Pre-1500 Profiles - Sourcing Requirements?

Question

What are the sourcing requirements for Pre-1500 profiles?  I seem to recall reading somewhere on WikiTree that there needed to be sources other than just other genealogy sites such as Ancestry, Geni, etc.  Or was I dreaming that?

It seems like the source requirements should be more stringent than pre-1700 profiles considering how many thousands of descendants some of these ancestors may have.

Is there anything published anywhere on WikiTree?

Comments

I'm not sure why the number of descendants would affect the quality of sources that a profile requires!  All profiles deserve to be well sourced.  It also seems that if we want pre-1700 profiles to be well-sourced, having an even higher standard for pre-1500 would beg question of , "well, why don't we apply that to pre-1700, too?"  I think this is one reason that the good answers to this question simply address what is a good source.

The real challenge to me is all the unsourced profiles on WikiTree. The good news is that there are very few people who want to make a profile worse;  most want to make it better.  So over time, the momentum is on the side of the profiles we have getting better and better.   (There are, of course, some days when I have to repeat this to myself, over and over....!)

Answer 1

Hi S you weren't dreaming. I frequently refer people to Research Before Editing (which is in Styles and Standards) says:

Do not create more than a handful of profiles based on uncertain or second-hand sources without searching for better sources on the profiles you have already created.

Do not add or edit any profiles of people who lived more than 200 years ago without a solid understanding of genealogical research and the peculiar problems of collaboration on WikiTree. See the Pre-1700 Self-Certification for more information.

The link under uncertain is to the Uncertain Help/Style and Standard, which says:

What are examples of sources that provide uncertain information?

Sources are either original or derivative.

Here are examples of derivative sources:

• A personal family tree.
• A family tree found online, including GEDCOMs, LDS ancestral files, World Family Tree, RootsWeb, Ancestry Member Trees, etc.. If the tree cites reliable proofs, find the proofs and cite them.
• Yates Publishing, US and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900, from Ancestry.com.
• Websites like Find-A-Grave. Find-A-Grave profiles rarely cite reliable proofs. When they do, find the proofs and cite them.
• Transcriptions of documents (wills, etc.) found online that are not published.
• A discussion in a genealogy forum. If the discussion cites reliable proofs, find the proofs and cite them.
• Books with family trees/family histories that do not cite reliable sources. These books are secondary sources and should be seen as a starting point. Further research is needed to confirm those relationships.

Here are examples of original sources where the information gathered from them is generally considered reliable:

...

The Pre-1700 Self-Certification says:

2. Is an Ancestry.com Member Tree a sufficient source for a WikiTree profile?

No. An Ancestry.com Member Tree — and similar user-generated family trees around the world, including WikiTree — may help lead you to original sources. The original sources should be cited.

3. Is FamilySearch.org a reliable source?

It depends.  FamilySearch.org has both user-contributed family trees (which would not be reliable unless they cite their sources) and digital images of original records (which are better sources). Simply citing "FamilySearch.org" is not sufficient as it does not distinguish which type of source.

4. Is Ancestry.com's Family Data Collection a reliable source?

No. This and several other databases on Ancestry.com are compilations of unsourced information. They are derivatives of derivatives. There is no way to verify the quality or accuracy of their data.

Comments

Thanks Maryann.  This looks like it applies to pre-1700 profiles.  I thought I recalled seeing something more stringent for pre-1500 ones, though...

---

There's a G2G question: Highlighting activity in Pre-1500s profiles?

---

Thanks for this great answer, Maryann!

---

This is a wonderful answer and should be cited often!

---

I think FindAGraves would be considered a good source for name, birth and death when those are present on photographed grave marker. I'm assuming you are talking about the obits and the that are are copied into here, rarely with a source. I do tend to find this information much more reliable than the run of the mill unsourced family trees.

You had a heading of "Here are examples of original sources where the information gathered from them is generally considered reliable:" with no content beneath it. Curious where you were going with that.

---

Hi Marty

The information in my answer is copied from WikiTree Help pages and the pre-1700 Self-Certification. 

I put the three ... after "Here are examples of original sources where the information gathered from them is generally considered reliable" to signify there is more information on the Uncertain Help/Style and Standard.

 

Answer 2

Working a lot on these,so Pre-1700 and pre-1500 ones as well, we have our list of  acceptable resources , so also for the pre-1700 ones we would like/ prefer, more than just the online genealogies.

 Of Course if there really is nothing else a source or a couple of the sites /genealogies you mention are better than no source at all, and just checked the 

Euroaristo European Royals and Aristocrats 742-1499 where it says: Have all profiles as well-sourced as possible and conforming to the WikiTree Style Standards. 

The main source  for medieval genealogy in the EuroAristo Project is the FMG databasesource medieval lands

Answer 3

This does not answer your question, but these are the preferred sources for the Magna Carta Project:

Magna Carta Ancestry and Royal Ancestry by Douglas Richardson are the foundational sources for the Magna Carta Project. Where there is a conflict regarding the facts on a profile, we follow Richardson, unless there is more recent published research that adds to or corrects his work.

EuroAristo's Medieval Lands database, maintained by the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy and based on the published works of Charles Cawley, and PGM's Great Migrationseries by Robert Charles Anderson are also accepted as definitive sources for Magna Carta profiles.

Comments

Thank you Doug. The four sources you list - Magna Carta Ancestry, Royal Ancestry, Medieval lands, and the Great Migration series, are useful because each profile in them lists where the authors found the information. The primary sources quoted by Richardson, Cawley and Anderson are one reason these particular authors are respected, and another reason is their professional standards.

Medieval Lands is available free online at [http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/CONTENTS.htm ''Medieval Lands'']

The Great Migration Series is available through an $89/year subscription to New England Historic and Genealogical Society, and also through a subscription to Ancestry.com, which can be had by the month for a lesser amount, or at the library for free.

