In The Future, Many Records Won’t Be What They Used To Be
In the year 2044, doing genealogy as we know it today will be a nearly impossible pursuit because many of the types of records we’re accustomed to using won’t be as useful, as accessible or as complete.
So said renowned genealogist Robert Charles Anderson at the National Genealogical Society conference last month in San Diego.
Anderson said genealogists usually first look for “survey records,” the broadest avenue likely to find answers, like censuses and city directories. By 2044, what will be the survey records?
Quoting a government report, he said in future years, sample census-taking might replace the actual contacting-every-person census that has been the standard since 1790.
This might be good enough for government statistical purposes and congressional apportionment, but it will not be good enough for genealogists. Recent newspaper articles have hinted at changes like contacting one in five families, etc., which would save many government dollars.
Anderson gave some statistics of his own:
Census records from 1930 through 1990 have been microfilmed and the original schedules destroyed.
The filming quality is no better than the 1910 and 1920 censuses, but there is no going back to the originals.
Early schedules were taken on loose sheets arranged by township in rural areas and by street in urban areas before filming. So, while they are not indexed, they aren’t too hard to use.
The 1990 schedules, however, were filmed as they came in, with no order at all, and will be impossible to use.
One last little-known fact: The amount of personal statistics gathered on every citizen in each census has been steadily decreasing the last few censuses.
A case in point: In 1960, only 25 percent of the people were asked about the birthplaces of their parents. In Anderson’s opinion, the value of the U.S. censuses for genealogists has reached its peak and in the future will be of far less value.
Moving next to military records, Anderson said we might assume newer military records would be as complete, as saved and as accessible as were the records of old. Not so. A 1973 fire destroyed more than 90 percent of the Army’s 201 files - the main personnel files from 1912 to 1960. (Naval records survived.) He said Vietnam records are “a mess” due to the haste of the military pullout from that country, and the records being “dumped” and never organized.
“Where is the money and the time to organize all those records?” he asked.
City directories have been a great source for genealogists seeking urban ancestors. But, for the past decade, New York, Los Angeles and Chicago haven’t published directories because they are too big and too costly.
Many second-tier cities publish directories only every couple of years for the same reasons. Telephone directories in the ‘90s list only about half the population because so many people opt for unlisted numbers. So, no documentation is left there.
Anderson said many government agencies now practice “selective retention” when it comes to saving records. These days, the Supreme Court generates more paperwork in two sessions than it did in the first 150 years of operation! This same sort of flooding is happening in all court levels. Which leads to the question, where is all this paperwork to be stored, not to mention being indexed and made accessible?
Fees for copies of records have skyrocketed in recent years. Barely 20 years ago, copies were free; then they were cheap. Now, the prices are double-digit. Anderson wonders if this is because the cost of doing business is rising, or is it to keep folks out of the records?
Rules for accessing records are becoming more restrictive. You must demonstrate “direct and tangible interest,” which means you must be a direct descendant. There is a move in some states to limit records to licensed researchers and investigators.
The last point Anderson made was that the changing social values of Americans will greatly hinder future genealogists. Increasing illegitimacy, non-standard reproductive behavior, more irregular migration patterns and the increased number of illegal aliens will all make genealogy a much more frustrating hobby.
As an example, Anderson said, documenting an ancestor in early English records is fairly easy, and one can often trace ancestry into the 1700s - if you can get that far to begin with. By the 1800s, conditions in England were radically different from previous years. The industrial age arrived and the internal migration to the big cities to better jobs was so great that accurate records do not exist.
Many fledgling genealogists in England get frustrated at that 100-year back roadblock and so quit the hobby for easier things to do.
Are we in America heading for a similar impasse? Will future genealogists find that the years of 1960-2044 to be an impossible barrier to document their way through?
Anderson ended his presentation with these sobering thoughts: As of today, technology and great minds have no “for sure” answers to these many tentacled problems. It is fact that we are approaching major changes in records gathering, storage and access in the 21st century, and we can only wonder and hope that our descendants will have the pleasure we’ve known in learning about our forebears.
If you are wondering how to begin researching your ancestors, or how to get your sister back in Nebraska interested in your hobby, here’s an answer: “Successfully Genealogy,” by Diane Dieterle, is a totally complete beginners’ packet. The 85-page book takes you from “Getting Started,” through correspondence, organizing, record types and how to use libraries. All you need to add is a pencil to the 100 blank forms included in the packet and you will have begun your genealogy.
This packet would make a great summer gift to yourself or a family member. Cost is $12.95 from American Genealogy Lending Library, PO Box 329, Bountiful, UT 84011-0329. Or call 801-298-5446.
Today’s laugh: Susan Dechant of Kettle Falls shares this tidbit: On Dec. 20, 1820, Missouri imposed a $1 “Bachelor Tax” on unmarried men between the ages of 21 and 50.
xxxx