Ancestors, Avotaynu, Roots: an Inquiry Into American Genealogy Discourse
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ANCESTORS, AVOTAYNU, ROOTS: AN INQUIRY INTO AMERICAN GENEALOGY DISCOURSE BY C2010 Michael S. Sweeney Submitted to the graduate degree program in American Studies and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Committee: _________________________ Cheryl B. Lester, Chairperson _________________________ Robert J. Antonio _________________________ Philip Barnard _________________________ John W. Hoopes _________________________ James R. Kent Date Defended: July 19, 2010 ii The Dissertation Committee for Michael S. Sweeney certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: ANCESTORS, AVOTAYNU, ROOTS: AN INQUIRY INTO AMERICAN GENEALOGY DISCOURSE Committee: _________________________ Cheryl B. Lester, Chairperson _________________________ Robert J. Antonio _________________________ Philip Barnard _________________________ John W. Hoopes _________________________ James R. Kent Date approved: ____________ iii Abstract The monograph is an inquiry into the genealogical assumption, the cultural notion that “who you are” is tied to who your ancestors were and that genealogy and family history will provide knowledge of that bond. The assumption is problematized by an examination of American genealogy discourse during two broad periods of heightened interest in ancestry: from the 1890s through 1930s and from the late 1960s through the present. The material is organized into six case studies of genealogy discourse, which are interpreted through textual and historical analysis. When the various formulations of the assumption uncovered in the case studies are placed side-by-side, the genealogical assumption is “opened-up” and its surface essentialism is brought into question as differing interpretations are exposed. The study concludes that the genealogical assumption is neither a completely satisfactory nor unsatisfactory way to articulate the consequences of social bonds between a person and his or her ancestors. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank Charlotte McIntosh, periodical librarian at the Midwest Genealogy Center in Independence, Missouri, for her invaluable assistance during the early stages of this project. I would also like to extend my appreciation to Kahlile B. Mehr, Dean J. Hunter, and David E. Rencher of the Family History Library in Salt Lake City, Utah for discussing their work at the Library and future directions in genealogy research. Francesca C. Morgan at Northeastern Illinois University also posed useful questions and offered her thoughts on American genealogy practice. I am grateful to my dissertation committee for their support and enthusiasm for the project. Their questions, suggestions, and criticism of my work undoubtedly made the project stronger. Bob Antonio and Bob Kent in particular met with me on numerous occasions and offered extended comments on the developing manuscript. This project could not have been accomplished without the excitement, curiosity, and intellectual and emotional support of Cheryl Lester. I am privileged to count these three not only as my mentors but also as my friends. The project has served to remind me of the debts I owe to family and friends, to the people who may not have discussed the theoretical underpinnings or historical details of the project but whose daily hard work, emotional nourishment, and commitment to my success made it possible for me to do so: my parents Gary Sweeney, Linda Schroeder, and Deborah Rollheiser, my brother Daniel Sweeney, and my grandparents Ila Maxine McAhan, Don Schroeder, Edwin Sweeney, and Mary Brownfield. And finally I need to thank Erika Massow, who daily tolerated my excitement and anxiety, made sure I was well fed and got some sleep, who smiled and said I could do it. v Table of Contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents v Introduction 1 Part One 1.1: Introduction 21 1.2: Daughters of the American Revolution 34 1.3: Genealogical Society of Utah and Mormon Genealogy 61 1.4: American Eugenics Movement 95 1.5: Conclusion 123 Part Two 2.1: Introduction 130 2.2: African American Genealogy 152 2.3: Jewish American Genealogy 174 2.4: Genetic Genealogy 198 2.5: Conclusion 232 Conclusion 238 Selected Bibliography 255 1 Introduction “What made America? What makes us?” These are the questions a February 2010 PBS series take up. In Faces of America, hosted by Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, Jr., traditional genealogy tools and genetic testing are used to explore the family histories of twelve “renowned” Americans, from comedian Steven Colbert and actress Meryl Streep to poet Elizabeth Alexander and journalist Malcolm Gladwell. Gates reveals information about the arrival of guests’ ancestors in the United States and traces their distant ancestry through documents, charts, and DNA evidence. According to the series preview, the guests’ family histories explain who they are as individuals and who we are as a nation.1 A similar idea appears to be at work in a completely different type of text, a recent Ancestry.com advertisement: “Your great-grandfather was a