James,    The William Lambert who was baptized (christened) 18 November 1743 at North Farnham, Richmond Co., VA was Ruth Lambert's brother William, not her father William.    Ruth and William were children of William Lambert and his wife Martha.   Ruth and William's father William Lambert was born 15 June 1720 at North Farnham, so there is not an age problem - he was not a very young grandfather.    There is a deed record dated 11 August 1777 in Mecklenburg County, Virginia where William Lambert and Martha his wife of Wake County, North Carolina, sold 143 acres of land to William Fox of Mecklenburg County, VA.  This record connects William Lambert in Wake County, NC to his earlier location in Mecklenburg Co., VA, and names his wife Martha who later shows up in the records Franklin Co., NC after William's death.  (The family didn't move from Wake Co to Franklin Co, NC, the county boundary moved in 1787.)   There are several records in Wake County, NC that name both William Pace and William Lambert in the same record as well as a road record that names William Lambert, William Lambert Jr., William Pace and William Pace Jr. - all in the same record.    William Lambert and William Pace owned adjacent land. Rebecca Christensen --- On Fri, 1/23/09, James Blair <[email protected]> wrote: From: James Blair <[email protected]> Subject: [PACE] Ruth Lambert To: [email protected] Date: Friday, January 23, 2009, 6:27 PM I may have the wrong information here. The date of birth I have got for James Pace (son of William Pace and Ruth Lambert) is Jan 23 1778. According to Pritchett (Southside Virginia Genealogies), the William Lambert who had land in Wake Co was born in Richmond Co, 18 Nov 1743 (Pritchett cites North Farnham Parish Register). If that's correct, William Lambert would be 35 when James Pace was born. Kind of young to be a grandfather. And from what I've read, James Pace is believed to have had older siblings, the oldest born around 1771. In 1771, according to Pritchett, William Lambert was 28. Even if Lambert started fathering children long before the law allowed, it seems unlikely he would become a grandfather by such a young age. James

Rebecca, There must be something wrong with my postings for the SGMF people in the Pees group. Results just came in for kit 47110 through 67 markers. Up to 37 markers, he was a match with the modal for the Pees group including the SGMF people. From 38 on the mismatch is so far off that it doesn't seem possible. I thought maybe the marker results had been shifted sideways somehow, but there is no way to shift the marker results to make them fit. Can you look at the Pees group (in the walesetc chart) and see if you understand the problem? Thanks, Roy

Roy,    The problem is that the results you have for the SMGF participants for markers 38-48 do not belong there.    SMGF tests several markers not tested by FTDNA and FTDNA tests several markers not tested by SMGF.   The markers for the SMGF participants that you have under 38-48 are not tested by FTDNA and need to be moved to their own columns with their own DNA marker labels - that is, the Pees/Pace participants have more than 67 markers tested among the participants although not every test has all of them.   So, the SMGF participants have 11 markers not tested by the FTDNA participants.  I tried to paste the marker numbers below for the 11 markers. 441 444 445 446 452 461 462 463 1B07 A10 C4635 Rebecca --- On Tue, 2/10/09, Roy Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: From: Roy Johnson <[email protected]> Subject: [PACE] Kit 47110 (Pees) To: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 8:18 PM Rebecca, There must be something wrong with my postings for the SGMF people in the Pees group. Results just came in for kit 47110 through 67 markers. Up to 37 markers, he was a match with the modal for the Pees group including the SGMF people. From 38 on the mismatch is so far off that it doesn't seem possible. I thought maybe the marker results had been shifted sideways somehow, but there is no way to shift the marker results to make them fit. Can you look at the Pees group (in the walesetc chart) and see if you understand the problem? Thanks, Roy ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message