LNAB: An earlier event published latter OR a facsimile of an event prior to the publication of the earlier event?

Question

Which is the preferred LNAB, a record of an earlier event that has been transcribed and published later (e.g. 1807 church record publ. in 1932) or a facsimile of a later record (e.g. 1838 signature), though earlier than the other record's published date? This is for John DeMott (DeMott-265). If it is the facsimile, then I believe I should change the LNAB since I used the "earlier event, published later" to create his profile.

I'm also running into this for his father, David (though in his case the facsimile is a US census), so I want to get it right prior to creating David's profile. I've looked in the help pages, but I didn't see this issue addressed. Thank you for any help

Comments

I just looked at the profile you referenced and looked at the surname page and it appears the point is sort of moot. The surname page lists De Mott, DeMott, and Demott all together. But still, your job as a genealogist is to weigh your sources and make a determination. Just do the best you can and remember nothing here is set in stone, any errors are correctable.

---

Thanks Lucy! I guess for now I'll stick with the spelling on the earlier event.

I just just realized you made both replies to my question. The actual sources were:

     - A church history (Adventures for God: a history of St. George's Episcopal Church, Hempstead, Long Island, publ. 1932) that notes a marriage date of 1807.

     - A scan (facsimile) of a signature on probate papers, dated 1838.

So my concern was even though the marriage is an earlier event, the church history could have modified the name to conform with conventions of the time. Whereas, the signature has no chance of corruption, but was for an later event (the probate of his father's will).

When I created the profile, I used the earlier event (the marriage), but it was published later and possibly modified in the transcription.

Thanks for any light you can shed on this!

Answer 1

You don't say what the records are. You should use the earliest record for the LNAB. What this basically means is to use a birth record first (date published is irrelevant unless you suspect it is not authentic). Second would be a baptismal record. Events recorded closest to the birth are most reliable, in general. I also like to take into account who was doing the recording. The further back you go, the more likely the spelling was any-which-way. I've seen names spelled differently within the same document.

Also, when you say facsimile you do not specify if it is a copy from a published book or a handwritten note or a family bible. I would think a family bible if it was likely an entry near the actual birth would take precedence. Normally a published work is better than someone's compiled notes. But then, bear in mind, before writing a book someone had to make notes, right? Your best advice is to consider where the source originated and how authentic you think it is.

A good practice would be to carefully assess the documents you have and then include your thought process in the bio for future genealogists to consider while they make up their opinion.