Wynne You wrote: > "Maybe I don't comprehend the system here,  or misunderstood something, but I get the impression that perhaps some members are starting at the other end.   Iow,  .........  say, their name is Davenport and now they're trying connect to one of the lines being discussed.- For instance I keep seeing a Thomas mentioned, like 'are we related to this Thomas',  well, I for one have at least  6 Thomases in my database, one of which is Rev. Thomas Davenport.   Then I see Rev. John Davenport mentioned a number of times  -    I have a Rev. John Davenport, and for all I know he may have come to the US.- If I've hurt anyone's feelings I certainly regret that,  but I've worked on my ancestry for about 12 yrs now,  and have *learned the hard way that you can only begin with yourself and then work backwards. In addition,  my sister has taken several trips back over to Derbyshire and Cheshire where she searched the Record Offices and visited the little churches of Rev. Thomas,  Rev. Samuel and Rev. John Davenport." > My response: Most of the people that have been on this list for any length of time know or have learned that there were several "original" Davenports that appeared in the United States in the 1600/1700s. From these individuals sprang the various Davenport lines we have been discussing. This included Thomas Davenport in Dorchester, MA, prior to 1640; The Rev. John Davenport, perhaps the best known, arriving from England in 1637; Davis Davenport born about 1660 in VA; and several others. Many of these lines are well documented and there is currently much research going on. In prior messages when we refer to "Thomas Davenport of Dorchester", etc.. we are referring to these individuals and their descendants. If someone can track their own ancestors back a couple generations they may be able to tie into one of these lines. That is where sharing information really comes in handy. You never know who might have that missing link. Why try to do all the research back to 1640 when it has been done before - possibly many times. Most of the recent discussion about these individuals had to do with DNA testing. Y-DNA testing is beneficial for the person being tested and also for the group. If he doesn't know which line, if any, he belongs to his DNA might tell him. He can then better restrict his research. If the person being tested knows his line then his DNA can be compared to other lines to see if there is a common ancestor. Bill Davenport [email protected]