Within the next few weeks I may be able to provide a good testimonial on advantages (to me) of testing done by FTDNA. Here's a little background on my situation. In the 1970s a J. S. Hurst (my 1st cousin once removed) did a lot of "conventional research" on our HURST family line. He didn't live to see his work published, but in 1982 his sister published the book "Hurst and Allied Families". I received a copy of the book & it sat on a shelf for about 17 years. When I retired, in 1999, I decided to do some verification & see if I could add anything, using the internet. It didn't take me long to realize that "internet genealogy" was NOT the end all in this field. Without getting too long, I'll say that I have done a lot of traveling around GA, TN. MD, VA, NC & SC in the last few years. Imagine my surprise when I found my cousin's book to be incomplete, inaccurate and in some areas downright untruthful. So much for "old time" methods. Maybe I was just a little more dilligent at digging through records in courthouses, libraries, archeives, etc. & searched out & talked to more folks than he did. Anyhow, back to the subject. It seems that my 3rd great grandfather, Jeremiah Hurst, dropped out of the sky with a wife & 3 kids in 1810, in time for the census, in Wythe County VA. Lots of other HURSTs there & nearby who could have been parents or siblings, but no record (that I've found) of who he "belongs to". Yes, I've been to Wytheville a couple times as well as Tennessee counties where he live between 1812 & his death in 1854. Found lots of "new" info (not in book) about him, his kids & other descendants but no "evidence" of who his parents are. There are currently 3 HURSTs who know they are descended from another guy in Wythe County at that time, who have been tested & are 100% match on the 25 marker test. If I come back with at least a 23/25 match with them (even better a 25/25 match) I will KNOW that I am at least related - if it's 25/25 match, the man they're descended from is probably my 4th, maybe 5th great grandfather. I know that's not as sure as finding a name on a will or administration, but it sure beats anything I've found in the last 3.5 years of searching, having spent a good bit of bucks traveling around the south. Someone mentioned the cost of the tests as a negative point. The 25 marker test cost me about $172.00 including postage. The 12 marker test is less, also less accurate & I did not even consider it. I don't think I ever went on a research trip where it didn't cost me about twice that much, and not all of the trips produced anything of value, genealogically speaking. I believe DNA testing is another tool, just like the internet is nothing more than a tool, to help some folks in their quest for the truth. Of course there can be some down sides to the truth, like the two "brothers" who were so far off on Y DNA that there was no way they had the same father, and they thought they did. Must have been a little hanky panky going on, but of course nobody wanted to talk about that truth. Anyhow, I'll post the results of my test when they come, whether they accomplish what I hope, or not. Regards Ernie Hurst ernie5823@earthlink.net

At 01:31 PM 5/8/2003 -0700, you wrote: >Max -- >Maybe Mr. Parshal should check out the Payne family use of DNA to >see genetic applications of DNA. While it didn't answer all the >questions [what single source can/does], it certainly did help. >Patrick Payne did a wonderful job for the group. >Kathryn Ide Langford >"Kathryn Ide Langford" <kathlang@attbi.com> Dear Kathryn, Thank for your suggestion. I agree with you. As a matter of fact, before unsubscribing to this list, and on your same line, I prepared yesterday a few resources to its "skeptical" members, with the suggestion that someone like Ardis Parshall contact the coordinators of those family studies, and express to them why he doesn't believe they are genealogists. Please, Ardis, cc to me your e-mail exchange with them, I will certainly be interested in discussion that will follow. Don't expect me to do the homework for you. Do it yourself. Everything is within your reach. I can appreciate and understand Richard Pence's input that he speaks out of not "knowing enough about DNA testing". Here are a few opportunities for everybody to increase the level of knowledge and to interact with people that on this subject - know more than you do: http://www.roperld.com/RoperGenetics.htm http://www.duerinck.com/results.html http://www.mumma.org/DNA.htm http://www.mctiernan.com/dnaraw.htm http://www.clangregor.org/ http://www.shgs.org/ And per Kathryn's suggestion: http://home.earthlink.net/~ppayne1203/ If you feel that you need more, please let me know, as I have about another 400 families that have web sites of their own, and 100 that are only paper documented. Now, please, don't get back to this list tomorrow saying that you've seen those seven above, analyzed and accepted or rejected the influence of a DNA study in genealogy . This will only tell me that you are not serious, which I am sure is not the case. Take your time, read it thoroughly and write to the project coordinators (which are very helpful and knowledgeable people). And then make your judgement. Lesley, would you mind sending me a copy of the paper or the research study which shows that "the rare of Y mutation is a little higher, but not sufficient to show much difference within the number of generations that can be historically verified." Besides being personally interested in it I would like to forward it to Drs. Hammer and Walsh. Finally, a word in reply to someone that mentioned something about "vested interest". My educational background is Aeronautical Engineering, Political Sciences and much later I decided to pursue an MBA here at Rice University. I make my living from real estate. Very nicely, by the way. Genealogy entered my life a few years ago, when one of my partners in other ventures (including real estate), an avid genealogist for 30 years, started a small hobby because DNA helped him find a link between two branches of his family, where no paper trail was available - one branch was in California, the other in Argentina. He asked me to join his hobby since it was growing into a business. For him, this isn't either his main source of living. Our vested interest is doing what we do in a very passionate way. Totally immersing in it. Willing to learn more and more. Willing to deal with skepticals that question themselves - because we keep always questioning ourselves. This is how we grow. There is nothing more frustrating than dealing with people that are happy with what they know, and who believe that the road ends there. Leslie, please don't forget to send me that paper, as I am unsubscribing from this list. Best Regards Max Blankfeld Max Blankfeld <max@familytreedna.com>

