claude-plugins/genealogy/skills/genealogy-methodology/SKILL.md

---
name: genealogy-methodology
description: Genealogy research methodology — GPS-based evidence evaluation, FAN research workflows with target lists, research journal conventions, claim promotion, and Council of Experts escalation criteria. Integrates with Librarian notebook and Gramps tree.
---

# Genealogy Research Methodology

## Purpose

This skill defines the research methodology, workflows, and standards for genealogy work in this project. It governs how research is planned, executed, documented, and validated.

This skill does NOT gate research behind planning steps. Research is autonomous. This skill ensures that autonomous research is *methodical* — that it extracts maximum value from every document, tracks what was searched, logs what was and wasn't found, and knows when to stop grinding and reassess.

## Core Principles

### Fact-Centric Research
- **Facts require sources.** Every `[fact]` must cite the source it came from.
- **Claims are not facts.** Unverified data — Ancestry hints, member trees, secondary accounts — is logged as `[question]` or `[claim]` until confirmed against a primary source image.
- **No interpretation during research.** If a person appears in County A then County B, record both appearances. Do not conclude they moved. Interpretation comes when all facts and gaps are known.
- **Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.** A missing record means the record is missing, not that the event didn't happen.

### Source Hierarchy
1. **Original source images** — courthouse records, original certificates, church registers
2. **Derivative sources** — microfilm, published abstracts, database transcriptions
3. **Authored works** — compiled genealogies, county histories, message board posts

Ancestry hints, member trees, and indexed records are *leads*, not sources. They point you to images. The image is the source.

### Extract Everything Valuable in One Pass
When examining a document (census page, deed book, tax roll, will), do not extract only the target person. Extract every person relevant to the tree or the FAN cluster. You may not come back to this document, and re-finding it costs time.

## Workflows

### FAN Research Workflow

A FAN (Family, Associates, Neighbors) research workflow is a structured investigation with a defined goal and finish line.

#### Structure

1. **Goal Statement** — A specific, measurable research question. Not "research Paulus Atreides" but "Determine the father of Leto Paulus Atreides using Arrakeen Province records 10150-10175."

2. **Target List** — People to watch for while examining documents:
   - The primary subject
   - Known family members (from tree or prior research)
   - Associates (witnesses, executors, bondsmen, business partners)
   - Neighbors (adjacent land, same census page, same church)
   - Anyone else in the tree who appears in the same time and place

   The target list grows during research. When a will names executors or a deed has witnesses, add them. When a census page shows a familiar surname, note it.

3. **Strategy** — The concrete plan to reach the goal:
   - Which record sets to search (census, tax rolls, deeds, wills, church records)
   - Which repositories hold them (FamilySearch, Ancestry, courthouse, state archives)
   - What order to search them (usually chronological or by expected yield)
   - Known coverage gaps or access restrictions

4. **Execution Log** — As each step is completed, record:
   - What was searched (collection, date range, pages covered)
   - What was found (with citations)
   - What was NOT found (negative evidence)
   - New targets or leads discovered
   - Coverage notes (see Collection Coverage below)

5. **Finish Line** — The goal is met when:
   - The research question is answered with sufficient evidence, OR
   - All identified record sets have been searched and the question remains open (document the gap), OR
   - The Council of Experts has reviewed the dead end and confirmed no further avenues exist

Use the FAN Research Plan template (`templates/fan-plan.md`) to structure these.

### Claim Promotion (GPS Checklist)

A claim becomes a fact when it satisfies the Genealogical Proof Standard. This is a deliberate, reviewable process.

#### The Five GPS Elements

1. **Reasonably exhaustive research** — Have you searched the record sets that could confirm or deny this claim? Not every record ever created, but the ones a competent researcher would check.
2. **Complete and accurate citations** — Every supporting source is cited with enough detail to find the original.
3. **Analysis and correlation** — Sources have been compared. Agreements and disagreements are documented.
4. **Resolution of conflicting evidence** — If sources disagree, the conflict is explained (not ignored).
5. **Soundly reasoned conclusion** — The logic connecting evidence to conclusion is explicit and defensible.

#### Promotion Process

1. Assemble all sources supporting the claim on the person's note, each with inline citation.
2. Check each GPS element. Document which sources satisfy each element.
3. If all five are met, draft a brief proof statement on the person's note explaining the reasoning.
4. Submit to the Council of Experts for review (use the `council` skill).
5. Collect approved promotions and present them to the user in a batch — list each claim, the supporting sources, and the proof statement. The user will call out any they disagree with.
6. Promote approved claims: change the tag from `[claim]` to `[fact]` and note the date of promotion.

If GPS cannot be fully satisfied, assign a confidence level:
- **Probable** — Preponderance of evidence supports it; minor gaps remain
- **Possible** — Some evidence supports it; significant gaps exist
- **Unproven** — Insufficient evidence to assess
- **Disproven** — Evidence contradicts the claim

### Council of Experts Escalation

The Council of Experts provides fresh perspectives when research stalls. Use it deliberately — not after every failed search, but when patterns suggest you're stuck.

#### When to Escalate

**Escalate when:**
- Multiple record sets across different collections yield nothing (e.g., two census years across three counties with no appearance)
- Conflicting sources cannot be resolved by evidence weight alone
- You've exhausted the obvious strategy and need new angles
- A FAN workflow has hit its finish line without answering the question
- You suspect identity confusion (two people conflated, or one person split)

**Do NOT escalate when:**
- You're partway through a large collection (30 images in a tax reel is normal)
- A single census or record set didn't have the person (they get missed)
- You haven't yet tried the obvious sources
- The search is progressing but slowly

**Rule of thumb:** If you've searched the same type of record across two independent dimensions (two time periods, two jurisdictions, two collection types) and found nothing in either, stop and think. One miss is normal. Two independent misses is a pattern worth examining.

