Among the things I know are things that I can’t remember where or how I learned them.
If that description is correct, does it follow that I now know things for which I have no evidence? Well, if I pick one of them (say, the claim that I spent quite a bit of my childhood on land that was deeded to the Souix in the treaty of 1852, a treaty altered unilaterally by the U.S. in 1868 in such a way that the land was no longer within Souix territory), I can say the following: my evidence is that I learned it somewhere, sometime; probably by reading it in a book.
But consider my state before reflecting on it. I’ve known for quite some time this fact. During this entire time, was I also aware that I learned it from a book? Did I, throughout the entire time that I’ve known this fact, believed that I learned it from a book? I doubt that this is true. But then it looks like I’m stuck: there are times that I knew this fact, but had no evidence for it. What I did have, however, was a disposition to form beliefs which have contents that support the content of the claim I know to be true. But how could such a disposition itself be evidence?