I am no longer in private practice, but I represented a number of estates a number of years ago. First of all, probate and intestacy laws are generally governed by the State in which the deceased was domiciled at the time of his (or her) death. As a consequence, the "next of kin" in one State could be different from the "next of kin" in another. Assuming an intestacy, the administrator of the estate would be the person responsible for providing the Estate Court with a listing of those entitled to share in the estate of the intestate deceased. More than likely, there would be an affidavit filed by the administrator that would indicate who, to the best of his or her knowledge, were those heirs entitled to share in the estate. It is certainly possible that the listing could fail to name a rightful heir if that person was simply outside the knowledge of the administrator. Most States have some type of legal publication that is required to be "advertised" in a newspaper within the confines of the deceased's home. This publication would state that creditors and possible heirs of the deceased would have a prescribed amount of time to declare their connection to the estate. In summary, a lost heir tends to remain a lost heir because of the lack of contact to the decease. However, the estate papers could be very valuable. For example, there may be real estate deeds that flow from the administration of the estate so that legal title to the real estate can be conveyed by the estate. These papers are particularly invaluable. Good luck! TRobin9682@aol.com

> Should it be dismissed because it is not "genealogy" does not > reflect on the work in anyway whatsoever, rather on the character > of the person refusing to accept the valuable assistance of > colleagues working across related disciplines. Gil -- You misunderstand me. I am not dismissing disciplines that are not genealogy, not in the slightest. I am far from refusing to accept the valuable assistance of colleagues working across related disciplines. While admitting to skepticism about the genealogical value of DNA testing, I have never denied its possible value; I have only asked for illustrations that it is in fact valuable. This IS a genealogy forum, so you can expect that most of the participants are principally interested in genealogy. I certainly am. It has been repeatedly stated by several list participants that commercial DNA testing has resulted in the successful resolution of numerous genealogical puzzles. Wonderful! But how? Would you, or any other participant, please have the kindness to pick any successful story and describe it in a Methods-y way so that I can understand HOW such testing can resolve a genealogical puzzle? Please? I do not deny the possibility, but I do not understand. I am asking for an example, and neither you nor Max nor anyone else is offering one. Perhaps I can do my part in resolving the miscommunication by illustrating what I am hoping to find. Some possibilities: 1. One of the articles on Max's list tells about a family who confirmed their tradition that they were Cohens by using DNA testing to show that they carried the cohenim gene. How does this contribute to their genealogy? While they are now confident that some unknown and indeterminately distant ancestor was a Cohen, have they really learned anything about how they fit into that genealogical line and how they are connected to any identified person? Traced lineages are the essence of genealogy. To me, the cohenim story is no more genealogical than family pride about being Italian, or being "some kind of cousin to Robert E. Lee" -- all very virtuous, lovely, of good report and praiseworthy, but not genealogical until you know WHICH Italians you descend from or HOW you connect to Robert E. Lee. What am I missing here? How does this scientific confirmation of their family tradition contribute to their traced lineage? 2. Perhaps a commercial DNA test would indicate that I am descended from the Parshalls of Xville and completely unrelated to the Parshalls of Yville. I could then take advantage of that process of elimination you describe, and focus entirely on the Xville family to save years of effort and thousands of dollars in not barking up the wrong tree. Bravo! This would be the perfect illustration. If you have such a success story, please present it as a Methods-y case study so that I can understand why going the DNA route is better than, or at least as good as, the traditional method of examining documents. 3. Jeremiah Lapp was a Loyalist who left Pennsylvania and ended up in Ontario. I have traced and documented my descent from Alois F. Lapp, who -- based on geography, timing, and name patterns -- is almost certainly the grandson of Jeremiah Lapp. I have not yet found the records to confirm which of Jeremiah's sons was the father of Alois. Is there any way your DNA testing could tell me whether that mystery link is John Lapp? or Anthony Lapp? or a completely unrelated Lapp ancestor? Do you have a success story where someone has resolved a similar genealogical puzzle? Those are three possible success stories that would make it clear to me how DNA testing can be an aid to genealogy. And I make no apology for the fact that it's genealogy that is important to me. I'm open to sociology and anthropology and statistics and the art of pumpkin carving if any of those disciplines can aid my genealogical search. Just help me understand how. Please. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com

