GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1997-04 > 0860046857


From: "Vickie (Elam) White" <>
Subject: Re: Countess Ida/Bradenstoke Cartulary
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 00:54:17 EST


D. Spencer Hines wrote --

<<We need a close and meticulous examination of all the evidence
that *does* exist-----that is what I've stressed throughout this
discussion.>>

The Cartulary has been examined already. This brings up a point that
you have side-stepped several times: whose word will you accept? Do
you feel that each and every researcher must examine each and every
document for himself/herself? Why can we not accept the decisions of
perfectly capable researchers?

Nothing in genealogy is carved in stone. It is not unusual for new
pieces of evidence to pop up, which may or may not support our
theories. And we must adjust our theories accordingly. However, we
must also have the courage of our convictions: put forth a theory,
prove it using reasonably rigorous means, and stand by it.

I do not think it is reasonable for a researcher to be asked to
subject *all* documents to the tests you demand. If someone wants to
go that far, go right ahead. And if a theory is later proven
incorrect, I would congratulate whomever discovered the crucial piece
of evidence and go on from there. That is the nature of research.

I'm not advocating putting forth theories willy-nilly, with barely any
research. I simply feel that it is perfectly acceptable to rely on
the judgement of other researchers, unless there is a compelling
reason for suspecting fraud or sloppy research.

Vickie (Elam) White

This thread: