Finding some not-so-great things/Slavery, racism, etc.

[cindersslipper]

A word of caution for all family tree-ers;

I have one side of my family tree all the way back to 1600, furthermore someone put it together the old fashioned way, traipsing about cemetaries and church registers in the Old Land.

I thought it would be cute to check it and expand it.

It took, oh about a day, before I realized that those folks back in the day were PLAYAS.

I found umpteen single female relatives proudly getting fatherless babies baptized, something id always been taught was Impossible.

Which then led me to the thought - ok so who were the fathers?

Which then led me to the thought - ok so what if the female relative was married and had an affair and presented the outcome as her husbands?

It quickly became apparent that short of DNA analysis, "family trees" as we know them are cluttered with b(stards, wh(res, cheats and turncoats.

Even the Royal Family - rumour has it the Queen Mother was the daughter of a French Maid!

Yeah so its interesting but you can never, ever hope to get it Accurate!. Not ever.

They were up to some tricks back in those days, I can tell you!

[Alandros]

Originally Posted by cindersslipper

A word of caution for all family tree-ers;

I have one side of my family tree all the way back to 1600, furthermore someone put it together the old fashioned way, traipsing about cemetaries and church registers in the Old Land.

I thought it would be cute to check it and expand it.

It took, oh about a day, before I realized that those folks back in the day were PLAYAS.

I found umpteen single female relatives proudly getting fatherless babies baptized, something id always been taught was Impossible.

Which then led me to the thought - ok so who were the fathers?

Which then led me to the thought - ok so what if the female relative was married and had an affair and presented the outcome as her husbands?

It quickly became apparent that short of DNA analysis, "family trees" as we know them are cluttered with b(stards, wh(res, cheats and turncoats.

Even the Royal Family - rumour has it the Queen Mother was the daughter of a French Maid!

Yeah so its interesting but you can never, ever hope to get it Accurate!. Not ever.

They were up to some tricks back in those days, I can tell you!

Very true, there was a lot more children born out of wedlock, men and women getting married after already having a child, as well as illegitimate children than people think now. In fact recognized illegitimate children are a thing, I realized this myself looking at an 1827 georgia tax digest where it has a widow listed with illegitimate children of her husband as heirs since illegitimate children were made legally heirs equal to legitimate children.

I will add that DNA has really helped sort some of these things out.

[maus]

Mores and values change over time, sometimes within generations. I have no doubt that future generations living 100-150 years from 2015 will find some of the "accepted" things that go on now as offensive, amoral and/or repugnant.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by maus

Mores and values change over time, sometimes within generations. I have no doubt that future generations living 100-150 years from 2015 will find some of the "accepted" things that go on now as offensive, amoral and/or repugnant.

very true. Times change and things change. I sometimes wish we could come back a 100 years later just to see what life is like: just of a visit, not to stay.

[kevxu]

Originally Posted by rabbitsong

Wow. I finally get a chance to revisit this thread and look at the responses! Some very good points and respectful debates. (Don't see this much on online forums. This must be a good group of people!) ....

Apropos the above - and I know this is not the focus of the thread - but I must wholeheartedly agree: this is a good group of people.

I periodically get so bummed out by the hysterical acrimony in forums where I would never expect it, much less in ones about current events, politics, etc. that it actually has a very depressing effect on me. And I stop reading C-D for a month at a time or so.

This group sticks to the focus (except me now), is often very helpful to each other, and usually handles disagreements civilly, and in respect to the rest of C-D, very, very civilly.

I would like to say, "Thank you," to everyone. This is a consistently good place to visit.

OK, back to the business of the forum.

[residinghere2007]

Originally Posted by nmnita

You know what? Even though these things all seem very racist to you, for many, growing up pictures of black childern eating watermelon, Aunt Jemima, etc wasn't really seen as a racial put down. Even if they were meant as racial dislike or hatred, I would not get rid of them. Yes, they are a part of family histoy. I remember growing up and not in the south, when one of our favorite stories way Little Black Sambo. We never gave it a thought as being unkind or filled with hatred, to us it was a cute story.

As for owning slaves, almost everyone prior to the civil war who lived in the south owned slaves. In fact farmers in the north in some cases also owned slaves or had hired help that were barely paid. Today it is hard for any of us to imagine what life was like for everyone 150 years ago.

Just wanted to mention that the bold is untrue.

A majority of southern whites did not own slaves because they were not wealthy enough to own slaves. Most white southerners were not wealthy.

Now, if someone today has a long line of ancestry in the south, then it is more than likely that they have at least one ancestor who owned a slave but that is only because class divides didn't always stay divided and so people married up or down. Also after the civil war, the white south was devastated financially and so people who think their family has always been poor may be surprised to find out that they weren't prior to the Civil War.

[residinghere2007]

Originally Posted by rabbitsong

Wow. I finally get a chance to revisit this thread and look at the responses! Some very good points and respectful debates. (Don't see this much on online forums. This must be a good group of people!)

I saw a few things that I want to address. I don't consider this to be white guilt or politically correct on my part. As I said, my parents did not bring me up that way. I was taught to like/dislike a person because of who they were and not because of the color they were. My father was a minister in a mainstream Protestant denomination and my mother was a teacher. They both supported the civil rights movement. (If you've read the book, "Blood Done Sign My Name", the minister featured was a good friend of Daddy's.) They took the time to educate me on what could be considered offensive LONG before today's PC culture. Not exactly sure where one poster surmised that in 150 years, my Muslim descendants will be offended by me. Was that supposed to be a dig at people whom he deems to be PC? I don't have any Muslim descendants, but it would be perfectly fine if I did.

I do understand that we need to take the good with the bad when researching our families. I just wasn't prepared to find these things from the 50s and 60s. I have a feeling they will go in a box. There doesn't appear to be anything of value, mostly just family letters, a newspaper clipping from Paul Harvey (open letter from Chicago) and an invitation to a bridge party written in the style of a slave in the deep South. (Think Scarlett O'Hara's slaves in GWTW.) My mother-in-law passed away twenty years ago, so I was only around her short time. My father-in-law and I had a huge blowup over the use of the N word around my children. (He said it was a perfectly acceptable term. Sheesh.)

Bottom line, we can't change the past, but that doesn't mean we have to like or agree with it. As one of you said, it's all part of the big tapestry. Thanks for all of your responses!

The bold would be considered interesting material to a collector of memorabilia. Any racist looking postcards would also be appealing.