More Living Columnists

• Dolores Sanchez Badillo: The view from the fenceline
• Mary Penner: Learning about your past is an awesome journey
• Steve Brewer: Goofy fads can hold fond memories for families

MOST RECENT TRIB STORIES

• ABQTrib.com to remain available
  08:48 a.m., February 25, 2008
• Congressman is indicted
  08:37 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Series of attacks target Green Zone
  08:36 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Iran is defying U.N., agency says
  08:35 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Waterboarding approval probed
  08:34 a.m., February 23, 2008

TRIB IN THE BLOGOSPHERE*

• Ty Murray Invitational thrills fans in Albuquerque
• Is Rome Burning?
• Ominous Skies
• The Road to Invalidation
• Albuquerque company participates in “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition”

*Note: The Tribune does not create and is not responsible for the blogosphere's headlines and stories. These links to blogs talking about ABQTrib.com are automatically generated. Use them at your own risk.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• Comments
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

Professional genealogists announced this week that the slave ancestors of the Rev. Al Sharpton were owned by the ancestors of segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond.

Since it wasn't uncommon for slaves to have children sired by dwellers of the plantation house, some wonder if the Sharpton/Thurmond connection could be more than two men who ran for president.

This scintillating possibility has ignited a fire under the Internet bloggers and other media types as they ponder the meaning of it all.

One blogger commented, "I just recently discovered that I'm descended from Adam. What's the big deal with Sharpton and Thurmond?"

I'm not sure if this blogger is sarcastic, subtly ironic, or just plain idiotic. Nevertheless, the story has people talking.

Just what is the big deal? For people unfamiliar with genealogy and its inherent twists and turns, it's a gee-whiz head-scratcher. For people interested in social history, it's fodder for dozens of dissertations on slavery, segregation, and economic and social opportunity.

For the average curiosity-seeker, it's the motivation to park in front of the computer and start looking for your own famous or infamous ancestors. That's the deal that makes me cringe a little.

Go ahead and hunt for your ancestors on the Internet, but keep in mind it's a "caveat emptor" activity.

I use the Internet every day in my research. But I'm cautious. Hundreds of my distant relatives have posted family trees on the Internet that include my family branches. I look at those occasionally and use the details simply as clues for further research.

When you see family trees with women having children when they're four years old, and when you see people buried in states they never visited, it doesn't take long to realize that this research is suspect.

Use the Internet to research your family tree, but don't gleefully download page after page of undocumented genealogies and then declare that you're done researching your family history.

I use Internet resources that are based on original documents like census records. I also hunt for records from reliable sources like state libraries and archives.The professionals at Ancestry.com who researched Sharpton's family tree did just that. They used valid, primary documents to uncover his roots.

When you find something about your family tree on the Internet, find out where the information came from. If there isn't any documentation with the information, it's just a clue, not a fact.

Anyone can declare they have famous relatives, and many people can find a family tree on the Internet that says it's so. But until you have verifiable proof obtained through cautious and careful research, I'd hold off planning the family reunion with your famous "relatives."