These research notes are provided as-is and contain supplementary working research.

This page expands an Evidence link in Identity — assessment: the findings, sources, and qualifications behind the marked passage.

Analysis

The unknown-corridor residual: eliminating named households does not clear the record's gaps

Eliminating named households is not the same as clearing the record. The same-name sweeps found more than forty distinct John Gurney heads of household in England between 1600 and 1670, and English parish-register coverage for the period is patchy enough that others existed unrecorded. The 1662-1666 London hearth-tax cluster makes the point concrete: eleven Gurney households in London alone, none of them surfaced by any candidate search, because a search built around a name, a wife, and a child set cannot see a household the registers never entered. The identity case file expresses this same residual as its two unknown-corridor scenarios, and it is the principal reason the estimate for Candidate B sits in the sixties rather than the nineties.

Confidence: Moderate

Why this conclusion

Qualifications and conflicts

Related context

Sources

Appears in

Topic file location: Identity — assessment

Also covered here

Technical details
  • Evidence marker: G13-PM-000106
  • Primary research item: G13-RI-000174
  • Graph revision: 244
  • Machine-readable JSON: /assets/g13-graph/marker-bundles/G13-PM-000106.json