I know very little about DNA studies, but I have enjoyed reading this thread. I also have a question that I need answered in "layperson" terms. I have a suspect line in my tree. I've located a few descendants from the line. The preponderence of the evidence suggest we all descend from a Hugh and Agnes (Stewart) Gordon in Co. Down, Ireland. (ca. 1800). Would DNA testing prove this relationship? Who would need to be tested? There are no known males at this time. Sandra SGordon817@aol.com

> Would you allow me to send your e-mail to a few of our customers > that "don't seem to be genealogists", so that they can respond > directly to you? I'll cc to you the e-mail that I send them. Max: Will your customers want to argue that they are in fact genealogists, that knowing they are descended in an indistinct way from some general ethnic group is the equivalent of a detailed and carefully constructed pedigree? Don't obligate me to enter that debate in personal correspondence with customers who evidently* have a philosophically different understanding of genealogical research. I have explained the kind of Methods-y illustration I need in order to appreciate the genealogical value of DNA testing. You have said that numerous such success stories have resulted from your testing. I will be satisfied when you, as the representative of your process and in contact with your own satisfied customers, filter their experiences and produce a concrete illustration of a genealogical puzzle that has been solved through the use of DNA testing. Until then, I retain my original skepticism of the genealogical value of commercial DNA testing. (Candidly, the skepticism is growing stronger with every exchange, and every failure to produce a single case study.) *evident, in that (a) they have already turned to commercial DNA testing while I am still searching for its genealogical validity; and (b) their testimonials express great satisfaction for the process without providing any clue as to how the testing enabled them to trace their lineage. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com

