Category: Genealogy

Genealogy Requires Actual Research Skills

Genealogy Requires Actual Research Skills

by Justin Durand

I like this article by James Tanner. Actually, I like most articles by James Tanner, but this one in particular.

In a nutshell, “I am not denigrating genealogy in any way, I just think that the subject of doing genealogical research needs to be upgraded from a pastime to a serious pursuit on the same level as any other academic study such as engineering, linguistics, or medieval studies.“

Maybe I’m just feeling a little virtuous here.

“The fact is that doing research of any kind is a technical, learned activity. Some people have innate talents that assist them in being “good” researchers but the only way someone learns how to do research is by doing it. Some schooling, including advanced university degrees in just about any subject, will help but competency in research is a bundle of skills that are learned over time. You may see a child prodigy who can play the piano at age three or four, but you will not see a child prodigy who can manage a major research project like those commonly encountered in searching historical documents for your ancestors.“

This has been an unacknowledged problem on some of the collaborative websites where I’ve been working the last 10 years. I keep running into a general attitude, “My opinion is just as good as yours”. (No. No, it’s not. You took history in high school, and now you’ve read some pseudo-history. I have 40+ years of actual research in primary sources, a bachelor’s degree in the stuff, and a significant amount of graduate work, albeit with a J.D. rather than an M.A. in History.)

I’m tired of arguing with idiots. When the mood passes, I’ll be back doing real research.

Foreign Origins

Foreign Origins

by Justin Durand

Our European ancestors often did genealogy as propaganda. Nowadays it’s sometimes hard to convince new genealogists, people who might have only a limited historical education, that there wasn’t some secret, oral, underground stream of tradition that has been suppressed by clumsy academics.

No. It was pure propaganda, and today we can see through it easily.

When I was in college, we translated Virgil’s Aeneid in Latin class; a project that spanned a full year. I loved that story. I still do. Priam murdered at the altar. Aeneas and his family fleeing the burning city. This is the stuff of legend.

But it’s all just a propaganda. The legendary Trojan prince Aeneas, who fled the city, eventually settled in Italy. He was the supposed ancestor of Romulus and Remus, who founded Rome, and more importantly ancestor of the family of Julius Caesar. Virgil wrote his famous poem to help aggrandize Caesar and his family.

The story worked to connect upstart Rome to the ancient and considerably more sophisticated culture of Classical Greece.

And medieval propagandists took a page from Virgil. If Rome had a Trojan ancestor, then as heirs of Rome their national lineages had to be just as good. The Franks invented Francio. The British invented Brutus. The Scandinavians turned Thor into Tror. All Trojan princes. “Heirs to Troy, and by extension to the Roman Empire, they had a right to rule inherited from the heroes of classical antiquity.“

Preserve First, Scan Second

Preserve First, Scan Second

by Justin Durand

This blog post stopped me in my tracks. I’m doing a huge scanning project right now. Drawers and drawers and more drawers of old paper files. All my genealogical correspondence and papers from the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s. A lifetime of work, and omg I was active. And now I’m helping Mom clean out her storage units (yes, units, plural). She’s giving me boxes of stuff, some of it originals of copies she has given me, some of it copies I’ve given her, and some of it stuff I’ve never seen before.

So, you can imagine I was in no mood to hear someone say I should stop scanning, that I should, apparently, backtrack and start preserving. Might be good advice for someone, but not for me.

Then I took a few days to think. Maybe I’ve being over-reactive. INFJ. You have to know I’d be over-reactive to anything that challenges my organizational process.

On reflection, preservation first makes a lot of sense. You don’t have to fix all the problems, but at least get it organized, do some triage, and get it put in archival boxes. I have mine neatly organized into file folders, staples and paper clips mostly pulled, crumbling papers photocopied. So, I’ve already done most of what Denise recommends as the first step. The way I see it, I’m good to continue with the scanning.

