Erin J. Green
LIS 652
March 18, 2012
Where Have All the Genealogists Gone? Why Genealogists Use (Or Don’t Use) Archives
When thinking about genealogy and the work that goes into researching a person’s family
history, the idea that pops into one’s mind could be a variety of things. To some, genealogy is
nothing more than merely a family tree, tracing back generation after generation, but to others,
particularly professional genealogists, it is much more than just a collection of names. When
looking into a particular family’s history, it is important that a genealogist know a background of
information about more than the family name. Aspects such as location and dates are just as
crucial in genealogical research, leaving the genealogist to consult multiple sources along the way
to discovering the secret to a particular ancestry. Because there are many types of historical
archives allowing access to numerous facets of a place’s history, including the people, there is a
wide range of sources to choose from when looking at genealogy; ironically, however, many
genealogists do not take full advantage of the archives in front of them, nor do archivists take
great strides to assist genealogists. As the title of this paper suggests, where have genealogists
been turning to for information, if not archives, and why?
As with any profession, the method through which a genealogist looks for information
varies from person to person, but one trend can be seen as very common among many
professional and some non-professional genealogists. They can all agree on the fact that archives
and finding aids and the way they are organized often leave them confused and/or frustrated,
making them want to consult other sources when conducting their research. (Duff and Johnson,
81) The most popular trend among modern genealogists, particularly novices who are newer to
the field, is to consult colleagues with previous experience and knowledge of a particular
geographic area and/or names of people in the area. From this, genealogists say that they feel
more comfortable asking someone in their profession for information, rather than an archivist,
whose methods of research are often not compatible with that of the typical genealogist.
The main conflict between genealogists and archivists lies mainly in just what they are
best equipped to search for in their initial research. With genealogy, it can be expected that a
person’s name is crucial, and most of the search centers on the name; however, many archives are
ill-equipped for this type of searching because many lack a name index or name searching system.
(Duff and Johnson, 85) As a result, genealogists must find a different method of searching, such as
the location of a particular family or the dates that this family resided in that area. This has
resulted in a more informal system of sharing among genealogists, when not consulting outside
sources on their own.
As a whole, the relationship between archivists and genealogists has historically not been
amicable, with their values often conflicting too much to coexist, though there have been recent
strides in improving these tensions. The root of this long conflict could lie in the purpose of
archives in general. Most archives have been created to serve a particular type of patron, most
from an upper-class organization such as governmental or corporate researchers; therefore
archivists see other types of users such as historians or professional scholars as their most
important clientele. (Barth, 16) The works of these users often become published into scholarly
works, for which the archives could take credit for providing some of the information included in
said publications. In the cases of genealogists, their work is usually not published and used rather
for personal or clientele purposes. The way that archivists view the product of their users’
research has been said to affect their treatment of the particular groups of users in their archives,
as suggested by one study focused on the opinions of both the archivists and genealogists.
Many studies conducted in the 1990s and beyond have found that while there has long
been a rift between the interests of archivists and genealogists, there have been surprisingly many
improvements made in their relations, particularly since the arrival of the digital era. When asked
to describe their three main groups of users – administrative, genealogical, and scholarly –
archivists tended to have the more positive than negative things to say about genealogists,
describing them with terms such as determined, friendly and enthusiastic. (Berth, 17) When the
genealogists themselves were interviewed and asked to give their opinions on their archival
experiences, the overall opinion of archives was more positive than negative, though there was
more negativity surrounding the research process more so than the archives themselves. This is
another suggestion that research methods are the underlying problem between the two groups.
Taking this information into perspective, it seems very ironic that there would still be such
an open disagreement between archivists and genealogists. Because there do not appear to be a
significant number of cases where they have an overall negative impression of one another, and
relations seem to only be improving rather than weakening, it also seems strange that there have
still not been many efforts to try bridging the gap between the two. Reading about this type of
incompatibility, especially on such a wide range of occurrences, makes one ask why archivists have
not been taking note of this and looking for better ways to cater to genealogists. Ironically, one of
the largest groups of archive users happens to be genealogists, who make up nearly 50% of the
user population. (Barth, 24) If genealogists remain to be the users at the forefront of archives, why
has so little attention been given to them, both in practice and in user studies?
While the recent advances in technology may have helped many groups of researchers
including genealogists, archivists are often still lagging behind in catching their repositories up with
the digital shift. This technological gap could also be a reason for the communication gap that still
lingers. Digital repositories have been available for several years now, though they only reach a
small percent of the population and usually hold only a fraction of what the entire archival
collection contains. (Sweeney, 264)
Genealogy, on the other hand, has thrived in the digital age. One of the ways that more
and more genealogists and family historians have taken to doing their research is through various
electronic resources such as Family Tree Maker, some of which can now be found online for free.