Ardis <AEParshall@aol.com> wrote: > But surely from all of your happily burbling satisfied customers, > you have gathered a single genealogical case study where someone > used your DNA test to prove a specific chain of descent from a given > person. Gee, Ardis, apparently you missed the Wall Street Journal article last month which gives all sorts of goodies that DNA testing has brought to genealogists. Not the least of which is that it found the roots of the reporter! Honest. ['DNA Testing Helps Find Family Roots' (From The Wall Street Journal), By Ken Wells; uncertain date (possibly 6 Mar 2003), but a cached copy of the story can be found if you seach in Google for this comgination of words: Wall Street Journal DNA Wells] The story begins: "Jim Wells, a longtime University of Kentucky mathematics professor, went to bed one night pondering a maddening and fruitless decades-long search for the origins of an ancestor. He woke up the next day to have his history handed to him in an e-mail. 'It's astonishing,' says the 70-year-old Mr. Wells of the recent revelations regarding his fifth great-grandfather, John Wells, who turned out, as Mr. Wells had suspected but could never prove, to be a Pennsylvania Quaker with British roots. 'It just didn't seem possible we would ever find his origins.'" The story says that Mr. Wells found out all this because he was a participant in a Y-chromosome Wells family DNA study. It later says that "Mr. Wells not only verified his theories about John Wells but found out his roots actually go all the way back to one Henry Wells, an English Quaker who immigrated to Pennsylvania around 1684." The story is vague on this part, but it says that Mr. Wells was able to do this "by comparing what he knows of his genealogy with the new data, [and then] fill in missing pieces." [I was disappointed in this, because I was hoping they had identified some new DNA markers for Quakerism or Pennsylvanianism. That apparently is not the case, so I am still puzzled at how Mr. Wells zeroed in on the Pennsylvania Quaker who came from England - especially when the literature tells me this kind of a conclusion is not possible with this kind of testing.] Here's another "success" story, Ardis. This one concerns Kevin Duerinck, "a Rochester, N.Y., genealogy enthusiast": "He organized his own surname DNA project about two years ago to answer a question unanswerable by conventional means because ancient records that might have shed light had been destroyed in fires: Was his family related to one or more of some 28 ancient Germanic clans with surnames spelled similarly to his? He rounded up a dozen volunteers representing a range of those names. "To date, the tests, conducted by Family Tree DNA [free plug, Max!], show that the Duerincks are relatives of at least two of those clans, the Durincks and the Diericks. 'We're talking about establishing a relationship to thousands of people,' says the 46-year-old Mr. Duerinck." Aside from the fact that there is no explanation of how Family Tree DNA was able to use "about a dozen" contemporary DNA samples to reach its reported conclusions concerning relationships to "ancient Germanic clans," my mind is reeling from Mr. Duerincks comment: "We're talking about establishing a relations to thousands of people." [Let's gve him some slack and say he must have been quoted out of context.] It seems to matter not that there is no way on earth to know who any of these thousands of people are and exactly how you are related. Those finer points are what consititute genealogy. Being related to "thousands" is a known fact for everyone! Perhaps we should introduce Mr. Duerinck to Mr. Wells, the U-Ky mathematics professor. The latter perhaps could explain to the former some of the theories of probabilities. The WSJ story didn't say how ancient thes early clans were, but given the facts of "pedigree collapse" (in short, when you go back far enough, there aren't enough living people to fill all of the theoretical spots in an ancestor chart), the chances are pretty good he is a descendant of practically everyone alive at the time! Now that's really news! We're talking in the millions, not just the thousands! Pump those into your genealogy program! But, Ardis, here is the most outstanding success story of them all. In case you missed it, an accompanying story to the above in the Wall Street Jorunal is headlined: "Reporter Uses DNA Method To Find His Family's Roots." [The story isn't all that complicated, but you can see the details for yourself by doing the Google search suggested above.] Reporter Wells professes to be a family historion who has searched "on and off" for the last 22 years for the roots of his great grandfather, Rufus Henry Wells, who lived in Arkansas. The only clues he had stemmed from a hand-written genealogy prepared by a great aunt. This gave information on the father and grandfather of Rufus, including their given names, a possible place of residence, supposed maiden names of their wives and said they were Virginians. Reporter Wells said that all efforts to follow up on that were in vain. The reporter then participated in the Wells Family DNA study, got word that he matched some cousins in a known "baseline" group (one with sound genealogical records) and was put in touch with one of them. This fellow had "the Wells Book" that includeed the details on the reporter's Virginia ancestors! There's no doubt that one of the best uses of DNA testing is in surname studies like this one. They can identify those who may descend from the same progenitor OR HIS MALE KIN. But what the headline said was that "Reporter Uses DNA Method To Find His Family's Roots." Nope. What the DNA study did, in fact, was provide him with the name of the cousin. It was the cousin who "found" the reporter's family roots. One does not have to have a DNA test to make these sorts of connections! I'm not sure how much money Reporter Wells invested in his DNA test (maybe he put it on his expense account?), but I have a tip for him right out of Genealogy 101: "Review of the Literature Is an Early Step." It would have been a whole lot cheaper to wander into a Family History Center, maybe 20 years ago, examine the Family History Library Catalog and then order a few microfilms. Doing the "review of the literature" is pretty standard stuff and with the names the reporter alreaady knew, he would have had no trouble finding his own family in the index and in "the Wells book" itself. Then he could have been busily at work doing the fun part for the past 20 years: verifying and amplifying the details! There you have it, Ardis. I guess you and I are just too skeptical. The success stories are all around us. What I am looking for now is where to sign up for the graduate course that tells you how to find your Pennsylvania Quaker ancestor "with British roots" through a DNA surname study! Wow. (I wonder if it works for Pennsylvania Dutch?) Regards, Richard "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

