Chapter one of the novel begins with Scout, our narrator, discussing what amounts to a family genealogy. She reviews in specific detail how the Finch family came to live in Maycomb, Alabama. By doing so, she brings up a key issue: the importance of family and family background.
I'll be honest, the first time I read this chapter, I asked myself when Scout would cut to the chase and get to the point. She seemed to be digressing often when she would go off on another tangent and discuss certain families in town, like the Haverfords, for example. But upon further reflection, I see why Harper Lee made this choice. Scout's comment early on about how "Being Southerners it was source of shame to some members of the family that we had no recorded ancestors on either side of the Battle of Hastings" illuminates this idea (Lee 3). The Battle of Hastings, of course, took place in England in 1066.
But what does Scout mean when she says that it was a "source of shame" to not have distant relatives in such a battle that took place on a totally different continent, in a totally different century? Essentially, the farther back one can trace one's lineage, the more respected one is. Harper Lee is conveying how important family background is in Southern society. Where one comes from, and who they are related to, is extremely important, even to a fault. This is clear when Scout mentions some of Atticus' early clients, the Haverford boys, which is "...in Maycomb County a name synonymous with jackass" (Lee 5). Clearly, family background comes with its own prejudices in Southern society. Are all Havorfords jackasses? Surely, it's possible that there are some who are not. This idea of one's background affecting a person's reputation, fair or not, is obviously an important theme that will no doubt be developed throughout the novel. Otherwise, why would Scout discuss it so much in chapter 1?