Chris Yes exactly right. In general this is why the matches follow the surname and why it has been used to investigate that divergent surname spellings are from a common ancestor. There is also a website associated with the book, http://www.dnaandfamilyhistory.com/ which does have some interesting links in it but the site does look as though it hasn't been finished, there are a lot of places where the heading is there but the actual link has not been set up. I mainly followed the links associated with the book which do seem more compltete Regards Peter -----Original Message----- From: chris [mailto:edwards05@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: 27 February 2006 17:02 To: peter@wharton-family.org; ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B.C.] RE: DNA Thanks Peter, You have explained it well. Just a couple of questions just to make sure that I have got the gist. Am I right in believing that for a match, both parties first of all have to be male and each then has to have an unbroken ascending line of fathers and sons until they reach a common ancestor? Meaning that my male first cousins on my mother's side of the family would NOT show up as a match with me even though we have the same grandfather. But male first cousins on my paternal side would match providing they were the children of my father's brother and not of his sister. Kind regards, Chris(topher)

And just to muddy the waters, apparently 1 in 12 of all males claiming irish ancestry is descended from Niall of The Nine Hostages!!! Ann Marie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Wharton" <peter@wharton-family.org> To: <ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 6:22 PM Subject: RE: [B.C.] RE: DNA > Chris > Yes exactly right. > In general this is why the matches follow the surname and why it has been > used to investigate that divergent surname spellings are from a common > ancestor. > > There is also a website associated with the book, > http://www.dnaandfamilyhistory.com/ which does have some interesting links > in it but the site does look as though it hasn't been finished, there are > a > lot of places where the heading is there but the actual link has not been > set up. I mainly followed the links associated with the book which do seem > more compltete > > Regards > > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: chris [mailto:edwards05@blueyonder.co.uk] > Sent: 27 February 2006 17:02 > To: peter@wharton-family.org; ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [B.C.] RE: DNA > > Thanks Peter, > You have explained it well. Just a couple of questions just to make sure > that I have got the gist. > Am I right in believing that for a match, both parties first of all have > to > be male and each then has to have an unbroken ascending line of fathers > and > sons until they reach a common ancestor? > Meaning that my male first cousins on my mother's side of the family would > NOT show up as a match with me even though we have the same grandfather. > But male first cousins on my paternal side would match providing they were > the children of my father's brother and not of his sister. > Kind regards, > Chris(topher) > > ______________________________