I've been accused of being more interested in history than genealogy. Is it true? Maybe, but how do you separate one from the other? How do you research a person without taking into consideration the economic situation of the area and his political and religious beliefs? Do you discount everything but names and dates of births, marriages and deaths?
How can you understand how your ancestor lived if you don't know what events he witnessed or which events played a part in the decisions he made? Do you just forget that he served in the Civil War and suffered from his wounds the rest of his life? Do you forget that he was a minister and helped establish a new church?
On the other hand, how can you understand history if you don't research the people who participated in the events? Do you study the Civil War as a series of conflicts without looking at the men who fought the battles?
Where does one stop and the other begin? In my mind, history and genealogy support each other and must be studied and researched together to get a more complete picture of our ancestors. What do you think?