Reilly, How many markers were being tested? At the 37 marker test, 4 mutations is within the norm for what we are seeing - and remember that some of the markers duplicate mutations and locations on the test, and even though it may show a marker mismatch, the mismatch may be only counted as one, or not at all. You have to look at what FTDNA says the mutation difference is. Rolla And because I was 4 mutations (single mutation on four different markers) away from other participants, a statistically unlikely event, I had my dad tested. And I am two steps away from him! One step on 459B and one on 460. So either the lab made an error on my DNA, or I've "beat the odds," so to speak. And I've read that some families show a faster mutation rate than others. So don't give up, just because you can't account for some mutations.

I have asked that sample 76807 be linked back only to John W. Queen, Jr. of 1816 at this time. There are two reasons for this: 1. The documentation I have collected and has been confirmed by a member of the donor's family reflects apparently solid documentation back to Jr. I certainly welcome and almost "beg" Queen listmates to argue for or against linking Jr to John Queen of 1774 Montgomery County, N.C. and from there back to Henson Queen. 2. If these results hold at the 25/37 marker level with kit 25676, then it will be an impossible stretch, genetically, to conclude that the donors are descendants of old Henson AND at the same time that old Henson was a son of old William. It just won't fit. Whew! I wanted some mutations. Well, we got 'em. I have zero question concerning the technical results. It's DNA doing its thing. How to interpret the results in light of what we thought we knew, or vice-versa, is the challenge. We certainly need to re-evaluate data regarding Henson. Gene

And I'll say it again. Hooray... Finally, someone that we are linked to. I haven't even looked yet, just read Rolla's report and I am already excited. I will get back to all after I've had time to ponder the new results. Again, Hooray and Happy New Year Carol

Ready to compare notes and discuss possibilities/probabilities of relationship of John Queen, Jr. to John of 1774 Montgomery to Henson Queen of 1742 whenever anyone ready to dig up their "stuff". Gene

Heaven help us, Hannah!! Rolla, please back off from Henson....for now....and let's hold it at the documented ancestor John W. Queen, Jr. of ca 1816 and his bride Martha Hickey. C'mon Carol, we've got some work to do! Let's find the common ancestor of these two samples if we can. Certainly we must upgrade this last sample. Hot dang! So, perhaps I'll never find my "19". Life goes on............... Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rolla Queen" <rolla.queen@charter.net> To: "'O Eugene Queen'" <EQueen@lexcominc.net>; "'QResearchers'" <QUEEN@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:12 PM Subject: RE: [QUEEN] Where to from here - with YDNA? > Gene said: "Is it over?" > > Has the fat lady sang? When it comes to my Queens, the bald lady may sing, > but not the fat lady! > > I have just posted brand spankin' new results for Kit 76807, an individual > claiming descent back to Henson Queen (1742). You will find the results > posted under Group 8, along with the results for Carol's James Campbell > Queen. Now, this has certainly got to be exciting for Carol, though the > results do not match with Group 1, so Gene will need to have this make > some > sense for us - when he gets through scratching his head - it will > certainly > fuel the fire and may help Carol on her way to figuring out what happened > way back when. > > However, it does not completely dash my conviction that her ancestry and > mine are not tied somehow in the Tennessee hills. > > Carol, you need to give me the ancestry information for Kit 25678 as you > know it - just male line back from participant, and year of birth. > > Rolla >

