My cousins are MAXWELLs. My immigrant ancestor John Sr. came from Ireland to Philadelphia in early 1740 -- we have the passenger record. By July of that year, he was in Virginia, testifying in Orange Co. that he and his family imported themselves "from Ireland to Philadelphia and from thence into this Colony." In other words, as soon as they arrived in Philadelphia, they hit the Great Wagon Road (think I-81), and migrated to what is now Augusta Co., Virginia. I could wax on extensively about the Virginia research. We clearly connect to the John Sr. who brought his family from Ireland to Virginia in 1740. After that, we're not sure if we connect to John Jr. or to other children of John Sr. Based on the land records, I lean towards all of us connecting to John Jr. We may never figure it out, but from a DNA standpoint, it makes no difference. The point is that the four male MAXWELLs who say they're in this line (and I clearly connect to them) share at least 25 markers. I just checked and see now that more males in my line have been tested -- a total of 10. Most only did 25 markers. I don't know the lineage for six of them, but for the four that I know, they match on 25 markers. I'm confidant that the 25-marker test supports the data that we have for these four, but I'd like to see 37-marker results for the other six. Mary At 09:43 PM 7/14/2008, Cliff Lamere wrote: >Mary, > >You said, "I have distant male cousins whose research is supported >by DNA -- back to about 1740." >Can you explain that? Was it male line or female line? What was >the research that was supported? What was actually proved; that he >was related to a single person or that he was related to a series of people? > >I'm sure others are interested as much as I am. > >Cliff > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >Mary Richardson wrote: > >>Dear Cliff, >> >>You quoted the results of a 12-marker test. I think 12-marker >>tests are worthless. 25-marker tests are certainly better, but I >>much prefer 37-marker tests. At that level and higher (though the >>benefits of higher are marginal), I have distant male cousins whose >>research is supported by DNA -- back to about 1740. Obviously, you >>can't do just a DNA test -- you have to have supporting >>research. And yes, you have to pay up for higher marker tests, but >>I think you're wasting your money if you don't. So yes, I've had a >>positive experience with DNA testing when the participants paid for >>more extensive testing. The trick is getting them to pay up -- as >>a female descendant who can't participant, I volunteer to >>underwrite males' testing...when I'm able to. >> >>Mary Richardson >> >>P.S. The article that you routed us to is about National >>Geographic's Genographic Project, i.e., tracing the early migratory >>routes of humans. You are right -- this doesn't have anything to >>do with Y-DNA testing to find near ancestors.