Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I so wish I had resources like that, sigh. My great grandfather, the one my grandmother said was her father (with his being English listed on the cencus ) seems to have become invisible. I'm still believing my grandmother that her mother was married twice since its hard to imagine a 4'10 womand and a just about 5' tall man having a daughter who was almost 6 ft tall and doesn't look much at all like her siblings.
At least I have something to do with my spare time now.
There was good and bad with the show, I thought. I liked the episode about the Mayor and the Congressman the best of the two so far.
It irks me that the whole attitude was that someone should be ashamed for having had a Confederate soldier in their family tree. But then, that's kind of to be expected from Henry Louis Gates Jr. (IMO).
Why would that irk you? Are you talking about Harry Connick?
I have Confederates in my family tree, and I don't like it much at all.
Why would that irk you? Are you talking about Harry Connick?
I have Confederates in my family tree, and I don't like it much at all.
So do I, but I don't feel ashamed of them. How can I, coming from a world utterly different from the one that shaped them, really ever guess what sculped them into who they were? The ones who left Missouri for Illinous and didn't particpate at all I can gleam some understanding, but its still through a distant filter.
What I wished is that the show had acknowledged that maybe his ancestor had served for the south because it was home, not for politics, and that back then, people in general were more regional. Before they'd say they were american, people would be of their state, their region or their settment. Many once settled in a likeable place, didn't travel far from home again. They just didn't see the world as we do.
By shifting masses of people, by uprooting or being part of a military, the first real shift into the perception of being part of a *nation* occured after the war was done. We come of that world. Our ancestors saw a far different place.
Not to mention that the south was heavily class based, moreso than the north, and poor whites as a class were likely to stay that way, but it was their culture and their home. Why the idea of condemning them for doing what people in cultures everywhere tend to do?
Looking at Ancestry should spur on an interest in learning about the worlds of our ancestors and how they lived and what shaped them. The one problem I see in the show is the front and center concentration on slavery by the geneticist. Maybe he could have spent some time documenting the life view of a poor white farmer and why he would have supported the confederacy without being evil. A bit more balance is needed.
Why would that irk you? Are you talking about Harry Connick?
I have Confederates in my family tree, and I don't like it much at all.
Because it does?
I don't understand how anyone can be upset or apologetic for something they did not do. And I'm sick to death of applying today's standards to history.
Confederate soldiers were bad? Why? Because they were fighting to defend their "country"? Were Revolutionary soldiers bad? Weren't they doing the same thing?
I guess a lot of it depends on whether you think all they were fighting over was slavery. I don't happen to believe that.
So do I, but I don't feel ashamed of them. How can I, coming from a world utterly different from the one that shaped them, really ever guess what sculped them into who they were? The ones who left Missouri for Illinous and didn't particpate at all I can gleam some understanding, but its still through a distant filter.
What I wished is that the show had acknowledged that maybe his ancestor had served for the south because it was home, not for politics, and that back then, people in general were more regional. Before they'd say they were american, people would be of their state, their region or their settment. Many once settled in a likeable place, didn't travel far from home again. They just didn't see the world as we do.
By shifting masses of people, by uprooting or being part of a military, the first real shift into the perception of being part of a *nation* occured after the war was done. We come of that world. Our ancestors saw a far different place.
Not to mention that the south was heavily class based, moreso than the north, and poor whites as a class were likely to stay that way, but it was their culture and their home. Why the idea of condemning them for doing what people in cultures everywhere tend to do?
Looking at Ancestry should spur on an interest in learning about the worlds of our ancestors and how they lived and what shaped them. The one problem I see in the show is the front and center concentration on slavery by the geneticist. Maybe he could have spent some time documenting the life view of a poor white farmer and why he would have supported the confederacy without being evil. A bit more balance is needed.
He did point out that Connick's ancestor was a poor immigrant stevedore with a family who realized that he would have made a lot more money fighting for the Confederacy than he would have working on the docks of Mobile or New Orleans.
It's not you or your ancestor- unless the two of you are related. Hence the question.
Quote:
I don't understand how anyone can be upset or apologetic for something they did not do. And I'm sick to death of applying today's standards to history.
What standards should we apply? Slavery was barbaric, brutal and inhumane, no matter what historical era we reference.
