I wish all of them were grouped together that matches either one or two markers. Carole in SC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carol Herbert" <carolherbert@sbcglobal.net> To: "marie sellers hollinger" <mari@netins.net>; "Jack Sellers" <Jack.Sellers9@gmail.com>; <sellers@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [SELLERS] DNA testing The way I broadly interpret our DNA results as they apply to the Sellers lines I have worked trying to find the origins of Johnston County, North Carolina, Sellers: The kits that group together within 1 or 2 markers (usually the ones that commonly mutate): 66525, Matthew 1800 Kentucky 29690 Jordan 1763 N.C. Benjamin 1740, Matthew 27033 James Jr. d. AL, James Sr, 1744 N.C. Where in N.C.? 19464 same 124024 Matthew 1760 Brunswick, N.C. 81503 Benjamin Edgecomb N.C. what year? Next group are basically one marker removed from above 14438 George 1815 AL, Young 1789? David 1760 N.C. Where in N.C.? Chatham? 14803 Young 1789 Chatham, N.C. David 1760 Orange N.C. 23989 Young 1789 d. AL b. N.C. Chatham 123528 Isaac 1800 N.C. 26552 Robert 1765 N.C. Where in N.C. ? Burke/Chatham? 34253 2nd cousin to 14438 41098 Laird b. 1771 N.C. Where in N.C.? Chatham or Brunswick or? 36092 William b. 1816 son of Isaac N.C. Where in N.C. Chatham or? Following groups differ from above and each other by at least three or four markers in 12 N56122 Joseph, son William 1820 m. Mary Sherrad Nash N.C. 32883 George Sr 1780 PA 42758 Johannes 1735 Germany Above 2 are 1 Marker (in 12), 3 in 67 removed from Jack and my group which follows N12156 Gurley 1802 Nash N.C. 14454 same 147407 Emmanuel 1795 Nash N.C. 121039 Alsey 1825 Johnston N.C. 145327 Daniel 1828 Johnston N.C. There are other groups that can be grouped in the way I have done above. They are not applicable to my current research, so I am stopping here. The above leads me to conclude as I said in an earlier e-mail, Marie and Jack, that as to Gurley and brothers and Daniel and Alsey, that we can exclude the Chatham/Burke/Brunswick group. Are the Nash County Arthur, John, William the same as the Brunswick group? At least one genealogist (the one who did the Nash County research thinks so). I had come to the same conclusion from land research because of Edgecomb being divided into Nash in 1777 that this group related to William through son John (rather than Matthew) father of William and George (Isle of Wight, then Edgecomb for George m. Faithey Gurley. Do we have ANY DNA that relates to these? If it is correct that Arthur, John, and William relate to George of Edgecomb, son of William, Jack and I have to exclude them on basis of DNA. Right, Jack? ________________________________ From: marie sellers hollinger <mari@netins.net> To: Jack Sellers <Jack.Sellers9@Gmail.com>; Carol Herbert <carolherbert@sbcglobal.net>; sellers@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 7:33:43 PM Subject: RE: DNA testing AMEN, we need better ancestor charts with PROVEN links, instead of assumed. And we need a few to SEND their charts. Oldest proven is fine, add assumed afterwards. But, the dna tests are helping confirm the lineage. The ones that are pretty well proven to Benj 1740 and 1720 are proven to MATHEW SELLERS bef 1700. But, we have at least a 100 yr gap between WM SELLERS and his son JOHN . But, in same area. Kinda would like more land/county records in this area. These VA counties changed to Northern Carolina and we must follow all these counties. Glad to have what we have and Thanks to all for sharing our families. WE have too many diff dna tests to connect to old WM. So we have diff lines of SELLERS here. We must find their links. Just had to drop in here for a second. marie, iowa -----Original Message----- From: Jack Sellers [mailto:Jack.Sellers9@Gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 8:04 PM To: Carol Herbert; mari@netins.net Subject: Re: DNA testing I don't think anyone has proven DNA that traces back to the original William. There are several that claim proof back to Benjamin. These are kit 19464 and kit 27033 that are exact but different from my results. It would be helpful if everyone had a cleaner or clearer chart that goes back to their earliest ancestor with name, place and dates. Thanks Jack At 05:52 PM 7/21/2009, Carol Herbert wrote: >Are we clear from DNA testing as well genealogist research that the >Nash County Arthur, John, William who are in the 1790 and 1800 Nash >County Census are related to the original William (b. abt 1650), >probably through his son John, but possibly through Matthew? > >Is this also true from the DNA of James Jr and James Sr of Chatham? > >And Robert Jr. Sr. of Burke through Thomas? > >And we (Gurley, Alsey, Daniel) are different from both of the above? ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SELLERS-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 - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.23/2254 - Release Date: 07/22/09 05:59:00