Hi Cousins. I think I remember someone on this list telling about Speculation Land Company Records at the Ramsey Library of UNCA. I may be confusing that with something else I read somewhere else. Anyway, despite my confusion, there is some interesting reading available on-line in the "Heritage of Western NC" sestion of Library website. Go to http://toto.lib.unca.edu/ and have a look around. Among the stuff you will find are information on and records of the "Speculation Land Company" which acquired and sold a kazillion acres of land in WNC. In a short time browsing I found a pair of land surveys where Meriday Queen was a chain bearer. Item #0498 Survey for Butam[?] Leles, 50 acres on Robinson's Creek. Back: Warrant No. 1730, survey for Arthur McClure, 4.5 acres on Mountain Creek. Chain Bearer Merida Queen http://toto.lib.unca.edu/findingaids/mss/speculation_lands/images/jpegs/slc0498a.jpg Item #0622 Warrant No. 1011, survey for Benjamin Newton, 200 acres in Rutherford County on Crooked Run. Signed Francis Alexander Chain Bearer Meredy Queen http://toto.lib.unca.edu/findingaids/mss/speculation_lands/images/jpegs/slc0622a.jpg I suppose Gene will be rushing over there as soon as he reads this. The rest of us had better step aside and let him run past. --Phil Minch--

Appreciate Rolla's response. Scot Kendall, please join in. Great minds, or weak minds, a mixture of minds, and never minds sometimes come together. Rolla has presented an idea that continues to interest me. "4) Test prices are dropping and testing panels are expanding. It would be good to urge all the testing companies to offer reasonable priced testing to bridge the gaps between FTDNA and Relative Genetics for instance." "... we don't want to end up with tests so far removed that we have a BETA/VHS crisis in the ancestry testing area." Our listowner has been very tolerant of some discussions that have not been exactly "on topic", but it may be asking too much tolerance of the listowner and rootsweb to get into deep "on-list" discussions regarding specific labs and costs. However, I'd very much like to take a hard look at what some other company offers in the way of markers as compared to the other. I'm specifically interested in any particular marker that appears to point the way as the 19 and 20 has for us. Is there a specific marker available that may open a door for us? I'm recommending/requesting that Scott and Rolla go off-list with me and let's beat this thing around. Let's look at the results of the Queen Project and the MacQueen (etc) Project and look for clues that could help each group. A limited number of cross-testing with the two labs may yield some positive results. We may even be able to develop a cross-testing plan for a number of samples and negotiate with the labs BEFORE agreeing to a darn thing with them. This would require additional samples from the selected donors; but hopefully, that would not be difficult with the living donors. Queen-L folks, be forewarned. As one voice, I would not plan to flood Queen-L with minute details of discussions; but we would advise the list of our recommendations and action plans. Rolla and Scott, let's ROLL! We're burning daylight. I ain't gettin any younger. 64 today! Gene

Gene said: "Is it over?" Has the fat lady sang? When it comes to my Queens, the bald lady may sing, but not the fat lady! I have just posted brand spankin' new results for Kit 76807, an individual claiming descent back to Henson Queen (1742). You will find the results posted under Group 8, along with the results for Carol's James Campbell Queen. Now, this has certainly got to be exciting for Carol, though the results do not match with Group 1, so Gene will need to have this make some sense for us - when he gets through scratching his head - it will certainly fuel the fire and may help Carol on her way to figuring out what happened way back when. However, it does not completely dash my conviction that her ancestry and mine are not tied somehow in the Tennessee hills. Carol, you need to give me the ancestry information for Kit 25678 as you know it - just male line back from participant, and year of birth. Rolla

