Multiple sequence alignment is discussed in light of homology assessments in phylogenetic research. Pairwise and multiple alignment methods are reviewed as exact and heuristic procedures. Since the object of alignment is to create the most efficient statement of initial homology, methods that minimize nonhomology are to be favored. Therefore, among all possible alignments, the one that satisfies the phylogenetic optimality criterion the best should be considered the best alignment. Since all homology statements are subject to testing and explanation this way, consistency of optimality criteria is desirable. This consistency is based on the treatment of alignment gaps as character information and the consistent use of a cost function (e.g., insertion-deletion, transversion, and transition) through analysis from alignment to phylogeny reconstruction. Cost functions are not subject to testing via inspection; hence the assumptions they make should be examined by varying the assumed values in a sensitivity analysis context to test for the robustness of results. Agreement among data may be used to choose an optimal solution set from all of those examined through parameter variation. This idea of consistency between assumption and analysis through alignment and cladogram reconstruction is not limited to parsimony analysis and could and should be applied to other forms of analysis such as maximum likelihood.