On April 22, 2003 I reported to the list we had some "puzzling" results for one of our DNA test participants. It was "so different from any Davenport and any other results in the FamilyTree DNA database." Now for the rest of the story. The results of the first participant from the Humphrey of Barbados line had come in. It showed he could not possibly be related to any of the other Davenport tested so far. Also, all other Davenports, even those known not to be related, had a DNA pattern that indicated Western Europe origins. That was expected. The Humphrey participant had a pattern that is typical of Middle East origin. This Middle East origin could be 500 years ago, 1000 years, or several thousand. Who knows. But it was unlike any other tested Davenport. There are a couple ways this could be explained. I will call him by his kit number - 8742. 8742's branch of the Humphrey line is Humphrey (b. abt 1600) > William (1664) > William (1696) > William (1744) > William (1766) > James (1824) > etc... There may have been some kind of "paternity event" such as an illegitimate child, an adoption, a Davenport raising a non-Davenport's son who changes his name, or a male Davenport remarrying and her child adopts the Davenport name. Anything that broke the male to male "bloodline." If a male non-Davenport "snuck" in anywhere down this branch - that could explain things. The second possibility would be if something happened prior to Humphrey. Researchers have determined that Humphrey was born in England - the source of most Davenports. It is possible that Humphrey or one his ancestors changed his name to Davenport - for whatever reason. In other words he never was related to the "resident" Davenports. Humphrey had several children. 8742 only represents one branch. We need to test other branches - such as his son Humphrey, Jr. If another branch matched 8742 then we can conclude that Humphrey was not a Davenport as we know it. We would then expect his other branches to match 8742 too. If, however, the other branch did not match 8742, then we have a different story. If branch "#2" matched other Davenports then Humphrey really was a Davenport and an "event" happened in 8742's line. But there is the possibility branch #2 doesn't match either one. We will deal with that if it comes. Sooo... before we can make any conclusions we need to test the other Humphrey branches. If there are any Humphrey, or possible Humphrey descendants out there or if you know one - please email me. Bill Davenport [email protected] Davenport Surname DNA Project Administrator