Indeed, Gene has stated the question eloquently: "...where do we go from here?" First, I hope to do an annual summary of statistics and such for the new year. Having said that, a few observations if I may in initial response to Gene's query. For most of us, the DNA study has been more than successful, but in as much as it has enlightened us about various lineages, confirmed suspicions, and has related people who didn't know that they were related, Gene reflects a little disappointment in his eloquent soliloquy. For many of us, the illusive brick wall or question that prompted initial participation still remains. I still can't get beyond my Francis, actually I'm still looking for confirmation to Francis. Don't know more than I knew before, except that my DNA is good back to Francis youngest son. I still need a donor from another line. It will come. But, through contacts and help from the group, my data base and research has expanded exponentially from what I could have gathered otherwise. I am extremely blessed and grateful for meeting all of you - related or not. But I have a direction, and sooner or later the descendants of Group 2 Samuel, and Charles Harrington Queen, and those claiming such, and the descendants of my Francis - that would be me - are going to have to do some serious talking and testing and running down descendants down other lines. Samuel's descendant sits there all alone, DNA unconfirmed, and despite the best research documenting a line of descent, the DNA begs for confirmation, because circumstantial evidence is increasingly leading my group to explore descent from this group of English Queens that settled in what is now the Washington DC area of Maryland. We are both going to have to collaborate to find a descendant from a distinct ancestor down a different line to see whether we can refine this "Maryland" connection once and for all. Gene and many of the Group 1 Queens still can't knock down the thin tar-paper wall that separates them from Old William and each other. But they can hear each other clearly, smell the smoke from the pot-bellied stove in the other room, and hear the distant voices of common ancestors calling - and the pig-path to papa is unfolding before them. They just need a key to open the gate. It will come! The Charles group is coming along slow but nicely. They seem to be in control of their destiny, and I think are finding links into the Quinn study. Some updates along that line would nice. In fact, I think each Group or person representing a distinct haplogroup in the study ought to provide a summary of where they are and what they know at this point. Present and future researchers would benefit. We still have a few stragglers trying to make sense of their DNA. In some cases, the explanations are becoming clear. In other cases, more work needs to be done. We have realized that, even with an unusual yet straightforward name like "Queen," there is a lot of diversity in our origins. Similarities get explained through convergence and transmogrification - I just love big words! Quinn becomes Queen, Queen becomes Quein, McQueen becomes Queen, McOwen, McEwen and Coyne become Queen, Quin, Quinn, Quean, Gwinn, Guinn, and so on. We have learned that some Queens have become Poor, and some who started out Poor, ended up Queens, and most certainly the richer for it! None of us should be disappointed in the DNA results. The DNA is truth. It may not have been what one was looking for, but it points us in the right direction. Only our interpretations are suspect. And oh what we have learned about the behavior of DNA. Like Roger Clemons, we often don't what pitch is coming next - curve ball, fast ball, slider - sucker ball - outside corner, high and inside. We keep swinging - a few out of park. But each time we get up to bat, we know we have seen his pitches before. That knowledge, and a swift kick in the rear, ought to help many of us down the road to ancestral enlightenment. So, where do we go from here? Well, while we keep diligently moving along our current path, there are a few areas that offer promise. 1) Deep ancestral origins. Within each persons results, one can see the building blocks of the ancestral origins of the male YDNA. I am looking at my 25 marker matches and most of what I see are names grounded in English origin. More and more, and my research is leading me in this direction, I am coming to accept the fact the my "Queens" originated from England, perhaps along the Scottish and Welsh frontier areas. Each of the DNA study participants has the ability to look at the surnames and origins of matches at the 25 marker level. Most of the names are not related in the recent genealogical past, but share a common ancestor between 700 and 10000 years or so ago. This is pretty cool. 2) Coordination and integration with other similar surname studies, including Quinn, McQueen, etc. Within each of these groups, we do have some individuals who are cross-matching on the same alleles being tested, whether it be FTDNA, Relative Genetics, or another testing group. This coordination may need to occur at a level higher than the individual testing company's desire and capability. Gene, Scott Kendall and I have dabbled a bit with this for McQueen and Quinn over the past year or so, but I think that even as we find segregation within our own Queen study at FTDNA, we may find interesting clues by looking at all the tests on a macro level. And consolidation and display of results and information on a group of people sharing similar sounding surnames should prove interesting. 3) For some of us, there will be new panels of tests offering clues to general ethnic ancestry coming on the market - often referred to as admixture tests, these results can generally answer questions about all the other DNA that isn't YDNA or MTDNA. 4) Test prices are dropping and testing panels are expanding. It would be good to urge all the testing companies to offer reasonable priced testing to bridge the gaps between FTDNA and Relative Genetics for instance. More and more, even though the free marketplace has forced prices to drop or services to expand in competition, we don't want to end up with tests so far removed that we have a BETA/VHS crisis in the ancestry testing area. 5) We have to encourage the European descendants of the brothers and sisters of our ancestors who were too afraid to get on the boat, or didn't need to run from the hangman's noose, to get interested in testing. Because sooner or later, as genetic testing heats up, we are going to find matches with distant relatives - and that will help some of us do an end-run around the old brick wall. 6) We have to convince some of the confirmed descendants of the Royal families, whether it be the current Monarch, or Charles, Henry, to get tested. Cause I just know that the reason I match so few people with a rare DNA type is a direct result of all those royals inbreeding and keeping the DNA isolated. I feel the Royal blood coursing through my veins. Certainly, one of the descendants of the Tudors, Four Doors, or Stuarts would want to claim and meet an American relative, don't you think! Well, enough for now. I can tell your eyes are glazing over, or is that just the New Year's ham! Got to get the brisket going. I'll be around later! Rolla When replying to a digest post, quote only the specific text to which you are replying, removing the rest of the digest from your reply. Also, remember to change the subject of your reply so that it coincides with the message subject to which you are replying. TO VIEW PREVIOUS EMAILS BY SUBJECT, GO TO THE THREADED ARCHIVES AT http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/listowners TO VIEW PREVIOUS EMAILS BY DATES AND SUBJECT GO TO THE SEARCHABLE ARCHIVES AT http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/listowners > http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen/DNA/queenmarker.htm > > http://www.familytreedna.com/public/queenDNA/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUEEN-request@rootsweb.com 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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 12:23 PM