"Ava Connelly" <aconnelly@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > The index can be searched free, but there is a cost, albeit a very > small cost to view and download the record. 30 Credits cost 36.00 > (GBP), to view a record is one credit, if you decide this is the > correct person it is a further 5 credits to download and print. While I agree with everything else you say, there's a slight typo here. The cost is GBP 6 per 30 credits, not 36. It works out at just over a pound per image (and the value of the pound is falling folks!) Lesley Robertson Lesley Robertson <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl>

"Gil Hardwick" <gruagach@highway1.com.au> wrote: > Lesley, unlike mtDNA which is passed from the mother to son > and daughter alike, the Y-chromosome is passed from father to > son ONLY. If you had read the rest of this thread, you would have found that that I gave that information in an earlier post. It has not been a subject of dispute. Lesley Robertson Lesley Robertson <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl>

"Max Blankfeld" <max@familytreedna.com> wrote: > Let's look at it, therefore, in a more analytical way: there are > subjective perceptions, pro and con, and then, there's the science. Let's discuss the science first. I have this quote from you: An exact match means that: 50% of the times a common ancestor existed 7 generations or less 90% of the times a common ancestor existed 23 generations or less 95% of the times a common ancestor existed 30 generations or less Let's suppose I round up 50 or 100 men with the name PENCE to do a surname analysis seeking to find which may stem from which progenitors in the U.S. This sort of an approach seems to be popular right now (and of some considerable value when properly designed to test a stated hypotheses). Let's further say the tests cost $100 a throw. Now, after we spend $5,000 or $10,000, will the report say there is a 50 percent chance that cenrtain specific persons within the sample are related within seven generations? If not, then what will we get for our investment? If I had $5,000 or $10,000 to spend on Pence family research I think I could find some more definitive results. Only a small fraction of the existing records have been adequately researched. And even after the DNA testing dust had settled, these records still would have to be checked to confirm any clues that the DNA testing might provide. > Every one has the right to chose their own approach towards > something, and so, it is within your right to believe that time has > not come for you to add DNA to the set of tools available for your > genealogy research, because you don't know enough of it. That's OK. If I left the impression that the reason I am not pursuing DNA testing right now is that I "don't know enough of it" and that "it" is Pence genealogy, I apologize. At this point I think there is more value in other approaches than there is in DNA testing. There certainly is no lack of opportunites for a whole lot more "traditonal research." If your implication is that I don't know enough about DNA testing, then you may be right. But what I do know about it tells me what I said in my first message - the cost-benefit ratio isn't what I think is reasonable. > On the opposite side you have those that found enormous value to it. > Just join the DNA-GENEALOGY list at Rootsweb and check it. I'll take a look. But as I said before, someone may place a high value on knowing that he and a correspondent are somehow related. However, this knowledge is of little value to a genealogists without proper documentation establishing or confirming that link. > The science is there for everybody to check it thoroughly. The > customers are there for you to question them and challenge their > findings directly. I don't think it's fair for their findings to be > challenged without giving them the opportunity to interact with you. > And I don't think it is fair to challenge the science without fully > understanding it. I am not sure what conclusions could be reached by my "challenging their findings directly." Isn't this supposed to be science? Aren't the "findings" suppose to statements of fact? What "findings" are lay persons obtaining from these studies? It is often difficult to keep those starting out in genealogy from making unwarranted "leaps" based on a similarity of given names or the fact that people lived in the same area. Based on that experience, it is not at all hard for me to believe that even more experience researchers are convinced of "the enormous value" of the results of their investment in a DNA study. Even to the point of making assumptions that are not supported by science and representing them as "valuable results." I have learned that it is foolish to ignore any clue, no matter how preposterous or naive it may seem. I also believe that there is a role for science in genealogy - in this case, a role for DNA testing. Right now, however, I think too much is being expected, perhaps because too much is being promised. And, worse, too much is being claimed that is not supportable by the scientific facts. As I said, I never underestimate the power of a researcher (especially one with a vested interest) to force a desired result from the flimsiest of clues. Richard A. Pence, 3211 Adams Ct, Fairfax, VA 22030 Voice 703-591-4243 Fax 703-352-3560 Pence Family History <http://www.pipeline.com/~richardpence/> "Richard A. Pence" <richardpence@pipeline.com>

