This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: pandjparker Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.parker/8206.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hello, Janet Gaston - Thank you for taking the time to explain all of that to me. I see that it could take years of research to unravel. What I can take from this - please correct me if I am wrong - is that on one side you have a paternal great grandfather Parker whose living male Parker descendant(s) tested to #5. Then you have a maternal great great grandfather Parker whose living male Parker descendant(s) tested to #16. Then later, two offspring, one each from each of those two lines, married and I'm guessing they were your grandparents? They had your mom. And she had you. Is that right? If that is the case, then a dual but unrelated surname ancestry of that type is not unusual at all, especially in Parkers. It is really no different than having two completely different surnames like Parker and Smith. Early dual Parkers were found repeatedly in Mississippi, Louisiana, and here in Texas where at least four separate Parker bloodlines migrated with, lived near, and intermarried over hundred of years until about WWI. Apparently it was even more prevalent in Virginia and the Carolinas until the Civil War. I read somewhere that it is called the Parker Puzzle. The big difference is that you are the very first Parker descendant I have read of who took the time and effort to track the two lines back and actually confirm how and when the dual Parker lineage occurred. Congratulatons. Patricia Ross Parker FG#7 researcher Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.