This is part 2 of a number of parts dealing with the Queen YDNA Project. It reflects facts as well as one man's opinions. News Flash: Richard Queen of 1766 - kit 69696 results are just in and are a perfect match to the old William model all 67 markers, including the 20 on 520. Evaluation 2: In Evaluation 1 we noted that YDNA evidence has allowed us to group "Queens" into a number of different groups. My focus is on the old William Queen of 1716-20 group and these comments relate to that group. The previous evaluation noted eleven (11) donors of descendants of old William with perfect matches at the 37 marker level. Following the recommendations of our testing company, we upgraded a number of samples to the 67 marker level in an attempt to, with absolute confidence, sub-divide the old William group. That has been accomplished with the 19s and 20s on marker 520. All the samples tested at the 67 marker level have a 20 on 520 except for four (4) lineages who have the 19. The 19's are: William Queen of 1790 - kit 24723 Hampton Queen of 1796 - kit 23661 Alfred Queen of 1810 - kit 72191 and others Hence Queen of 1823 - kits 24404 and 26707 There is adequate factual evidence that the 19 on 520 is an "old" mutation dating back to at least 1810. Overwhelming additional evidence suggests that the 19 occurred not later than 1772. Here's the evidence: 1. Descendants of 3 sons of Alfred Queen of 1810 were tested and all tested descendants carry the 19. Thus, Alfred had the 19 in 1810. 2. Descendants of 2 sons of Hinsey Jonas Queen of 1858 (son of Hence Queen of 1823) were tested and each has the 19. Thus Hinsey Jonas had the 19 in 1858. 3. A descendant of William Queen of 1813-1820 has been tested and has the 19. Since there is only one confirmed sample of this lineage, the only absolute of the 19 is that of the donor, himself. 4. A descendant of Hampton Queen of 1796 has been tested and has the 19. Again, since there is only one confirmed sample of this lineage, the only absolute 19 is that of the donor. Circumstantial evidence is building that there was a relationship of Hence Queen to William Queen of 1813-1820; thus to William Queen of 1790. Further, the location of William Queen of 1790 in Macon County in 1840 - next door to Haywood County - increases the likelihood of a relationship to Alfred Queen who was in Haywood County in the 1830s prior to his move to Cocke County, TN. The move of Hampton Queen out West by 1820 removes him as a candidate as the father of one of the 19s back East. Thus, I believe that I speak for "we 19s" in saying that we are convinced that parallel mutations are not at play here. There was a male son or grandson of old William Queen of 1716-20 that originated the 19 on 520 and we descend from that male Queen. That male Queen could have been the most recent common ancestor of the 4 -19s; thus William of 1790, Hampton of 1796, Alfred of 1810 and Hence of 1823 being brothers. Or, the most recent common ancestor of two or three of the 19s could have been a brother to the most recent common ancestor of one or two of the other 19s. Bottom line is that YDNA evidence has clearly sub-divided the old William descendants into the 19's and 20's on 520. For research purposes, it appears unlikely that any donor with a 20 on 520 descended from the lineage of the 19's any more recent than 1772....and probably never. Further, it appears unlikely that any donor with a 19 on 520 descended from the lineage of the 20's any more recent than 1772. The 1772 date is used as the most recent probable date of birth for the father of William of 1790. Thus, here we are: The 19s looking for a common ancestor born about 1772 or earlier - and who had the 19 on 520. This ancestor would have been a son or grandson of old William Queen of 1716-20 based upon the probabilities of relationships due to some significant perfect YDNA matches at the 37 marker level. The field of research has been narrowed for the 19s - now looking for relationships between the 19s. It has also been reduced for the 20s - now looking for relationships between the 20s. Next: Proof of a two-step mutation (as currently defined by our testing company) and parallel mutations. Isolating the 19s and the 20s. Gene