tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20022401.post3512441709915255252..comments2023-10-05T16:12:41.773+05:30Comments on A Gudem: Missing Family TreesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20022401.post-3495967617540296862007-09-24T11:25:00.000+05:302007-09-24T11:25:00.000+05:30etlamatey, I agree with much of what you say. Majo...etlamatey, I agree with much of what you say. <BR/><BR/>Majority of blacks in US are barely getting into middle class, so I don't think many would be interested in study their family tree (beyound famous people like Oprah and Heny Gates). Lot of Americans (or Europeans, for the matter) may not like their families, or history for that matter, so may not care about their family tree, but there is probably one or two people in their extended family (if one can call it that) - those with the same last name, that probably charted their family tree. And if and when a disinterested person ever what to find out about their family tree, I think they can do so easily. I'm making a gross generalization, but I think it is valid one. Also because of the way birth and death is, or was, tracked for centuries, it's easier, relatively speaking, to build a family tree - I think, anyway.<BR/><BR/>With regards to Bharatiya families, the information you give is fascinating. Because social life is (or at least used to be) organized around castes or subcastes, your example is surely optimal. I'm sure there are many families in south India that track their family tree similar to yours. But I think it would have been limited to the educated groups and groups that were in some kind of power - such as rajas or zamindars or mantris or tahasildar types. I really doubt that vast majority of people who were not educated (I don't mean in the current sense) or had little power in the system - be it in a kingdom or a zamindari, have little recourse to any set up I talked about in the post or the one your family uses. If these people want to create a family tree I don't think they have much recourse when compared to a similar family - ie uneducated and not being part of the system - in Europe or in US, because of the way family events were tracked (or not).<BR/><BR/>I agree with your comment about the current genealogy transparency. It's an individual issue.<BR/><BR/>It's really wonderful to know your family history goes back 13 generation - that's 3 to 4 centuries!Chandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04763671243428875888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20022401.post-76655126406319333622007-09-23T21:12:00.000+05:302007-09-23T21:12:00.000+05:30I agree tracking a family tree can be fun and inte...I agree tracking a family tree can be fun and interesting. But your assessment that this activity is popular in the west and not so in India is hard to swallow. 'West' is of course a rather coarse definition for the sake of this discussion. I have asked dozens of my American friends about their roots and have never got an response going back more than 2 generations. Most seem to know they have, say, Irish or German roots but none seem to know where in that country they hailed from. Like you point out, this practice is more likely to be more popular in long-settled Europe. <BR/><BR/>Also the practice among blacks to track their ancestry isn't as widespread or egalitarian as you make it out to be. There are a handful of institutions and academic programs with a focus on black genealogy, and of course interested individuals (with resources), who give the impression that this activity is popular.<BR/><BR/>You seem to lay too much emphasis on the nomadic pundits of Kashi and none on the Indian equivalent of the church - the samaj/community (the sociological, not the religious equivalent) organized around caste. The Chittpavan-Bharadwaj samaj that my family belongs to has a trust that periodically publishes genealogical registers. My ancestral line goes back 13 generations back in that book. I can say the same about some of my friends who belong to other castes in western India, where genealogy is an important part of the communal consciousness. Maybe things are different in south India. <BR/><BR/>The main difference between genealogy as followed in the west and as followed in India is that, in the west, it is institutionalized in public or semi-public institutions where the focus is on dissemination of information (to interested individuals as well as journalists from, say, Nat. Geographic who will make a documentary on genealogy and give Indians who watch the impression that it is popular in the west). On the other hand, genealogy in India is mostly vested in caste/community based institutions where transparency and public access is not really an important aspect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com