Using "History of Royalton, Vermont, with family genealogies, 1769 - 1911" as a source

Question

Hi all,

I'm wondering if anyone out there has done any research including families of Royalton, VT, specifically using the "History of Royalton, Vermont, with family genealogies, 1769 - 1911", found online here: https://archive.org/stream/historyofroyalto01love#page/n5/mode/2up

In the preface, the author admits to the probability of error. Seeing as how this compilation was completed over 100 years ago, I hesitate to use it as a source, but I don't want to disregard it completely either.

Thoughts?

Comments

I've not used that book, but I've used other books a whole lot like it. Much of the information is probably good -- and it may not be available anywhere else. However, these books have errors -- and they sometimes glossed over the truth to avoid embarrassing living people.

Use it, but clearly identify the pieces of information that came from the book, and be ready to correct the information when new sources turn up that contradict it.

Answer 1

Someone has created a free-space page for this book: History of Royalton, Vermont. It includes a link so you can see what profiles use the source. 

Comments

Thanks for finding this, Rick.

I added a notation at the bottom of that source page regarding the quality of the genealogies.

Christine, bottom line: it's okay to use such genealogies as a starting point. And if this is the only source for your data, then definitely cite it. MANY of us relied on such sources early on. In this case, there are no sources cited in the genealogies. Therefore, it would be recommended to find additional, more original records that affirm what's published there.

The data is probably correct, but we can't confirm it based on what's found there.

---

Jillaine, I think most published, and online genealogies, fall into this category of needing "more original records". I have seen others on WikiTree describe these types of sources in degrading or insulting terms. I point this out because the words you used are not. Your words are correct and accurate, without any negativity. Thank you.

To quote the author of this book, "I have not thought best to mar the appearance of this book, and to divert the attention of the general reader by frequent references to the authorities from which data have been culled."  (page vi)

I think this is the attitude of many authors of genealogy books. This is unfortunate for us, as we are not "the general reader".

This author goes on to say "The History of Royalton is now offered to the public with the hope that, whatever faults it has, they will not be held so near the eye as to obstruct the view of any good it may contain." (page viii)

I think there is "good" in these types of sources and hope "whatever faults it has" will be corrected and documented here on WikiTree.

---

You should add that as a quote to the source page: "I have not thought best to mar the appearance of this book, and to divert the attention of the general reader by frequent references to the authorities from which data have been culled."  (page vi)

That's priceless. ;-)

---

Fantastic. Clearly my googling abilities are not up to snuff, as I could not find that profile when I was looking around!

---

There are a lot of great WikiTree Free-Space profiles that people have been creating. The best way to find them may be to use the "WikiTree Free-Space Profile Search". I bookmarked this search page in my web browser.