In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CHAPTER 22 Genealogy as an Ethnographic Enterprise JASON E. COMBS1 Ask any family historian who has roots in the Coal Fields region of eastern Kentucky, and she or he likely will know of George “Goldenhawk” Sizemore , an allegedly one-half or three-fourths Cherokee resident of the area during the early to mid-1800s. As one newspaper article in the Salyersville area argues, Goldenhawk remains a legend of sorts to many people in the region, as many colorful stories continue to be told about his adventures (Mueller, 1999, June 7). The article recounts one story regarding Goldenhawk’s remarkable fertility: About the same time, 1860, Goldenhawk was indicted for bigamy in Floyd County, Henry Sizemore said. According to minutes from the hearing, the judge said, “Mr. Sizemore, I understand you have about 50 children.” . . . Goldenhawk said, “I guess you’re right. But, judge, if I’d been half as pretty a man as you are, I’d had more than that.” (Mueller, 1999, June 7). A similar story appears in the notes of my grandmother, Gwen Combs, which she gave to me one summer while I was a boy. She identifies Goldenhawk as the father of 52 children, through seven wives. “He would have had 62 had they all lived,” she adds (Gwen Combs, personal communication, ca. 1985). Although written nearly fifteen years and seventy miles apart from each other, these two accounts demonstrate the importance for many people of understanding their roots, for through the recounting of each, the teller understands her or himself in relation to her or his ancestors, in these cases, one that lived over 150 years ago. Today, genealogy thrives as a popular pastime. Although people pursue it for different reasons, writers agree that, for many, it comprises one way through which they strive to understand themselves (Lichtman, 1978; Stryker-Rodda, 243 1987; Wright, 1995). I have been a practicing genealogist for seven years. Over fifteen years ago, my grandmother gave to me several scraps of paper on which she copiously had written notes. “This is the family history,” she told me. “I want you to keep it and pass it on, for when the old people are gone, there may be no way to ever get it again.” I was ten years old then, and although I understood little of the importance of what my grandmother had given to me, I did as she told me to do. Nearly a decade later, five years after my grandmother’s death, I found those same notes that had been sitting in the recesses of my desk and realized what my grandmother had entrusted to me. Since then, I have continued her initial work far beyond the rough ancestry that she had chronicled. After years of corresponding with others, sifting through government records from around the country, and conducting numerous interviews with family members, I have produced a genealogical account of our family that spans over five hundred years. Regarding some branches of our ancestry, it reaches even to earlier times. Like many other genealogists, I have learned through trial and error, firsthand efforts, or from consulting various genealogical aids. To help novices to learn about genealogy in more economical and less frustrating ways, a wealth of literature has been published regarding genealogical methods, strategies, and techniques. Despite the necessity and value of this knowledge, these sources present an incomplete model of the genealogical enterprise: they emphasize technique at the expense of a more holistic understanding of what research entails. These sources conceptualize genealogy as a “science”; however, as they employ it, this metaphor ignores some of the more interpretive and social dimensions of genealogy . I suggest that “ethnography” offers a more fitting and insightful metaphor, one that recognizes these dimensions and thereby incorporates a more organic and personal appreciation for genealogical research. Reconceptualized in ethnographic terms, genealogy offers much promise to all researchers regarding the family, including those in academe. Genealogy as the “Science” of Ancestry I will begin with an explanation of what constitutes genealogy. Although one certainly can find subtle differences among different definitions, most of them share key ideas. Doane and Bell (1992) define genealogy as, “the study of family origins and the ways of individuals; individuals and families help to make history” (p. 15). Greenwood (2000) offers a slightly different definition: Genealogy is “that branch of history which involves the determination of family relationships” (p. 3). Certainly, these two definitions differ. Nevertheless, they share two common assumptions: the family constitutes the principal...

Share