immigrant patriarch had a brother or nephew for whose existence there is not an iota of evidence in the records of Lancaster County. I feel extremely certain that "David Stephan" never existed. However, as I conceded at the outset, the negative conclusion is only viable if one is certain that sufficient evidene survives that David Stephan's name would have turned up in some document. I feel the evidence suffices for the negative inference, but someone else may feel differently.

[@GenealogyTV]

You might try the FamilySearch Full Text Search to see if anything pops for Stephan David or David Stephan, Stephen, Steven, or Steve, Dave, etc.

[@suzannechalifoux8587]

Thank you so much for this video, such great good advices… as always! ;-)

[@JodiDeeter]

Where do I locate the handouts

[@feliciagaffney1998]

The description lists 3 ways to find handouts.

[@GenealogyTV]

In the membership tab on the KZbin channel, if you are at the Information Access level.

[@GenealogyTV]

In the membership tab if you are at the Information Access level of membership.

[@kathrynludrick4821]

Great vid

[@VincenzoCapodivento-kl1ek]

I have a group of correspondences with a triangulation same segment.and I tself position they are children of cousins of 4 degree.all these people they all have in common.that have origins of south asia and origins of the roma.what does it mean? I had my mother tested why.two maternal lines frim my grandmother and great-grandmother are missing.

[@GenealogyTV]

Ideally you should have a DNA expert take a look at your situation. It is hard to give DNA advice here.

[@talentonboard2456]

What kind of evidence is it when you research an ancestor with the same name thinking it is yours but then discover facts that it is not him but has the same name same town even. This is where research notes for yourself would come in handy so you won’t keep following the wrong guy. Can you say not Joe Shmoe born 1896 but yes Joe Shmo 1897 and cite your source why. For instance it can’t be Joe Shmo 1896 because here is his death record and couldn’t be our Joe Shmo who we know lived to be 80. This is kind of what I thought you meant by negative evidence before I watched this video. There must be a term for this where you narrow down by exhausting others with same name. I don’t know. Thank you Connie you are always helpful!

[@GenealogyTV]

You would write a proof statement citing your sources and reasoning.

[@GenealogyTV]

And add it to your research notes.

[@marilyndekker1541]

What do you do if they changed their last name all their way to the new country?

[@GenealogyTV]

Search all names.

[@VincenzoCapodivento-kl1ek]

Ciao hon un gruppo di match che tra di loro hanno tutti l etnia asia mer e tutti gruppi genetici dei rom.e ci sono tra loro chiee mezzo cugini tra di loro e chi e un po piu distante tra di loro con me sono figli di cousin di 4 grado.che significa?.hanno altre etnie ma solo asia hanno tutti il gruppo in comune oltre la yriangolazione stesso segmento.io ho greco e italy del sud e medio Oriente.

[@GenealogyTV]

È molto difficile rispondere alle domande sul DNA qui, per non parlare di una lingua che non parlo.

[@JodiDeeter]

On KZbin channel

[@cyndidavis5486]

Maybe he was a tick mark