For an elusive ancestor such as John J. Poill, it is important that genealogists take a very disciplined approach to their proofs and in particular to develop their own standard of proof for the use of circumstantial evidence then apply it consistently and objectively in their presentation. This website uses the genealogy proof framework illustrated in the figure below.

In the proof framework shown below, we are trying to prove that an ancestor we have recently encountered (ancestor “Y”) is actually the same person as an ancestor we encountered previously (ancestor “X”). Much of the time devoted to genealogy is spent in constructing proofs that follow this basic pattern. Let’s go through this genealogy proof framework which is used extensively in this website:

· Ancestor “X” is proven by various facts in the genealogical record to exist at a specific place and time (labeled “B”).

· Similarly, ancestor “Y” is proven by various facts in the genealogical record to exist at a specific place, probably different from “B,” and at a specific time, probably years earlier from “B” (labeled “A”).

· We suspect that ancestor “Y” is in fact ancestor “X” and want to prove it.

· We prove ancestor “Y” is ancestor “X” by proving a transition (labeled “T”). The transition accounts for how ancestor “Y” “emerged” into ancestor “X”.

For an elusive ancestor, the proof that a proposed transition “T” does in fact account for how ancestor “Y” emerged into ancestor “X” is always based on very tenuous circumstantial evidence as shown in the figure. After all, if the transition weren’t based on circumstantial evidence, then the ancestor wouldn’t be considered elusive. Thus, while we can collect strong genealogy information associated with ancestor “Y” at the place/time labeled “A” and ancestor “X” at place/time “B,” it is the transition “T” that connects them that is usually very difficult to prove. It is the veracity, integrity and believability of the transition “T” that will prove the case.