Ardis Parshall wrote: >Biology might be satisfied with the confirmation that I share some >part of my chemistry with any given person, but that isn't >genealogy. Genealogy demands not only that I know I am likely >descended from, say, James Parshall of Gardiner's Island, but that I >descend from him through the chain of >James-Isreal-Isreal-Isreal-David-Ira-George-Ira-Charles-George, etc. Ardis, your argument here is a Straw Man. I am not a "genealogist" myself, but an anthropologist. The limited, very linear discipline of genealogy as you describe it above is merely a subset of the wider study of human society. My core academic discipline is statistics. When carrying out new work in the field the first task is always to survey the area, then once a general pattern emerges it can be mapped and used as a guide to all the very finely detailed work that has to be done over the ensuing years in completing the research. At that point too, a very large part of the preliminary survey work involves extensive cross-disciplinary collaboration, in this case including mtDNA and other such testing where it is available. The point being that it is not the 50% chance that two people are related that matters, but the other 50% chance that they are NOT related thus narrowing down the range of probability and saving a huge amount of time and money wasted barking up the wrong tree. How is this relevant to genealogy? By taking up the scientific method in carrying out basic research what I am able to do is map the spread of relatedness of very large numbers of people very quickly indeed. Just on my website there are 5,100+ names. While genealogical tools were used to map them AFTER the event, the research method had entailed basic anthropological field work. Apart from one or two purists, the result has been warmly welcomed among genealogists not merely because it has saved them a very great deal of work, and very large amounts of money they would have otherwise spent, but in particular because of the high level of accuracy and reliability of the genealogical information contained therein. Should it be dismissed because it is not "genealogy" does not reflect on the work in anyway whatsoever, rather on the character of the person refusing to accept the valuable assistance of colleagues working across related disciplines. For my part, if they want to spend years of their lives and thousands of extra dollars wading through their purely "genealogical" research when there are far quicker and cheaper tools available for narrowing down the scope of their enquiry, well, so be it. I am not going to insist on how others should live their lives or spend their money, although reasonably I do have a stake in maintaining discipline in my own profession. Gil Gil Hardwick <gruagach@highway1.com.au>

Hi, I just got back from a successful trip to NM, photographing gravestones and gathering photos and papers from relatives. One of the papers I found was a "final account" for an estate for May READ. She had acquired quite a sum of worth for 1961 and the list of heirs was over 32. My husband's grandfather, a paternal cousin, received 1/4th 1/6th of 1/2 estate. I contacted the probate office for Cook Co. , IL and they say the file is 400 pages. That would cost about $125 to have copied. I have the "final account" that states page 240 on the first page and lists assets and heirs. There are no addresses for heirs or genealogical evidence on these pages. My question, does anyone know what I would ask for that would show how the heirs are related? The woman in the office was quite helpful and she is going to look through the file over the next couple of days, but I only asked her to look for addresses. I didn't know what else to ask for. Would there be a chart or family tree? What would a genealogist submit for a probate heir search as results that might be in this file. I would think it would be a great find to further my research if this estate already paid someone to do a search back for all these cousins. Thanks for any suggestions and help. Evelyn Evelyn Bayna <ebayna@ucsd.edu>

I am looking for a group or list where members can post questions or share info about marital rites (...what made a marriage given a particular time and place, laws pertaining to marriage and family given the region and time period), rites of passage and general questions/info about customs. I looked at rootsweb. Didn't see a list dedicated to this. Anyone know of a list/group I should try or does anyone have a site to recommend? Thanks, Brenda bransflakes <bransflakes@earthlink.net>

