Thanks to a not very good job (rather lousy would be more accurate) of research, I was one of those who managed to overlook Elias Bowie and then had questions about Charlie Scott, yet another hard lesson in the perils of researching US stock car racing and NASCAR in particular. What Jim points out is another example of just how difficult it is to correctly revise what is generally accepted by the fans and by many or most in the recent auto racing press, not to mention the bulk of auto racing historians.
I think one of the primary reasons Elias Bowie was overlooked was because it happened on the West Coast. There are many in the racing world that seem to know absolutely nothing of racing from the Mountain States westward. They know of some of the more famed tracks and events, but past that, little else. Often, the background and regional racing experience of the drivers seems a complete mystery to those East of the Mississippi, even with some remarkably well-known racers.
But, beyond the regionalism that is as sadly prevalent in portions of the motorsport press as it is in other media endeavors, I can see how this happened (and continues to happen). The "fans" generally accept what is put forth as fact. One assumes that a writer/author who comes across as knowledgeable is, in fact, correct with the information they present. However, as we've discussed ad infinitum, many assume the first person got it right and simply copy off that and repeat it. Most errors are simply handed down. And, yes, they are difficult to correct or revise.
I don't want this to be so long that folks eyes glaze over, but I'll try posting a more detailed look at the evolution of "The First Black/African-American Driver in NASCAR('s Top Series)."
Edited by Jim Thurman, 04 December 2017 - 22:20.