There has been an ongoing debate among 'historians' that somehow a degree makes a person a 'better' historian than a genealogist (who is just a hobbyist). I strongly disagree with this, especially since I've seen some sloppy biographies of noted heroes. Genealogists work strictly with primary documentation - the census records, the vital records (birth, death and marriage) while some historians rely solely on what has been published before or what is available in their local archives. Most genealogists I know make pilgrimages to the places where their ancestors lived. They locate cemeteries, churches and get a true feel for the community where their family members lived and died. My father and I have accumulated a treasure of experiences from interviewing people who lived down the street, including a shy elderly woman who merely peeped around a tree to answer my father's questions about one of our great uncles. She answered concisely and clearly, but preferred to have the tree between him and her. Can a historian glean that from a book?
And with this experience comes something I can only call brilliant compassion. Because this elderly woman, along with the grave-digger walking along the side of the road one day in present day Lee County, NC and the old man with the granddaughter who liked to swat visitors with a fly-swatter all bequeathed us something more than answers. They gave us the culture of our ancestors. And that is why genealogists get it right and historians get it wrong. That is why the history books are not accurate.
Must read books about history and compassion:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment