I spent three summers in Richmond above London and have visited London about ten more times on my student trips. The Thames at low tide looks like a creek to this Missouri guy accustomed to the Mississippi and Missouri rivers. Well, maybe not a creek, but a small river. Not hard at all to cross in a small boat. At high tide is more like the Mississippi at St. Louis. I have done a lot of reading on London and the Thames. In Richard's time there were many small boatman willing to cross the river for a fee. It was widely done. As for transporting items or a loaded cart, that would require a larger barge, but they existed. The Thames is tidal some way above London, today ending at Richmond where a dam and lock have been installed to prevent the tide from going further up. In Richard's time there was only London Bridge, maybe a mile upstream from Wapping, and it was crowded with shops on both sides making it narrow and very congested with carts etc. crossing. London Bridge in that day had huge stone supports that blocked much of the passage of water. When the tide was coming in or going out, the narrow openings between the piers of the bridge ran fast like rapids on a river and it took a skilled boatman to get through. That is why all of the big ships were restricted to the area downstream from the bridge, so that's where the shipyards were. However, from my reading the Thames was never much of a barrier. I have walked across Tower Bridge at the edge of Wapping and I have stood at Wapping docks and looked across the river, and I cannot imagine any difficulty in getting across in any kind of decent boat. Roy Johnson -----Original Message----- From: Rebecca Christensen [mailto:rchristen@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 12:30 PM To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Wapping to Rotherhithe -- googlings Ellen, That is very interesting especially the tunnel! IF- all of the rest of the markers match - then the results will be exciting because we could *potentially* have a 34/37 match which FTDNA intreprets as a "related" match - that is, Group 3a and participant #8179 probably shared a common ancestor in the time period since surnames have been established. Even if we land up with a 33/37 match, FTDNA says the relationship is "probably related." See FTDNA's page on Genetic Distances for 37 markers for more information. http://www.familytreedna.com/GDRules_37.html There have been some projects that have had the third panel of markers (markers 26-37) match while the mutations have occurred in the first 25 markers. But the third panel of markers also has several fast mutating markers, so it will be interesting to see how this turns out. IF -- it turns out to be a "related" match of 34/37 or even 33/37, further research will need to be undertaken as the lineage for participant # 8179 only goes back to a George Pace of 1859. At this point, not enough is known about the George Pace line of 1859 but it might put a foot in the doorway in finding out more about the ancestry of the NC Paces of Group 3a especially, with additional research effort on the George Pace of 1859 line. Now to patiently await the DNA test results..... Rebecca genealogy@snuffy.britishlibrary.net wrote: It would certainly be exciting if the DNA shows a close relationship. Won't prove anything, I suppose, but very interesting indeed. Rebecca, can you tell us what conclusions could reasonably be drawn (if any) if all the other markers turn out to match? Ellen ==== PACE Mailing List ==== To share info which may be of interest to others, reply to the mail list (PACE-L@rootsweb.com). To say thank you or otherwise reply personally, reply to sender.