The advantage to using online databases as such is primarily the ease of access that comes with
keyword searching and obtaining the software through minimal searches. As it has been found to
be with genealogists, many are willing to rather buy their own software from a source they find to
be reliable, even if there is another location where it can be accessed for free. (Barth, 2) With this
kind of commercial success of genealogical resources, archives have also been placed in danger of
losing one of their main groups of patrons. This is another key issue that must be discussed in
order to make changes in the relations between archivists and genealogists.
From reading over several studies on the behavior of both groups of professionals and
what seems to be the problem between them, I have been able to conclude that more than
anything, it is lack of communication that has become the downfall of genealogists when wanting
to make use of archives. This is not necessarily the fault of the genealogist, but rather a flawed
system that needs to be altered in order to adjust to generational and personal differences. While
many archives were created with the intent to only be available to a very particular audience, in
this modern era it has become more important than ever to shift away from this frame of mind
and accommodate this ever-changing society by making archives accessible to the masses.
Although this has already become the goal of most archivists, to create open access to their
materials, many still project the impression that the archives themselves and how they have
always been arranged ought to remain unchanged; however, this is not always the case in today’s
society that is, as noted, always changing.
One possible solution to helping aid this difference of opinion on how searches ought to
be conducted is for archivists to look further into how genealogists do their work, and see how
they could adapt their own search methods without completely changing what they have created.
While I do agree that archives should remain historical and in their original state, I also believe
that there are times for historical techniques, particularly when dealing with searching, ought to
be expanded on, for the sake of the user. Since one of the modern goals of archivists is to provide
open access, it ought to be kept in mind that change is sometimes necessary as society changes,
and in this case, it would likely be more helpful than hurtful. Perhaps an expansion on ways to
search through a collection is one of the best solutions; for example, a finding aid that did include
a keyword search or name index could be more than helpful for genealogists that are in the
beginning stages of their search.
Archivists also may want to see how easy it could be to create an electronic search system
for any type of user including a genealogist. There have already been several finding aids of this
type created for genealogical archives around the world, such as SVAR (Swedish Archives
Information), an archive of Swedish parish records and other genealogical documents, which can
be made accessible by loan or purchase to libraries and other institutions. SVAR is also responsible
for digital education on how to properly train researchers on how to manage archival documents,
particularly older ones. Such a type of approach to an archive, particularly one suited for
genealogists, is an example that could be applied when considering how to make archival
collections more “modern,” especially when considering digital education. This is something that is
usually lacking, especially in the case of archives, so I believe that education is a must. Just the
simple human interaction for the sake of educating others how to use an information system such
as an archive could be most beneficial in the long run.
My biggest conclusion that I want to make is that there does not have to be a divide
between archivists and genealogists. These two groups, which have gone hand in hand for
centuries, must band together in order to understand each other and be better served by archives.
Since genealogists seem to be further along in crossing into the digital age and using electronic
resources to conduct research, I think they could be seen as a key tool for archivists in seeing what
can be done to improve the users’ experience and help bring archives into a more modern light. If
genealogists could have their voices heard more often in the face of archives and feel more
welcomed and adjusted with their surroundings and the resources they are using, this could lessen
the chance of archives losing their largest group of users to outside sources, both digital and nondigital. Since genealogists have also become so adapted to collaborating with fellow genealogists,
they should also see that collaborating with archivists as well could produce amazing results. Both
are information professionals, and both need to recognize them as such in order to coexist
peacefully.
Bibliography
Barth, Christopher D. “Archivists, Genealogists, Access, and Automation: Past and Present Trends
in Archival Access Technologies and Their Implications for the Future of Genealogical
Research in Archives” (1997), available at: <http://www.arcticwind.com/cdb/writings//
archives1.shtml>
Bovin, Margareta. “Serving Genealogy and Local History Researchers – Experiences in the
Analogical Past and a Peek into the Digital Future.” IFLA Publications: International
Genealogy and Local History: Papers Presented by the Genealogy and Local History Section
at IFLA General Conferences 2001-2005. Berlin, K.G. Saur, 2008.
Duff, Wendy M. and Catherine A. Johnson. “Where Is the List with All the Names?
Information-Seeking Behavior of Genealogists.” The American Archivist. Vol. 66, 79-95.
Edwards, Rhianna Helen. Archivists’ Outlook on Service to Genealogists in Selected Canadian
Archives. MAS thesis, University of British Columbia, 1987.
Sweeney, Shelley. “The Source Seeking Cognitive Processes and Behavior of the In-Person Archival
Researcher.” PhD dissertation, University of Texas, 2002.