<< You disappoint me James. Oversimplification at best.>> A statement like that needs explaining. I am slowly learning about these groups; I am as I have emphasized mainly the keeper of the charts. Val and Rebecca know the lines much better. However, I believe we all have the right to hypothesize and James' hypothesis deserves considering and a reasoned rebuttal if there is disagreement. Such discussion is the only way we can arrive at rational conclusions. Here is my take: For me, I do not see how the fact that the different branches of group 3a match each other is evidence that they, and not 3b, are descendents of Richard and Isabella. Or perhaps both descend from Richard and Isabella, or maybe from one of the other two Richard Paces who were contemporary with "Richard II" or maybe there is a link somewhere back in England. I would much prefer to stop all of the lineages on the donors page short of "Richard II" but some donors have pleaded with me (out of family pride) to site their lineage all the way back to Richard and Isabella and I have complied. Maybe the DNA committee needs to come up with some sort of policy on this. We have not yet determined where the mutations between 3a and 3b happened, so it seems to me there is no way to tell how far back those mutations occurred. And it should be emphasized to all that we do not have documentary evidence for ANYONE back to Richard and Isabella, although surely some of the North Carolina Paces must be their descendents. Roy Johnson -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:00 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [PACE] DNA results You disappoint me James. Oversimplification at best. John Pace ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Blair" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:34 PM Subject: [PACE] DNA results > It seems to me the DNA results now fit together extremely well, and tell a > perfectly coherent story about the descendants of Richard and Isabella. > Not proved, of course, and due to the lost records it's impossible to be > sure exactly how the lines of descent work; but nevertheless it makes > sense. > > The 3a DNA is shared by (among others) the descendants of Richard (m. > Rebecca), the descendants of William (m. Ruth presumably Lambert), the > descendants of John (m. Ann Russell), and now, it seems, also by the > descendants of Bignal Pace. > > The simplest explanation of these results is that all of these descend > from Richard and Mary, and therefore from Richard and Isabella. > > In other words, the 3a line is the line of Richard and Isabella. > > Looks to me like the Pace DNA study has done it again. > > James Blair > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 > ------------------------------- 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 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.17/1844 - Release Date: 12/11/2008 8:58 PM