Max -- Maybe Mr. Parshal should check out the Payne family use of DNA to see genetic applications of DNA. While it didn't answer all the questions [what single source can/does], it certainly did help. Patrick Payne did a wonderful job for the group. Kathryn Ide Langford "Kathryn Ide Langford" <kathlang@attbi.com>

<ashtonredlin@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > Please can anyone give me an idea as to how I can search for a > relative? He was born in 1883 in Dundee, Scotland and he sent a > photo of himself aged c.30 from a hospital in Marshall, Texas. It sounds as though you don't know when he left Scotland. Checking the 1891 and 1901 census http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/ would be a good start - at least it will reduce the time interval to be checked. Did he marry before he went? If so, his marriage cert will also be at Scotland's People. It might also be worth looking at the death certs in case he came back.... For the USA search, I'll hand you over to our trans-Pond cousins! Lesley Robertson Lesley Robertson <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl>

Max -- I've spent some time reading through your page of testimonials and part of the collection of news articles. There is no doubt that some users of DNA testers are completely satisfied with the results of their tests. Not a one of those whose stories I read, though, seem to be genealogists, and not one of the stories reported is a genealogical case study. People are oh so happy to learn that they and Fred are somehow releated, or that some distant ancestor most likely did come from a particular ethnic group. Biology might be satisfied with the confirmation that I share some part of my chemistry with any given person, but that isn't genealogy. Genealogy demands not only that I know I am likely descended from, say, James Parshall of Gardiner's Island, but that I descend from him through the chain of James-Isreal-Isreal-Isreal-David-Ira-George-Ira-Charles-George, etc. That's too high a burden to place on a DNA test, just as it is too high a burden to place on any other single source (try proving a line of descent solely from census listings, or solely from land deeds, or solely from any other tool) -- I am not asking for such a miracle when I ask you for a genealogical success story. But surely from all of your happily burbling satisfied customers, you have gathered a single genealogical case study where someone used your DNA test to prove a specific chain of descent from a given person. We constantly read on this list the case studies of how genealogists have used a given record type to solve a problem. That's what I'd like to read from you -- a single, solitary case study resulting in the solution of a genealogical puzzle, to the standards of a genealogist. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com

> Please can anyone give me an idea as to how I can search for a > relative? He was born in 1883 in Dundee, Scotland and he sent a > photo of himself aged c.30 from a hospital in Marshall, Texas. > > Thanks Annette <ashtonredlin@yahoo.co.uk> Hi Annette The site below is very good, not perfect, but very very good, a few links do go wrong, but I've had excellent service when this happens, send off an e-mail and the Archivists at the Records Office, can find the correct entry and snail mail it to you. The index can be searched free, but there is a cost, albeit a very small cost to view and download the record. 30 Credits cost 36.00 (GBP), to view a record is one credit, if you decide this is the correct person it is a further 5 credits to download and print. (Equivalent to 31.00 per record, if you don't have to view various same named persons, compare that to 13.00 to purchase the extract and it is good value for money). (Below, copied from Scotland Official Records Online Site). A partnership between the General Register Office for Scotland and Scotland On Line, http://www.ScotlandsPeople.gov.uk/ is the official online source of par= ish register, civil registration and census records for Scotland. Containing almost 37 million names, the ScotlandsPeople database is one of the world's largest resources of genealogical information and one of the largest single information resources on the Web. We provide a fully searchable index of Scottish births from 1553-1902, marriages from 1553 to 1854 and deaths from 1855 to 1952. In addition, indexed census data is available from 1881 to 1901. To respect privacy of living people, internet access has been limited to birth records over 100 years old, marriage records over 75 years, and death records over 50 years. >From the results of an index search made on this site you may view, save and print images of many of the original documents, and order extracts of any register entries of interest. Such requests are forwarded automatically to New Register House, and the requested extracts are mailed to you (airmail in the case of overseas orders). The General Register Office for Scotland (GROS) administers the registration of events such as births, deaths, marriages, divorces and adoptions, and is responsible for the statutes relating to the formalities of marriage and conduct of civil marriage. They take the decennial census of Scotland's population and prepare and publish demographic and other statistics for central and local Government, for medical research, and for the private sector. They also make available to customers public records about individuals, and maintain for the Scottish Executive the National Health Service Central Register. GROS is headed by the Registrar General for Scotland, John Randall. Hope this helps you Annette, and good luck with finding your family in Scotland. Regards Ava Connelly "Ava Connelly" <aconnelly@blueyonder.co.uk>

