GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1998-08 > 0902020708


From: Michael Burley <>
Subject: Re: Accuracy
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 01:18:28 GMT


Scot Austin wrote:
>
> wrote:
> >
> > I have a number of medieval ancestors, some of whom I have on the web at
> > URL http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Bluffs/2473/ancestral_file.html
> > I have a few lines that tie in with the Plantagenets, the Capets, etc. My
> > question is what records are the most accurate as I have found books,
> > articles and wall charts that have different info on the Kings and
> > Queens...is there any record considered "official"?
> >
> > Dan Taylor
> I believe that if you read this group for a while, you will discover
> that the answer to your question is the reason this group exists.
>
> Scot Austin

I agree. Quite a number of these books and papers you allude to have
been written by posters to this NG. I doubt any responsible
genealogist/historian would consider any single source as "official".
Check as many sources as you can, then compare and combine them. You
might also check out: alt.talk.royalty - it too is quite good, in spite
of a gang of vulgar flamers posting to it recently. And you get the
added value of D. Spencer Hine's posts to both groups... :^) ATR has a
FAQ listing good source material - sorry I don't have the URL close to
hand.

I'm reminded of an occasion when visiting a local LDS Family History
Center, a librarian couldn't understand why I was researching my
medieval and royal ancestors. She told me: "that's already been done!"
The late Jack Benny may have answered best: Well!!

Check back often - there is a wealth of talent and information on these
NG's.

Mike Burley

This thread: