Ancestral Findings Podcast Episode AF-1238

Same Name Ancestors, Part 3: The Proof Case Method

Date: February 9, 2026 | Host: AncestralFindings.com

Episode Overview

In this final installment of the "Same Name Ancestors" series, the episode provides a detailed breakdown of the proof case method—an organized and disciplined approach to solving genealogical puzzles when multiple ancestors share the same name. The host demonstrates how building a proof case is the key to avoiding errors, defending your conclusions, and creating lasting, verifiable genealogy research.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Challenge of Same Name Ancestors

The risk:

• Even careful researchers can be misled when names, counties, ages, and hints line up between multiple individuals with the same name.
• It's easy to unintentionally blend two people into one profile.

The host underscores:

"The records are close enough to look convincing. The county fits, the time period fits, the ages are close, the hints line up. It can feel like you have a match when you really have a blend." (00:01)

2. What Is a Proof Case?

• Not a biography, but a decision file:
  A proof case is a concise, structured argument that answers a single identity question with evidence—deciding which candidate is correct and why the others are not.
• Purpose:
  To provide defensible conclusions that can be passed on without unraveling later.

  "A proof case is not a life story. It's a decision file." (00:53)

3. Constructing a Proof Case

a. State a Narrow, Testable Claim

• Begin with a single, clear sentence—e.g.,

  "The John Thompson who married Mary Davis in 1819 in this county is the same John Thompson who appears in the 1850 census in this district and left probate in 1857." (01:23)

• Keep claims specific and narrow; prove one identity at a time before expanding to other questions.

b. Candidate Profiles

• Before weighing evidence, draft separate profiles for each candidate using only reliable identifiers:
  • Approximate birth range confirmed by multiple records
  • Locality details (district, township, neighborhood)
  • Spouse and children's names (when supported by multiple records)
  • Occupation, land ownership, military service, probate status, etc.

"...Make a short profile for each candidate that includes only stable identifiers, not guesses." (02:23)

c. Create an Identity Matrix

• A side-by-side grid comparing candidates across stable attributes (locality, spouse, land, church membership, associates, etc.)
• Only include facts you can cite.
• Helps reveal which person fits all evidence and which only fit some.

"An identity matrix is a simple comparison grid of attributes that can separate candidates even when names match." (03:21)

d. Weighing Records

• Assess each source for its reliability:
  1. Original vs. derivative source
  2. Primary vs. secondary information
  3. Direct vs. indirect evidence
• Not all records are equal; some are more prone to error.
• Example:
  • Deeds are generally more reliable than census data or death certificate parentage.

"When you weigh evidence, you stop letting one weak statement override a pattern of stronger records." (04:39)

e. Build a Focused Timeline

• Construct a chronological sequence solely for identity-separating events (not a comprehensive life timeline).
• Look for "collisions"—evidence two people cannot be the same (e.g., two households in the same census year or conflicting spouse names at the same time).

"Collisions are powerful because they show the candidates are separate people even when their names match." (06:12)

f. Using Anchor Records

• Certain records "anchor" an identity more than others by tying together multiple stable details (spouse, land, children, etc.):
  • Deeds with spouse's dower release
  • Probate naming specific heirs
  • Guardianships or land partitions

"Your proof case will usually stand on two or three anchors supported by additional records that keep the pattern consistent." (07:00)

g. Handling Conflicts

• Address discrepancies honestly; don't hide or force away minor conflicts.
• Determine if conflicts affect the identification or just non-critical details.
• Flag unresolved issues for follow-up.

"Conflicts are normal...the key is to resolve them or to explain why one piece of information is weaker." (07:38)

h. Elimination: Why Others Don't Fit

• A proof case isn't complete until specific evidence is presented ruling out other candidates.
• Example reasons:
  • Different tax/living locations
  • Different spouse or children's names
  • Conflict in probate or land details

"Elimination is what makes your conclusion durable." (09:08)

4. Writing the Proof Case

• Clear, plain language; avoid drama.
• Structure:
  • Single-sentence claim
  • Profiles of each candidate
  • Anchor evidence (with citations)
  • Supporting patterns (tax, land, associates)
  • Exclusion evidence (how other candidates are ruled out)
  • Repeat claim as a proven conclusion

Model Example:

"The James Carter, who married Rebecca Lane, is the man consistently taxed in District 2 from 1831 through 1854 for 120 acres on Pine Creek, whose deeds include wife Rebecca releasing dower, and whose 1856 probate file names children matching the District 2 household. The other James Carter in the same county appears in District 5 tax list during the same years and is tied by deeds and associates to Cedar Branch, including a spouse named Sarah. These parallel records show two separate men living at the same time and the target identity belongs to the Pine Creek man." (10:06)

5. The Payoff

• Proof cases transform difficult same-name problems into solvable research.
• Fewer errors and rework over time
• Higher confidence in published/shared trees
• Leave behind reliable work for others.

"When you build proof cases, same name ancestors stop being a nightmare and become a solvable research problem." (10:48)

Memorable Quotes with Timestamps

• "This is the tool that turns I think into I can show it." (00:50)
• "Paper: Make a short profile for each candidate that includes only stable identifiers, not guesses." (02:23)
• "If you cannot cite it, it does not go in the matrix." (03:52)
• "Collisions are powerful because they show the candidates are separate people even when their names match." (06:12)
• "Elimination is what makes your conclusion durable." (09:08)
• "Keep the writing plain. Use dates, places and record types. Avoid dramatic language. You want the reader to be able to check the work." (09:51)
• "That is the goal. A clear claim anchored by a few strong records, supported by patterns and reinforced by elimination." (10:39)
• "When you build proof cases, same name ancestors stop being a nightmare and become a solvable research problem." (10:48)
• "You will spend less time undoing mistakes. Later you will feel more confident when you publish or share your tree." (10:58)

Key Segment Timestamps

• 00:01: Introduction to proof cases and their necessity
• 01:23: How to state a proof case claim
• 02:23: Building candidate profiles
• 03:21: Identity matrix explained
• 04:39: Techniques for weighing evidence
• 05:31: Building a focused timeline & spotting "collisions"
• 07:00: Anchor records as decision points
• 07:38: Handling and documenting conflicts
• 09:08: The process of elimination in proof cases
• 09:42: Writing a clear proof case—step-by-step example
• 10:39: Summing up—the goal and benefits of proof cases

Conclusion

This episode equips researchers with a practical, methodical system for resolving the most common and vexing genealogical challenge: distinguishing between ancestors with the same name. Implementing the proof case method means more accurate family trees, less time spent on errors, and results that other researchers can trust well into the future.

For questions or to share a tough ancestor case, visit ancestralfindings.com and use the Contact page. Explore further resources, articles, and podcasts to enhance your research journey!