It is unrealistic to expect records obtained in genealogy research to be completely consistent. Names will be spelled a variety of ways, places of birth will vary as to location, ages or dates of birth may suggest a decades-long birth date. It’s human nature to occasionally be inconsistent when providing information, especially as one ages and if the same information is given repeatedly in a variety of documents over a series of decades. Sometimes the variation is intentional because the person was lying and sometimes it is unintentional because the person did not know or did not care. The problem is compounded when informants are providing information about people they never met or events that took place before they were born.

And most of the time these people never dreamed that in 100 years someone would be fretting over an age they provided in a census enumeration.

Anyone who expects complete consistency in records used for genealogy research is going to be disappointed and frustrated. They may even wish to pursue a new interest.

A more realistic expectation is for records to be relatively consistent. The difficulty is that “relatively consistent” is difficult to precisely define. Sometimes it is contextual. But a few general guidelines:

• A person’s last name, no matter how it is spelled, should have the same general sound from one record to another. Knowing how the name was likely pronounced is key to this process.  Having a step-father, being adopted, getting married, etc. all can change that last name.
• A person’s age should generally generate a ten year range of birth dates and usually one that is more narrow than that. Children’s ages tend to be more accurate than those of older adults. If the majority of records suggest a smaller range of years of birth, it could very well be that the one record suggestive of a significantly different date is simply an error.
• A person’s place of birth should be geographically consistent and should also take into account changing borders and changing political alliances in the area where the birth took place. The probability the informant actually knew the information coupled with the fact that some people occasionally confuse “where born” with “where from” should also be taken into account.

Other identifying factors in the records should paint a consistent picture as well:

• names of parents
• name(s) of spouse(s)
• names of children