Greetings all, A brief overview of the Queen DNA project reveals that Queens have been separated into some distinct and confirmed groupings. This has certainly been beneficial in sorting out Queens and reducing the scope of research of various lineages. In addition, many Queens can now say with a very comfortable degree of certainty that "we" descend from old William or Charles or Francis Queen. The "19's" on 520 in the group can apparently state with a comfortable degree of certainty that "we" descend from old William and that there was a son or grandson of his that had a 19 on 520 and that "we" descend from that son or grandson. Thus, it seems to me that the project has been helpful to all Queens. Perhaps the greatest disappointment with the project is that the additional 30 markers provided little assistance to the majority of our group. Sub-groups (the 19's and the 20's) were created; but that appears to be about it. Hopefully, in the years to come, additional and more meaningful markers will be made available by the lab and testing company. If I'm still around, I will upgrade select samples. If I'm not around, then project leaders have my permission to upgrade any samples I have sponsored. But, do we stop now? Is it over? Is this all that we can do, or wish to do, regarding YDNA? There are still a half-dozen or so samples in the pipeline. So, we're certainly not ready to close the books just yet. But, the question remains, where do we go from here? Gene

Thanks, Carol. The card was nice. Now, where is the largest bulldozer on planet earth? Some of these brick walls are THICK and TALL. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carol A Queen" <postalq@grnco.net> To: <queen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 2:21 PM Subject: [QUEEN] Merry Christmas > Merry Christmas to all (can't resist adding) and to all a good night. I've > made a card for all my wonderful Queen family. You may view it at > > http://www.hallmark.com/ECardWeb/ECV.jsp?a=1348412181407M000000N&product_id > > Love you all, > > Carol-listowner

