XPost: soc.genealogy.computing, soc.genealogy.misc, alt.genealogy   
   XPost: soc.history   
   From: denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid   
      
   On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:20:17 +0000, Ian Goddard   
    wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:   
      
   >The original documents are the only evidence - the only indication -   
   >that the events happened.  If we didn't have the documents we wouldn't   
   >know that the events, or even the people, existed.   
      
   They are not the only evidence.   
      
   There is DNA that may change the facts.   
      
   Some examples :   
      
   Germain Doucet father had 3 children, Pierre, Germain and   
   Marie. From records, we know they are all siblings. The records   
   are dispensiations, i.e. permits to marry even if related, for   
   descendants. So, original documents say they are siblings.   
      
   But Germain son has Native DNA, unlike Pierre. So despite   
   the paper trail, Germain is not the biological son of his   
   father. So you have here an example of the evidence from   
   paper contradicted by DNA.   
      
   And on the other hand, you may have a relation proven by DNA.   
   Like 2 sisters with the same family name, living say 50 miles   
   away and never quoted in the same document, but having the   
   same mtDNA signature.   
      
   So we have more than the paper trail as evidence.   
      
   And we have also some original documents that are now lost   
   but copied or interpreted by others while they existed.   
      
      
   Denis   
      
   --   
   Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)   
   Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/   
   French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/   
   Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)