Concerning Genealogies / Being Suggestions of Value for All Interested in Family History

by Frank Allaben

Can a genealogist claim to be exempt from conditions which the greatest historians impose upon themselves? Does a Gibbons, Macaulay, Guizot, Motley, Prescott or Bancroft expect to withhold the sources of his information and ask to be taken on faith? By giving the authorities for his statements, he proves instead that he has made proper researches, that his work is faithful, and that he can be trusted to draw judicious conclusions. We appreciate the great labor involved in compiling an authoritative work and understand the temptation to compile a book of mere assertions. But we see no honest escape from the obligation to give authorities, nor is escape desirable. For it is a sad fact that some, who support themselves by means of genealogical investigation, manifest no great anxiety to do honest work. They are careless in gathering their facts, and their pretence of having surveyed a field is no assurance that desirable data have not been overlooked or wilfully neglected. In compiling, they are equally slipshod. Their work is always set forth in the unauthoritative manner here condemned, and it is most desirable that others should protect themselves from the outward appearance of a like carelessness by giving their authorities.

The extra work which the giving of authorities is supposed to entail is more fanciful than real. The failure to jot down the authority with each note made in our notebook, to remind us of the actual value of each item and to direct us where to go for its context or for reinspection, is probably a much more substantial cause of extra work. And there is no difficulty in giving our authorities in the manuscript prepared for the press if this work of previous investigation has been properly done. We can appreciate the terror of the situation for one who has failed to note his authorities as he transcribed his extracts. After compiling his manuscript from his notes, must he go over the whole territory covered by his research in order to gather up the missing authorities? Unless he is of heroic mould, he will probably refuse to do so in despair!

Thus the reader can perceive the full importance of doing the work of investigation properly, as insisted upon in the preceding chapter. If he has done so, there is no difficulty in compiling an authoritative work. His note and the authority for it stand side by side, and as he uses the one he can instantly set down the other.

We have spoken of the legal method of investigation, and said that the genealogical investigator is like the lawyer who is getting his evidence together. But this having been done, there remains the preparation of the case for its presentation to the court. The work of the genealogical compiler corresponds to this. As the lawyer's brief compels the favorable decision of the judge, or as the logical presentation of the case convinces the jury, so should the argument of the compiler of family lineage convince the court of public opinion. His should be an historical document which carries its evidence upon its face. But if his method has been careless either in research or presentation, the cross-examination of historical criticism is sure to tear the case to pieces. Although a temporary decision may be given in his favor, another investigator will eventually arise and question some of his unsupported statements. The whole case will thus be appealed, and a new investigation be called for.

It is perfectly true that a strictly legal method cannot be carried out in the printed volume. Original documents can be readily presented to an ordinary judge and jury and by them be carefully inspected. But when we present our case from the printed page, the whole world is the court, our readers the jury, and the printed volume itself both witness and advocate. The original documents, though we may have them in our possession, cannot be placed in the hands of every reader of a book. Therefore in compiling for publication, the historical method takes the place of a strictly legal presentation of the case. This method, as we have already seen, simply leaves out the feature of affidavits and certified documents, and substitutes that of references to the original authorities. It is the legal method adjusted to the conditions of publication.

The reward which flows from this method is easily seen. We cannot hope that our book will be flawless. Mistakes will occur, and it may transpire that some of our witnesses were misinformed. But what of this? If we have followed the historical method, the pointing out of an error in no wise invalidates our book. One witness out of the hundreds we have called may be impeached, but this only affects the single aspect of the case which rested on the testimony of that witness. The rest of the testimony stands unimpaired.

On the other hand, the historical method involves no undue severity in the character of our book. It need not be stiff and solemn and pedantic. If we are gifted with a sprightly style, let us make the most of it. If we see a humorous side of things, let us entertain the reader with it. Even though one of our venerable forebears be the subject of the joke we need not hesitate. Could we appeal to him, undoubtedly he would smile with the rest and urge us to go ahead and make the book as bright and lively as possible.

If we have collected portraits, photographs of old homesteads, tombstones and churches where our ancestors worshipped, ancient documents and other heirlooms, these should be inserted or referred to in the proper places in the manuscript prepared for the printer. A genealogical work embellished with illustrations has its attractiveness increased many fold, and much can be accomplished in this direction without incurring a very great expense.

A truly interesting genealogical work is not a dry compilation of family statistics, but contains striking biographical pen pictures. Let these be made as complete as possible, and the story told with all the interest we can throw into it. We believe that the ideal genealogy is yet to be written, and that it will present facts with the accuracy of a Bancroft, but clothe them with the charm of an Irving. What possibilities there are, and all in connection with a work which will hand down our name, wreathed with the memories of our ancestors, in a common halo of glory!

In view of what has been said it will be suspected that we do not look with much favor upon statistical tomes, with their hieroglyphic abbreviations, disconnected phrases, and other contortions of condensation. This is certainly true. We would abolish all abbreviations in genealogical works if we could, and would have the story told in sentences framed in our mother tongue. We would have the book excellent in matter, pleasing in style and attractive to the eye.