I believe that Rolla intented this for Queen-L; thus I'm forwarding it. His chart can be located at: http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen/DNA/queenmarker.htm To ease Rolla's "nervous" problem, the donors of kits 23496 and 46552 are quite closely related. They share a most recent common ancestor level at the grandfather of one and the great grandfather of the other. The common ancestor died in 1955 and the family lived in Arkansas. I'm not aware of any shred of doubt regarding their lineage. The conservative (omigosh) in me used the word, "reportedly", instead of the more appropriate statement that the donor is "darn well" closely related. As to the donors of kits 72376 and 39478, they are related at the "daddy" level - in other words, they are blood brothers. Christmas Eve has passed; but hoping that Santa made everyone happy this Christmas Day. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Rolla Queen To: 'O Eugene Queen' Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 11:31 PM Subject: RE: Cuss/Discuss The results to which Gene refers, plus some new results for Group 4 are now posted for your Christmas Eve enjoyment. I cannot refute Gene's assertions. Things are as they appear. Of course, I do so get nervous when terms such as "reportedly" are used to describe close relations. Any chance that this 38 allele distant ancestor could somehow be . . . Naw..........., I'll let Gene have his Christmas present wrapped with a smile this time! Merry Christmas Gene! RQ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: O. Eugene Queen [mailto:EQueen@Lexcominc.net] Sent: Sunday, December 24, 2006 8:13 PM To: Rolla Queen Subject: Cuss/Discuss Kit 23496; 20 on 520; 38 on CDYb. Donor is reportedly closely related to kit 46522 with the 20 mutation on 520 and but not the 38 mutation on CDYb. Kit 72376; 19 on 520; 38 on CDYb. Donor is brother of kit 39478 who has same two mutations, plus 25 on 390. Donor is also documented relative of all the Alfred Queen clan - all have 19 on 520. Conclusion: The mutation 38 on CDYb is another parallel mutation as it relates to the descendants of Alfred's son L. D. Queen (brothers kits 72376 and 39478) when compared to kit 23496 not closely related. Refute? The good news for the Alfred Queen clan, and the project, is that we have another perfect example of the power of YDNA and mutations as it relates to the L. D. Queen lineage. With just 2 samples at the 37 marker level we hit the point of mutation to 25 on 390. We have other examples in the project where one descendant of a particular lineage has a mutation, while another decendant of the same lineage does not. Gene

Merry Christmas to all (can't resist adding) and to all a good night. I've made a card for all my wonderful Queen family. You may view it at http://www.hallmark.com/ECardWeb/ECV.jsp?a=1348412181407M000000N&product_id Love you all, Carol-listowner

Okay, Rolla....lets compare and argue over the results for kits: 39478 and his brother 72376, compared to 23496. I know that it will be tough and disappointing, but can you say "parallel"? para - llel. Gene

Gene ,you recon a possum caught inna rabbit box wouldn't work for Rolla ? I mean.. you know ..a rabbit ain't gonna use THAT tare box no more.. less of course you burned it out .I can make a box about as easy as I can burn one out .And I could ship that tare fat rascal in the box.You did mean a live possom didn't cha ? Oh yeah.I''ll haft to git me one of them new whatchamacallit... Zodiac calenders? You know sows I'llI know when it's gonna be a full moon cause I go to bed for the moon comes up in the winter months. I hope this here note don't git Rolla all bumfuzzled up to where he don't know what to do.I han't ameaning to do that atall Meanwhile all you youngins and families have a Merry Christmas or what ever don't. offendge.Betty

Got yer prescription refilled, huh? Gene Now get you a man with a bald head and hair on his back and everyday will be Christmas. When it comes to Queens, one things fer sure, you get the royal treatment everyday. I might open my present early! Rolla

