Several years ago, I became interested in genealogy. It didn't take long to find out how quickly stories can become muddled and changed over just a few generations.
My great grandmother's father, who died when she was 1 year old, was said to have been trampled by a horse that was spooked by teenagers. I later find out through several newspaper sources that instead he had been driving a delivery for work when his wagon went off the side of a bluff, and he fell under the wagon, and it crushed him to death. This was my grandmother's grandfather, yet by the generation of my grandmother the story had already changed significantly.
My grandfather's grand aunt, his grandfather's sister, had died in childbirth, and the child died shortly after and was placed in her coffin with her afterward, or so I had been told through the family. When I saw her obituary, I found out she had actually been sick for some time before passing away; her death was not a sudden unexpected event. Again, this was only three generations later, with my grandfather knowing his grandfather very well, and my grandfather had already gotten the story wrong.
My grandfather's grandfather had accidentally shot and killed a friend of his, according to my grandfather they were climbing over a fence while hunting and his gun accidentally went off. His friend remained alive for a few days to tell the police it was an accident. Turns out, a very detailed newspaper article states my grandfather's grandfather and several other friends of his were in a hunting cabin together. My grandfather's grandfather was cleaning his gun; the gun went off and shot his friend in the face and killed him instantly. Still only three generations later but the story again changed significantly.
If it hadn't been for the Internet age I most likely would have never seen these actual obituaries and newspaper articles that reveal the accurate events. There were seeds of historical truths in these claims; my great grandmother's father was crushed to death when she was very young; my great grandfather's sister did have a baby who died a few weeks after her and the casket was opened, and the baby was buried with her; my grandfather's grandfather did shoot and kill a friend on accident and it involved hunting. Still, at least two of these stories had not only changed but changed significantly, only three generations later, and it would have always been assumed the family oral traditions were the accurate version of events.
If stories can be changed significantly after only three generations, and the accurate versions are only caught because of the modern internet age where we have access to television, pages like ancestry, newspapers.com, for historical records, etc., are we really supposed to believe that stories around 2000 years ago which weren't even starting to be written until roughly 30 years after the events they describe have to be accurate, because there were living witnesses to these events who would have "corrected" these errors? My grandparents knew individuals who were contemporaries to the stories told and they still got them wrong. These stories were also spreading far and wide, surely out of reach of the "eye witnesses" fairly quickly.
Never mind the fact the fact that these events involve something as emotionally strong as religion, these aren't just historical family facts. There is much more reason for embellishment for these stories. My grandfather and grandmother personally knew individuals who personally knew their grandparents, which would be their own parents, and they still got the stories wrong.
The moral of the story is, don't believe a story has to be 100% correct because of eyewitnesses, whether it's in favor of your religion or not. Don't assume any stories are 100% correct just because you want them to be. Give skepticism a chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment