The Rev. John Davenport was perhaps the best known of the several Davenports that arrived in America in the 1600s. His line is well researched and dates back at least to Orme de Auceporte around 1086 in England. Over the years there has much speculation that all or most of these Davenports were in some way related. Now we have more ammunition. The sample from kit # 9415 (Rev. John) has an exact match with the Albemarle Davenport line. It also has a 24/25 match with the Thomas of Dorchester line. This means that it is a pretty good bet that the Albemarle line descended from the Rev. John, or from a very near relative such as a brother, uncle, or cousin. ( I am not necessarily saying all these people existed). The same is true for the Thomas of Dorchester line. But we know Thomas and The Rev. John are in roughly the same generation so their connection would be in England. They could be brothers, cousins, have the same grandfather, etc... For the Albemarles - Our next step is to see if we find a connection between Richard born 1642 and The Rev. John Descendants in the USA. If not - we will need to look for a connection in England. I would also like to see a genealogy of the early Albemarles if someone has one. For the Thomas line - The two participants are from the Thomas > Charles branch. We could use a participant from one of the other sons - Jonathan, Ebenezer, or John. This might help pinpoint what Thomas actually was. ----------------- The second result that came in was kit # 9573. There were rumors in the family they were from the Humphrey line. The family also goes back to New Jersey where Humphrey descendants resided. It turns out those rumors were true. There is a 21/25 match with the other Humphreys. Normally we would not consider this a match. But since the Humphrey results reported so far are so "different" compared to everybody else tested at FTDNA (over 13600 samples) I will call it a match. Humphreys are only close to other Humphreys so far. I moved it from the "unknown" line to Humphrey. I will let the Humphrey researchers work with #9573 to look for a connection. ---------------- That's it for now. There should be more results back in a few days. Bill Davenport [email protected] Davenport Surname DNA Project Administrator

Great work! I do have a question, though. It would appear that #9573 indeed belongs to the Humphrey genetic pool, but 4/25 off in 400 years? Isn't that supposed to be too much? I had interpreted the fact that my cousin (#8305) was off by 2 from the Thomas line to mean the connection had to be back in England before the emigration, but if a descendant of Humphrey could be 4 off, then this would be out the window and we could be descended from Thomas or even John or the Albemarles. What do the people at FTDNA say about the odds of this? Do they have alternative theories (maybe a separate line of Davenports going way back in England from which the Humphreys came)? Maybe when we get most people tested, one of the scientists at FTDNA will wrap it up for us, giving us their opinion of how things look. On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 18:30, [email protected] wrote: > The Rev. John Davenport was perhaps the best known of the several Davenports > that arrived in America in the 1600s. His line is well researched and dates > back at least to Orme de Auceporte around 1086 in England. Over the years there > has much speculation that all or most of these Davenports were in some way > related. > > Now we have more ammunition. > > The sample from kit # 9415 (Rev. John) has an exact match with the Albemarle > Davenport line. It also has a 24/25 match with the Thomas of Dorchester line. > > This means that it is a pretty good bet that the Albemarle line descended > from the Rev. John, or from a very near relative such as a brother, uncle, or > cousin. ( I am not necessarily saying all these people existed). > > The same is true for the Thomas of Dorchester line. But we know Thomas and > The Rev. John are in roughly the same generation so their connection would be in > England. They could be brothers, cousins, have the same grandfather, etc... > > For the Albemarles - Our next step is to see if we find a connection between > Richard born 1642 and The Rev. John Descendants in the USA. If not - we will > need to look for a connection in England. I would also like to see a genealogy > of the early Albemarles if someone has one. > > For the Thomas line - The two participants are from the Thomas > Charles > branch. We could use a participant from one of the other sons - Jonathan, > Ebenezer, or John. This might help pinpoint what Thomas actually was. > > ----------------- > > The second result that came in was kit # 9573. There were rumors in the > family they were from the Humphrey line. The family also goes back to New Jersey > where Humphrey descendants resided. > > It turns out those rumors were true. There is a 21/25 match with the other > Humphreys. Normally we would not consider this a match. But since the Humphrey > results reported so far are so "different" compared to everybody else tested > at FTDNA (over 13600 samples) I will call it a match. Humphreys are only close > to other Humphreys so far. I moved it from the "unknown" line to Humphrey. > > I will let the Humphrey researchers work with #9573 to look for a connection. > > ---------------- > > That's it for now. There should be more results back in a few days. > > Bill Davenport > [email protected] > Davenport Surname DNA Project Administrator > > > ==== DAVENPORT Mailing List ==== > For instructions on unsubscribing or searching the list archives visit: > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~nvjack/davnport/group.htm > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237