Now Gloria, referring to the baldness as a "disease" is just playing into all the old stereotypes mostly started by men that have a growth on their head. Now just about anyone will tell you that if you have a growth on your skin, you should probably have it removed before it becomes malignant, Our early Queen progenitors understood this very well. If fact, we can thank the womenfolk for choosing bald men as husbands and perpetuating the DNA. Its just healthier in the long run. A young woman seeing a man running around with a growth on his head would know for sure that he wasn't long for this world and that he would leave her with a few ugly youngins and penniless to take care of them. A man with hair on his head is also less virile, cause they use too much testosterone to make hair, and don't have any left over for making love! Now bald men, using their baldness to advertise their health, strength and VIRILITY, cause we channel all that testosterone into love, well, all that just makes for a happier woman, and lots of Queen DNA for testing! The happiest women are the ones who married bald Queen men who have just a mess of hair on their backs. Those are the most virile of all, the he-man Queens, the human version of the gorilla's silver back male. At some point, individuals in a species have to have ways to advertise to the opposite sex that they are a prime catch. Despite all them lies they perpetuate on all them daytime soap operas, a man with a growth on his head ain't much good for nothing but bad acting, cheatin', and running off with your best friend, Bob! Now get you a man with a bald head and hair on his back and everyday will be Christmas. When it comes to Queens, one things fer sure, you get the royal treatment everyday. Now my wife comes from a blend of Welsh stock and some of them folks that came over on the Mayflower. She don't have no hair on her back, but I love her just the same! In all fairness, she is one smart cookie, can balance the checkbook, mow the lawn, and after all, she did marry well! And I got me a mess of red-headed kids to boot! here's to a wonderful Queen Christmas! I might open my present early! Rolla _____ From: gloriah4@juno.com [mailto:gloriah4@juno.com] Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 8:55 AM To: rolla.queen@charter.net; EQueen@lexcominc.net Cc: QUEEN-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [QUEEN] Rolla's hair Rolla and Gene, A hearty "thank you" to you both for brightening my day with your hair humor. (It is humor, right? hee-hee). I dunno, maybe some folk might consider it to be "off topic" for a surname list but I think it is very appropriate for this one since the bald disease seems to run in the QUEEN genes - that is, if my branch is any example. You two keep up the good work! Looking forward to monitoring your posts in the new year. I have learned a lot from you - about DNA and lots of stuff. Season Greetings! Gloria

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.queen/927.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Add this to the mix; hope it sheds some extra light. Roberta 1910-Taney County, Mo - Oliver Township Jesse Queen - White 19 Born:MO (Fath B:TN, Moth B:MO) (living as a boarder in household of Arlie and Millie Linzy) 1900-Cass County, Mo - Union Toownship John E Queen - white 33 Mar/1867 B:IND (Parents B:TN) Mary C Queen - Wife 42 Jul/1857 B:MO (Fath: VA, Moth: MO) Jesse C Queen - 8 Jun/1891 B:MO Atelia C Queen - Dau 6 12/1893 B:ARK William J Queen - Son 3 Aug/1896 B:?

Rolla and Gene, A hearty "thank you" to you both for brightening my day with your hair humor. (It is humor, right? hee-hee). I dunno, maybe some folk might consider it to be "off topic" for a surname list but I think it is very appropriate for this one since the bald disease seems to run in the QUEEN genes - that is, if my branch is any example. You two keep up the good work! Looking forward to monitoring your posts in the new year. I have learned a lot from you - about DNA and lots of stuff. Season Greetings! Gloria

Gene, just to clarify and make sure I get this right, you said "Shoot yerself a 'possum on a full moon night. Dress and bake the 'possum" What kind of dress would you recommend? Since I live out here in Southern California, I was thinking about using a Sun Dress, but since I will be shootin' said 'possum on a full moon night, I was a wonderin' if it might be more appropriate to use an evening dress, perhaps one of the cast offs of a Hollywood starlet, or sumpin like Miss USA might not be needin while she finishes rehab in Palm Springs? Now technically, I can't shoot no possum here in the suburbs of Los Angeles, but if I can run it down with a car, would that work just the same? I'll get back to you on the rest of the recipe. My oldest boy, who is gradiatin high school soon, had to stop readin it to me so he could go out and find a mop bucket and figure out how to make a cow stall. I told him to just startle the cow and see what happens. Where does the "stuff" come from when the cow stalls? Sounds like it might be a powerful recipe, especially since you have to apply it liberally! If we was to have to apply it like a conservative, I might not be able to use my food stamps to buy the mop, rags and couch I would be laying on while drawing unemployment while a waitin for my hair to grow. Since I will be in denial, that 2.5 years will go buy pretty slow. Good thing I asked for box set of Beverly Hillbilly DVDs for Christmas. I sure do love getting those home movies from kinfolk what ain't come to Californi. Now you all have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Now where did that dad burn boy go! Rolla