When Records Disagree

Conflicting records are not an exception in genealogy—they are the norm. Dates shift, names change, ages fluctuate, and locations contradict one another. This project treats those conflicts as information, not as failures.

This page explains how disagreements between records are handled and how conclusions are reached without forcing certainty.

Why Records Conflict

Records were created by people, often under pressure, with limited information and varying levels of care. Errors can arise for many reasons:

  • Informants guessing or misremembering
  • Language barriers and spelling variation
  • Clerical error or transcription mistakes
  • Changing social or legal norms

Disagreement does not automatically disqualify a record. It simply requires context.

Not All Records Carry the Same Weight

When records conflict, their reliability is evaluated rather than averaged.

  • Records created closest to an event are usually favored
  • Documents created for legal purposes often carry more weight
  • Repeated information across multiple sources strengthens confidence

No single rule applies universally. Judgment is applied deliberately.

Patterns Matter More Than Outliers

A single conflicting detail rarely overturns a broader, consistent pattern. Ages, birthplaces, and spellings may drift within reasonable bounds across a lifetime.

When most records agree and one does not, the outlier is noted rather than erased.

What Happens When Conflict Persists

Some conflicts cannot be resolved with existing evidence. In those cases:

  • Multiple possibilities may be presented
  • Language reflects uncertainty rather than resolution
  • The question is left open for future research

Closure is not forced where evidence does not support it.

How This Appears on the Site

You may see approximate dates, qualified statements, or explanatory notes where records disagree. These are signals—not hedges.

They indicate careful handling, not uncertainty disguised as confidence.

A Closing Thought

Disagreement between records reminds us that history is reconstructed, not replayed. The goal is not to eliminate contradiction, but to understand it honestly.