Richardson's books can be purchased from him online at Amazon.com. He uses print-on-demand so they are never out of print, at an average cost of $35 to $40 per volume, for the four and the five volume sets. Also at the library reference sections for free.

Mr. Marlyn Lewis' website, http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/ "Our Royal, Titled, Noble, & Commoner Ancestors and Cousins", which has all of the Magna Carta barons and their descendants, is documented with Richardson's work, (and that of other less recent scholarship). It is free online.

---

Unfortunately, my pre-1500 ancestors and connections do not appear in any of those 4 main sources.

 

Here is a sample of the sources I HAVE been using.  Are they acceptable?

* Tropenell Cartulary  [https://archive.org/stream/tropenellcartul00davigoog/tropenellcartul00davigoog_djvu.txt as text]  or [http://www.mocavo.com/The-Tropenell-Cartulary-Being-the-Contents-of-an-Old-Wiltshire-Muniment-Chest-2/826273 as images]

* THE SCUDAMORES OF UPTON SCUDAMORE: A KNIGHTLY FAMILY IN MEDIEVAL WILTSHIRE, 1086-1382 by Warren Skidmore, Third edition, Akron, Ohio, 2006 [http://skidmorefamilyhistory.webplus.net/Upton%20Scudamore%20Jan%202006.pdf available on line]

* A History of the County of Wiltshire: Volume 7. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1953. [http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/wilts/vol7 Volume 7]

* A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 4. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1911. [http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol4/pp542-543 Parish of Plaitford, Pages 542-543]

* Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office, Volume 34 By Great Britain. Public Record Office [https://books.google.com/books?id=MvALAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA257&lpg=PA257&dq=%22robert+beverley%22+%22richard+II%22&source=bl&ots=TKnGTCe4RV&sig=7um2O7RNBD43LaJEUIIcNyFxwzs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAmoVChMI34_Ctfu3xwIVEQqSCh0a7g69#v=onepage&q=%22robert%20beverley%22%20%22richard%20II%22&f=false on line]

* "A History of the Battiscombe and Bascom Families of England and America" by Geoffrey Battiscombe Barrow 1976

* "THE LADY CONSTANCE: A FAMILY SCANDAL OF 600 YEARS AGO" by Geoffrey B. Barrow, pg 151 - 154  in  NORTH WEST KENT FAMILY HISTORY, January 1982 . Vo1.2, No.5  [http://www.nwkfhs.org.uk/nwkfhs-02-05.pdf on line]

* A History of the County of Wiltshire: Volume 8, Warminster, Westbury and Whorwellsdown Hundreds. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1965. [http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/wilts/vol8 Volume 8]

* A Medium of Intercommunication for Literary Men, General Readers, Etc. Notes and Queries, Fourth Series – Volume Eighth, July – December 1871, London , 4th S VIII. Sept 9, ’71,  “Percy or Percehay of Chaldfield”, A. S. Ellis, Pg 210 – 211

* The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1386-1421, ed. J.S. Roskell, L. Clark, C. Rawcliffe., 1993 Available from Boydell and Brewer - RIVER, Sir Henry de la (d.c.1400), of Tormarton, Glos. [http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1386-1421/member/river-sir-henry-de-la-1400 on line]

 

* Wiltshire Notes and Queries AN ILLUSTRATED QUARTERLY  ANTIQUARIAN &  GENEALOGICAL MAGAZINE  VOL. II. 1896—1898. http://www.mocavo.com/Wiltshire-Notes-and-Queries-Volume-2/403989/7?browse=true

* Wiltshire Notes and Queries AN ILLUSTRATED QUARTERLY  ANTIQUARIAN &  GENEALOGICAL MAGAZINE  VOL. III. 1899—1901 http://scans.library.utoronto.ca/pdf/3/34/wiltshirenotesqu03deviuoft/wiltshirenotesqu03deviuoft.pdf

* Wiltshire Records Society, Vol LXII for the Year 1986, THE EDINGTON CARTULARY EDITED BY JANET H. STEVENSON ISBN U 901333 19 X http://www.wiltshirerecordsociety.org.uk/pdfs/wrs_v42.pdf

---

Janet, thank you for the wonderful linked sources - all quoting primary sources. I'm adding them to my collection of good sources.

I should have mentioned History of Parliament Online, and British History Online, as two free online databases that quote primary sources. We use HoP frequently.

So yes, all the sources you mention are good for documentation of Medieval profiles. We simply use the ones we do because they are organized for us to find the most of the data on each profile very quickly, in just one or two places.

---

Thank you all for the terrific suggestions! Such great sources to look into!

Answer 4

Cite what you have.  If you got it from a Find A Grave page which cites a book you haven't seen, cite the Find A Grave page, not the book.

As for standard of proof, if it didn't come from a primary source, somebody made it up.  There is no third way.  The net doesn't have access to hoards of secret information which isn't on record but is somehow true anyway.  There are no pre-1500 family bibles, nobody's grandad can remember those days, and Aunt Agatha's research was mostly looking it up in library books.

You won't normally see or cite the original documents - you'll get it from a book which got it from another book.  But you'll know there's a chain.  If there doesn't appear to be a chain, it's Unsourced.

Many sources are mixed - guesstimates and historical reconstruction get mixed in with recorded facts.  There's no simple line.

Comments

I hadn't looked at it this way, but it makes sense. Thank you.

Answer 5

I am not aware of any requirements. Here are some lists of sources that may be helpful for Pre-1500 Profiles:
http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sources-The_Middle_Ages
http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sources-England
http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sources-Europe

Comments

Thank you for the suggestions!