### Collection Coverage Tracking

When working through a record collection (tax rolls, deed books, census reels), track coverage on the **source note** for that collection.

#### What to Record
- Collection identifier (FamilySearch film number, Ancestry collection ID, book/volume)
- Date range covered in this pass
- Pages or image numbers examined
- What was extracted (people found, documents noted)
- What was NOT found (negative evidence for target list members)

#### Before Re-Searching a Collection
Always check the source note for previous coverage. If pages 12-48 of Arrakeen PPT 10150-10160 were already covered, start at page 49 or move to a different year range.

## Research Journal

The Research Journal (formerly "Worklog") is the running record of all research activity. It lives as a Librarian note and serves two purposes: session continuity and institutional memory.

### Structure

Each entry uses this format:

```
## YYYY-MM-DD

### HH:MM — [Short Title]

**Goal:** [What you set out to do]

**Searched:**
- [Collection/source searched] — [pages/range covered] — [result: found X / nothing relevant]
- [Collection/source searched] — [pages/range covered] — [result]

**Found:**
- [Key finding with inline citation]
- [Key finding with inline citation]

**Not Found (Negative Evidence):**
- [What you expected to find but didn't, and where you looked]

**New Leads:**
- [Anything discovered that warrants follow-up]

**Target List Updates:**
- [New people added to the FAN target list and why]

**Notes:**
[Unstructured observations, theories, hunches, anything that doesn't fit above but shouldn't be lost. This is the place for "I noticed that..." and "I wonder if..." — things that aren't facts but might matter later.]

**Open Questions:**
- [question] [Specific unanswered question arising from this session]

**Tasks:**
- [todo] [Specific next action arising from this session]

**Session Close:**
- Unfinished: [What was in progress when the session ended]
- Next: [What the next session should start with]
- Blocking: [Anything preventing progress — access issues, missing records, need user input]
```

### Conventions
- Use `[question]` and `[todo]` tags so they're searchable across the notebook
- The **Notes** section is deliberately unstructured — don't skip it. Hunches recorded here have led to breakthroughs.
- **Session Close** is mandatory. It's the handoff to the next session (which may be a different Claude instance with no memory of this one).
- Append entries within a day using `### HH:MM` subsections. Create a new `## YYYY-MM-DD` section for each day.

## Evidence Classification Reference

When evaluating a source, classify along three axes:

### Source Classification (What you consulted)
| Type | Description | Example |
|------|-------------|---------|
| Original | First recording in original form | Courthouse deed book, original certificate |
| Derivative | Copy, transcription, or extract | Published abstracts, database entries, microfilm |
| Authored | Compiled or analyzed work | Published genealogy, county history |

### Information Classification (When recorded relative to event)
| Type | Description | Example |
|------|-------------|---------|
| Primary | Recorded at/near time of event by knowledgeable person | Birth date on birth certificate |
| Secondary | Recorded well after event, from memory or hearsay | Birth date on death certificate |
| Undetermined | Cannot determine timing or informant | Undated family Bible entry |

### Evidence Classification (What it tells you)
| Type | Description | Example |
|------|-------------|---------|
| Direct | Explicitly states the needed fact | Marriage record naming bride and groom |
| Indirect | Implies fact when combined with other evidence | Age on census implying birth year |
| Negative | Expected information that is absent | Person missing from tax roll they should appear on |

**Critical distinction:** An original source can contain secondary information. A death certificate (original source) recording a birth date 80 years prior (secondary information) is weaker evidence for birth date than a birth certificate (original source, primary information) — even though both are "original records."

Load `references/evidence-evaluation.md` for detailed frameworks on conflict resolution and source weighting.

## Source Document Rules

Source notes in the Librarian notebook contain **only source material**:
- Citation (full reference)
- Transcription or abstract
- Persons table (who appears in the document)
- Factual discrepancy notes (e.g., name spelled two ways in the same document)
- Collection coverage (what was searched, what range)

Source notes do NOT contain:
- Analysis or commentary
- `[insight]` or `[question]` tags
- Theory or supposition
- Connections to other sources

Analysis, insights, questions, and theories belong in **person notes** (with citations back to the source) or in the **Research Journal**.

## Note Section Rules

**Templates define the allowed sections for each note type.** When a template includes "Open Questions" and "Tasks" sections, those sections belong on that note type. When a template does not include them (e.g., the source template), do not add them — put those items on the relevant person note instead.

### Standard Tags
| Tag | Meaning | Where Used |
|-----|---------|------------|
| `[fact]` | Verified with GPS-level evidence | Person notes |
| `[claim]` | Unverified assertion with a source | Person notes |
| `[question]` | Open research question | Person notes, location notes, journal entries |
| `[todo]` | Specific pending action | Person notes, location notes, journal entries |
| `[insight]` | Observation or pattern (with optional source) | Person notes |

Source notes use **no tags**. FAN plans use their own structure (execution log, target list).

## Templates

Output templates for structured documents:

- `templates/fan-plan.md` — FAN research plan with goal, target list, strategy, and execution log
- `templates/source.md` — Source document note (transcription + persons + coverage)
- `templates/person.md` — Person note (identity, claims, evidence, relations)
- `templates/location.md` — Location note (jurisdiction history, available records, coverage)
- `templates/journal-entry.md` — Single research journal entry

## References

Detailed reference material loaded as needed:

- `references/evidence-evaluation.md` — Conflict resolution frameworks, source weighting, GPS deep dive
- `references/fan-strategies.md` — FAN principle application, cluster genealogy, community reconstruction
- `references/council-escalation.md` — Detailed escalation criteria and examples