fire-eater in the circus. No wonder you love spicy food.” Below photos of a fire-eating circus entertainer and a census record listing occupation as “performer,” copy attempts to lure the viewer to Ancestry.com, one of the fastest growing and most popular websites for researching family history. “You’ve inherited a lot from your family,” the text reads. “Your natural ability to juggle. Your appreciation for the performing arts. Perhaps you owe it all to your ancestors. Want proof? Go to Ancestry.com, the world’s largest online collection of family history information.”2 Both examples, the PBS series description and the Ancestry.com advertisement, convey the message – not much different from the one given to me by my grandmother, herself an avid genealogist – that knowledge of who your ancestors are, of where they came from, is also knowledge about yourself, about where you fit and what makes you you. Genealogy and family history, they suggest, 1 “Faces of America,” PBS,< http://www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/> (accessed June 2010). 2 “Ancestry.com” advertisement, Ancestry, January / February 2007, 68. 2 provide such knowledge. The idea at work in the above examples obviously has some currency in contemporary American culture. Genealogy and other forms of family history research are, without a doubt, widely practiced and increasingly popular activities in the United States. A 2000 Maritz Research poll found that 60% of Americans surveyed expressed at least some interest in learning about their family history, an increase when compared to their similar 1995 poll that showed 45% of those asked were at least somewhat interested in genealogy. Of that 60%, roughly half had taken the additional step of creating a family tree.3 A 2005 Marketing Strategies Inc. poll indicated that 73% of Americans express some interest in researching their family history, representing a 50% increase from a similar poll conducted in 1995.4 Ancestry.com reportedly has “800,000 paying subscribers and 14 million registered users” as of 2007, and FamilySearch.org, the online site for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ Family History Library, receives roughly fifty thousand visitors daily.5 Interest in genealogy and family history spans across racial and ethnic groups in the United States, as evidenced by journals devoted to African American, Jewish, Latino, and Native American ancestry.6 And genealogy and family history hold enough audience appeal to be the subject of a spring 2010 primetime television series, NBC’s Who Do You Think You Are? 3 “Sixty Percent of American Intrigued by Their Family Roots,” Maritz Research Incorporated, May 2000, <http://maritzresearch.co.uk/release.asp?rc=195&p=2&T=P> (accessed September 2008). 4 John Simons, “Tracing African roots through DNA,” Fortune, 19 February 2007, 37-38. 5 Ellen Rosen, “Latest Genealogy Tools Create a Need to Know,” New York Times, 18 August 2007; “Tracing your own family roots,” MSNBC, 29 August 2008, <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26455893/> (accessed September 2008). 6 See, for example, Afro-American Historical and Genealogical Society Journal, Avotaynu: The International Journal of Jewish Genealogy, Nuestras Raíces, and The Goingsnake Messanger. 3 A survey of contemporary American genealogy and family history discourse reveals a repeated theme: that who a person is – in terms of “authentic self,” “essence,” membership in a racial, ethnic, religious, or national group, etc. – is somehow tied to who a person’s ancestors are and where those ancestors were from and that genealogy and family history provide a method for attaining such knowledge.7 A few other recent variations on this theme include: Filmmaker Pierre Sauvage in Barbara Kessel’s Suddenly Jewish: “When you erase your heritage, you rob your children of self-knowledge. Heritage is self-knowledge . The beliefs of your ancestors are part of you. They shaped you. To not know what shaped you is to be weakened.”8 Bliss Broyard, describing the genealogists at work in the New Orleans Public Library in her memoir and family history, One Drop: “Always they are searching for a name . When they find these names, they can begin to lay claim to history. They tell themselves a story. My family has been in this city for over two hundred years . We took part in 7 Julia Watson, “Ordering the Family: Genealogy as Autobiographical Pedigree,” in Getting a Life: Everyday Uses of Autobiography, eds. Sidonie Smith and Julia Watson (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), 297. Julia Watson made a similar observation. Genealogy, noted Watson, is based on a categorical assumption: “Humans are defined by who and where we are ‘from’ – in terms such as stock, blood, class, race.” Through an analysis of two “how-to” guides, Watson argued that the practice of genealogy works to suppress autobiographical sources of family history. Her use of textual analysis as a method of understanding genealogy as a cultural practice was one inspiration for this project. To be clear, I am not suggesting this “genealogical assumption” is the only theme at work in genealogy and family history discourse.