I don’t have it all in archival boxes, and I’m not actually sure I want to do that. I have a bunch of lateral files, and a largish closet we call “the file room”. I use those for the papers. Then I have the photos in bankers boxes. I fret about those boxes. If I died right now, today, the lateral files would stay where they are are for 20 years, but the boxes would go to my sister, who would likely stash them in storage for lack of space.

My sense is that climate control is an important element here, as well as keeping a clear vision about what is practical and what is probable. I could put everything in archival boxes now, but my sense is doing that would increase the risk of eventual destruction.

Today’s thoughts aren’t my last word on the subject. Now that I’ve read about the problem, I’ll be thinking about it every morning when I go into the file room to grab today’s scanning project. And I might eventually change course. Just not today.

Royal Fakes

Royal Fakes

by Justin Durand

One of my main academic interests is the way genealogical fakes are created and preserved. For many years I was active on Geni.com, working with other volunteer curators to round up and fakes, get them corralled, and so improve the quality of the medieval tree there. In the end it turned out to be a losing battle.

Even so, most of my genealogical correspondence continues to be people asking my opinion about different lines where they suspect a fake. Answering those messages is a lot of work. And, truthfully, my heart isn’t really in it right now. I’m off on other things.

I’ve stumbled across a YouTube channel — UsefulCharts — that does some pretty good work on presenting basic information on this topic. So, I’m going to take the easy way out and just link to some of them. I don’t agree with every point of every presentation, and I would caution that many of the presentations oversimplify. But still.

There are some shortcuts that will save you a lot of time if you accept them upfront. Despite what you might read in the popular press and on the Internet:

  • There are no proven descents from Adam and Eve.
  • There are no proven descents from King David.
  • There are no proven descents from Jesus.
  • There are no proven descents from Joseph of Arimathea.

On the other hand:

  • Everyone in Europe is probably descended from Charlemagne.
  • Everyone in the British Isles is probably descended from William the Conqueror.
  • Everyone in the British Isles is probably descended from Edward III.

Everyone is descended from royalty. Not everyone can prove their connection to these lines, but having a proven lines is very common. If you have one, very cool, but you’re not special.

Revised Oct. 27, 2019 to add link.

Ruth Luce

Ruth Luce

by Justin Durand
Ruth Grant Luce
Ruth Luce’s memorial plaque in Ogden, Utah

Ruth (Grant) Luce was always one of my heroes. She was born in Maine the year before the American Revolution. She came west with the Mormons when she was 72 and lived another 12 years after that. She died at the age of 84, having been a pioneer of Nauvoo, Salt Lake City, and Ogden. That’s some pioneer hardiness.

A few weeks ago, I wrote about how Ruth’s husband Malatiah Luce was granted a lot in Great Salt Lake in 1848, making it likely he died there, not back in Nauvoo.

One of the things that bothered me at the time is the Ruth Luce was also listed at the Pioneer Overland Travel Database as receiving a lot in Great Salt Lake in 1848. If true, there would be some problems interpreting the entries. Would Ruth have been granted a lot if her husband was present and received a lot at the same time? It would be possible theoretically, but it didn’t work like that for any of the other pioneers on the 1848 list.

So, I wrote to the BYU Family History Center. I can never say enough good things about them. Their answer — Ruth did not receive a lot. That was a mistake and has been corrected. Very nice.

They also did some light cleanup in this area, which I deeply appreciate.

I had Ruth’s date of death in my database as 3 June 1860. Not even. I vaguely remember seeing other dates. I chose one of them, and made a note to do more research. BYU has done it for me.

BYU says, “The inscription on her gravestone shows her death date as 13 June 1860. However, the Utah State History Cemeteries and Burials Database shows 3 July 1860. The gravestone appears to have been created quite some time after her death, so we are using the date that appears on the Utah State History cemeteries and Burials Database as the more accurate date of her death.”

So now we can start the endless battle of correcting Ruth’s death date all across the Internet.