Quote:
Confederate soldiers were bad? Why? Because they were fighting to defend their "country"? Were Revolutionary soldiers bad? Weren't they doing the same thing?
I am not saying they were bad. I am just saying I am not proud of them. In fact I only acknowledge them because they appear in my family tree. I don't even feel as if I am descended from them.
Quote:
I guess a lot of it depends on whether you think all they were fighting over was slavery. I don't happen to believe that.
Slavery was certainly part of the Confederacy's cause.
He did point out that Connick's ancestor was a poor immigrant stevedore with a family who realized that he would have made a lot more money fighting for the Confederacy than he would have working on the docks of Mobile or New Orleans.
I took that as supposition. He has no way of looking into the man's mind. Yes, maybe he could but then maybe that wasn't why. And of course when the embargo went into place, the docks didn't have any work. But I suspect that *just* pay wouldn't have been enought to leave family alone. Who's right? How can we know unless someone can channel the dead or find his journal.
Personally I'd like to see what is said if someone has a transported ancestor, or one of the Irish/English/Scots kidnapped off the street to fill up the ship. Read accounts of the time and they were *described* as slaves, and the 'trade' used the same ships. One of mine came via the old Bailey. He didn't leave Maryland for ten years, which I'm guessing meant 'time' got added. Considering that for transported convicts in that region half didn't survive the indenture, he got lucky. Convicts were considered disposable where life long slaves were not. And the practices that evolved during the period of most labor shipped in via indentures ended up defining American slavery, it would be suitable to mention if there wasn't an agenda at work.
If slavery is evil, shouldn't all versions be evil too? Especially considering that most transported were 'vagrants' or pety thieves who survived by whatever way they could or staved. 'Criminal' in the 17th to 19th century has a whole different meaning than now, too.
Think he would point that sort out? My feeling is it would get glossed over. He is 'professional' when discussing non slavery related subjects. He gets passionate with them. This has no place in looking at either history or your ancestors.
I'm hoping to find he's capable of being color blind but my impression is he isn't.
Last edited by nightbird47; 03-29-2012 at 03:26 PM..
It's not you or your ancestor- unless the two of you are related. Hence the question.
I don't have to be descended from them to be irked by their attitude towards his service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
What standards should we apply? Slavery was barbaric, brutal and inhumane, no matter what historical era we reference.
So does your sense of a "shameful" history apply to every one of your ancestors? Name me somewhere on the globe that doesn't have a history of slavery. Are all Africans to be ashamed of their history? All Native Americans? Those are both pretty recent (and some current) societies with rampant slavery.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
I am not saying they were bad. I am just saying I am not proud of them. In fact I only acknowledge them because they appear in my family tree. I don't even feel as if I am descended from them.
Well, you are. How nice of you to condescend to acknowledge them, even though you're "not saying they're bad."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
Slavery was certainly part of the Confederacy's cause.
Part, but not the whole. Does each individual soldier, or even citizen of the Confederacy have the same cause, or degree of cause? Of course not.
Wow the Rita Wilson segment was the best yet, I certainly learned alot about history.
Spoiler
I never realized there were Greek Muslims but it does make sence if you look at a map. and how they were next to Turkey in the area where her ancestors came from.
[quote=EnricoV;23640240]I don't have to be descended from them to be irked by their attitude towards his service.
Quote:
So does your sense of a "shameful" history apply to every one of your ancestors? Name me somewhere on the globe that doesn't have a history of slavery. Are all Africans to be ashamed of their history? All Native Americans? Those are both pretty recent (and some current) societies with rampant slavery.
I know nothing about the vast majority of my ancestors, except they came from every continent except Australia.
Quote:
Well, you are. How nice of you to condescend to acknowledge them, even though you're "not saying they're bad."
Why is that condescending? I acknowledge them because they appear in my family tree. I don't know them or love them - they just existed. I have no feeling for them positive or negative. I cannot judge them for what they did, but I don't agree with the cause they fought for.
Quote:
Part, but not the whole. Does each individual soldier, or even citizen of the Confederacy have the same cause, or degree of cause? Of course not.
Who knows? But I continue to hear defenders of the Confederacy lionize them, and it irks me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