Regarding getting an SS-5 for genealogy purpose, here's what happened when I ordered one: I had been trying for 10 years to locate three cousins I had lost contact with, especially the one I was closest to when we were kids. Finally, in 2001 I found out through the SSDI that my older cousin had died in 1995--probably. Since there was more than one Barbara BURGESS listed in the SSDI and I wasn't sure of her exact birthdate, I sent for her SS-5 using a form I found on the internet. I can't remember if this form said I needed to include a reason for wanting the information, and I still had a lot to learn about genealogy research even after 10 years of research (as I still do). So I'm not sure if I indicated she was my cousin and that I needed it for genealogical purposes. I also didn't think to state that her father had died in 1965 and that I believed her mother was also deceased. When I received a copy of the form, I found that it was my cousin. However, the names of her parents had been marked out. One reason I wanted it was to find out her mother's maiden name, which I never knew, so the form was little help to me. I later found out her mother's maiden name through the Texas Birth Index. If I had plenty of money to spend on genealogy research, I would find the SS-5's useful. For me, though, they aren't. I can find the information elsewhere. Everyone needs to decide their usefulness for themselves. Laurie Laurie Nelson <lanenelson@rt66.com>

Lesley Robertson wrote: >"Max Blankfeld" <max@familytreedna.com> wrote in message > > > You are correct in saying that mtDNA is passed from mother to male > > and female children, but when a mother's mtDNA is passed to a son, > > it stops right there, it doesn't go down the line. That's what I > > meant. It only goes down the line from mother to daughter to > > daughter..... > >As do all lines except the surname-bearing one. Lesley, unlike mtDNA which is passed from the mother to son and daughter alike, the Y-chromosome is passed from father to son ONLY. Without being drawn into a whole raft of associated arguments on sex and gender construction, let me simply state here that it is the Y-chromosome alone which determines maleness. Else we would all be female, and none of these issues would arise. Gil Gil Hardwick <gruagach@highway1.com.au>

"Singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote... : : > <snip of lots of good background ... > : > : > Any advice would be deeply appreciated. I've recently been : > requesting death certificates on anyone who made it into the era of : > death certs who I feel is connected and this has helped somewhat but : > in some cases it's left me with even more questions. : > : > Matt Lupo a.k.a. matt at lupo dot com : : Do you have a copy of that pension record? I assume it's a Georgia : pension? If nothing else, you'll find out where she was living when : she applied, and there will be some evidence of her marriage. I do have copies of the pension papers and again, they leave me with more questions as they suggest my g-g-grandmother was still living in Dooly County, in Pinehurst, I believe. From what has filtered down to me via family sources, I think she was estranged from her family, but again, I don't have any direct documentary evidence other than the fact that she doesn't seem to be near any of them. The records also suggest she didn't remarry as she's still listed as Lupo and that she's the widow of my g-g-grandfather. She would have only been in her early 20s when he died, however, and she would have had three children under ten, so I find it odd that she didn't remarry, but I've found no evidence that she did. My main family sources for this information are cousins who are the children of my great-aunt and great-uncle. My grandfather started his family late in life and was already in his 70s when I came along. I remember him as a crotchedy old man who I was somewhat afraid of when younger. I knew his brother, but he lived a long way away from where I did and died about five or six years prior to the time that I started becoming interested in genealogy as did his sister who was more distantly removed from my family than my great-uncle. : The 1870 census is strange and unreliable South of the Mason-Dixon. : No theory to determine who is excluded has yet proven valid in more : than one county. Tax records might help fill in gaps. Yes, I've found the 1870 census to be a mixed blessing at best. As far as I can determine, only one city in Dooly County was polled and it wasn't the one where most of my people were living. I've found a few people with my family name, but can't definitively connect them. I have also checked tax lists but the lists from Dooly are spotty -- there's one from 1851 on which my g-g-g-grandfather is missing even though I'm pretty sure that's where he was living at the time. Matt Lupo -- G. M. Lupo a.k.a. matt at lupo dot com Up on the hill, they think I'm okay Or so they say... "G. M. Lupo" <deaconblues@steelyspam.org>