Keith - this is hysterical. Thanks for the morale boost!! Dawnene -----Original Message----- From: keith d bailey [mailto:kbailey@frontiernet.net] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:17 AM To: BRIDGES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BRIDGES-L] DNA question Dawnene, Remember that at some point in time, no one had surnames. So eventually you will run into all kinds of distant relatives with varied surnames that track back to one man way back when... He may have been a "Carpenter" that took-up building "Bridges" and may have even been a "Cartwright" for a while. In each case, he could have had children or grand-children that adopted that occupation as a Surname in years to come. . I believe you may find it interesting to look into the Sisk family. There are so many possibilities that might be discovered by looking into it that might otherwise be forgotten. Just keep in mind that your Bridges may or may not have known of any relationship to the Sisk family. I'll use folks in my family as an example. My ggg-grandpa William Long married into the Bridges. His brother George had children with my GGG-grandpa Gee's sister, but the children went by Gee and not Long. His other children went by long. They considered themselves half-siblings, but some of the grandchildren tried to hide the facts and to this day, some claim there no kin. Now, my GGG-grandpa Gee's brother John married GGG-grandpa Long's sister Margret, but must have gotten divorced. The children went by Gee for a while, then seem to have went by the surname of there step-father, a Garrett. Though one seems to have reverted back to using Gee as her maiden name when she got married. My ggg-grandfather William Long als had another brother Joseph who married his 1st cousin Mary Garrett. Mary already had a son by a Holden, but the child went by the name long. Like wise, Joseph had previously been married to a Grasty. When Joseph came back from fighting the civilwar he divorced. Come to find out, Grasty had shacked up with another man. One of there sons took in a boy... some say it could have been his, but the story was that he was at the mill and a lady gave the baby to him because she was unable to care for the child. Whatever you decide to to, goodluck. Blood may be thicker than water, but without water blood dries-up and blows away. Keith Bailey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dawnene" <dby1107@comcast.net> To: <BRIDGES-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 2:12 AM Subject: [BRIDGES-L] DNA question > Hi y'all: > > > > I think I've asked this before, but my braincells are going, so bear with > me. > > > > My John Bridges, Livingston County, KY, does not seem to match any other > Bridges DNA on our test-site, although he IS close, and does seem to be in > the general vicinity. HOWEVER, > > In the 25-marker testing, he matches with 24, and is one off of one marker, > with his mother's neighbors, the Sisks. I wouldn't have known his, but I > kept getting emails that they'd found a match for me - and it was always > with a Sisk. The answer seems very obvious, but I'm still clinging to the > hope that he might be a Bridges (don't know why, but you get attached to > these people after years of research.) > > SO, how likely is it that two surnames are so closely related in the 25 > marker test? What would all of you do?? Shoot, my maiden name was Bridges, > and I'm kindof attached to it! > > > > Thanks, > > Dawnene > > >