I caught a very interesting show on PBS about Oprah Winfrey and how they traced her family even though the slaves weren't listed in the population census, but found in owner's records. What a tough time our black friends have tracing their roots. At the end, they discussed mitrochondrial DNA and the possibility of tracing exactly which tribe Norah's ancestors had been stolen from and also that they could possibly find a cousin in Africa who is alive today from the same ancestors . WOW. Alice

Hello to all, Thanks for bringing up this subject about Oprah Winfrey's genealogy. I was researching my white ancestors in Central Virginia in the 1750-1880 time frame, and another research contacted me asking for my help. She was researching her black ancestors in the same area, same time frame, and they had the same last name as mine. So I started to do some searches online to help her. The 1860 census will not name the slaves. But there were many black people by then who were already free, and they are listed and would be listed as either black or mulatto. The 1850 census has a SLAVE SCHEDULE, it works by listing the OWNERS name, then it will count the number of female or male slaves. No names are used, but at least you can get an idea of numbers, in case you feel you can match someone to that list later. Wills of people will many times list their slaves names, they may be Willing a slave to another person, and sometimes they will make the slave free at the time of their death. I am sure that their are some records of slave sales. The 1870 census would be the FIRST census in which the slaves would be free and should have chosen a SURNAME to use and should be found in a census. The surname was not always their slave master's name. It could be any name they chose to use. There are 2 very nice books which are written that deal with black families who are looking back in their own genealogy in USA. Both have photos as well. "Having Our Say" by the Delany sisters (Sarah L. and A. Elizabeth). "Cane River" by Lalita Tademy. Both of these books are very interesting to read. Concerning DNA tests for use in genealogy www.familytreedna.com A male can have his dna tested, and by the way no blood or needles are used, a male's dna test will reveal the genetic group of his MALE line in a direct line from him to his father, to his father, and onwards in an unbroiken line backwards. This test will not reveal his mother's line or anything about any of the many many grandmother's he had. So that a male who is considered black today, his dna testmight reveal that his earliest male ancestor was a white european man. How is this? What if a slave woman had a son with a white man, that son would have the dna of the white european man. This dna never changes, it is then passed on from father to son. The reverse story is a white man today could have his dna tested and have his test results go back to an African male. How did this happen? A white woman had a son with a slave. Perhaps that son married a white lady, and so on, until so many generations pass, that the man would have no ideas about his biological background. For example: recently in Northern England, some white men, all of the same surname, had been tested for dna. They all showed that their earliest ancestor was an African male. The researchers feel this might have been during the Roman conquest of Britain, perhaps the Romans had African soldiers with them, and they left some sons there in England. There was a time in England when slaves were permitted, but it was ablolished by law in early 1700's. Also, I can recall that there is a professor living in Florida, and he had his dna tested, it goes directly back to Gheghis Khan the Mongolian/Chinese conqueror, who conquerored from China to the Meditereanean Sea. This professor said he has no idea how he is connected to Old Gheghis, but he is. For us women who want to be tested for dna, our results will tell us nothing about our father, or his father. Our results will tell us about our mother, and her mother, and her mother, and going back in a straight unbroken female line. This is something fun to do, get a piece of paper and mark backwards in an unbroken line, listing all your female ancestry, this is your maternal only line. Some people will be ending up at a early Native American woman in colonial 1600's in Virginia, for example, and this dna results will be shown to be a Native American type. Let's say a white european man lands in Jamestown VA in 1607, he finds the only woman available is a Native American tribal lady, and they start a family together. If those kids used their white fathers name, and in turn continued a tradition of marrying other white european people, after a few generations thay may not be aware of their biological roots and their tribal heritage. But dna will prove it. My uncle was William A. Sisemore of Southern California, his dna goes back to a Native American male. He had no Native American culture, or appearance. He looked like a typical white-european mixture, like many Americans. But his dna told a different story. The Sizemore name was in VA in the 1600's. Best regards, Lilly Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: <Alikat42@aol.com> To: <ohlorain@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:14 PM Subject: [OHLORAIN] PBS show traced Oprah's roots >I caught a very interesting show on PBS about Oprah Winfrey and how they > traced her family even though the slaves weren't listed in the population > census, but found in owner's records. What a tough time our black friends > have > tracing their roots. At the end, they discussed mitrochondrial DNA and > the > possibility of tracing exactly which tribe Norah's ancestors had been > stolen from > and also that they could possibly find a cousin in Africa who is alive > today > from the same ancestors . WOW. > > Alice > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OHLORAIN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message