Perhaps I am missing something here. I have more than a passing interest in DNA, though not normally from the genealogy angle. So what I do not understand is how those seeking DNA testing to prove they descend from a particular ancestor, who has been dead for 200 or more years, without knowing his DNA, expect to actually prove it? A group of people who are tested can prove whether or not they are from the same family/ancestor, but if they are not following the same lines in their reseach, what happens? I would think there would be a limit to how far back DNA research can take you. You can only take samples from living people. Unless the plan is to dig up our ancestors (I doubt the authorities would grant this, *just* for general genealogy research), how else can DNA testing prove you descend from Joe Bloggs born c1700 or whatever? We are somewhat lucky within our reseach, as we know back 6 generations from myself, with our STONES, documentation from the 5th ... but in each generation the first son has the exact same name as his father before him - Edward, which carries down as well. From the 3rd generation before me to the 3rd generation below me, each second son is named John ... each third son is named Robert ... George .... Thomas ... William .. Ours' follows this pattern to the present day. Females follow a similar pattern. Ok .. so we know from the 5th before me .. to the 3rd after me .... but we do not know who the siblings of our 5th & 6th great-grandparents are, or what their birth order nor names are. Or even exactly where the men were born ... we have unproven place for one ... but is it correct? We do not know yet. So how will DNA testing help in our case? By the way, our STONE line came to Canada, from Hunts UK, c1855. We now know for sure the 5th gggf & 6th gggf (82 yrs old in 1881, Canada census) were not born in Hunts. To confuse matters further, the 5th gggf was not married under the name STONE, nor were his first two sons registered at birth, as STONE, although, on his marriage certificate, his father is a STONE. As far as I can see, we would have to get every present day STONE, in the UK (for starters!) to be tested, not to mention our own men here, to try to locate exactly where our line originated. What happens if one group in the USA do not match up with any others? How are they going to know where they belong? They would have to convince STONEs around the world, the UK in particular to be tested too. Again .. they can only go back to the living ... how are they going to actually prove that this John/Edward/George/Thomas/William etc Stone, or that John/etc etc Stone is in fact their John/etc etc Stone. There were far too many with those names who were unrelated living in many different areas, not only in the UK, but also in Canada, the USA, Australia and so forth. We know (positively) there were two families of Stones living in a small village, in NS, both of which had many of the same Christian names ... totally unrelated. Birth order and daughters' names are what helped separate the two families there. DNA would help present day members, who do not know much about their lineage, to form groups ... but not any further back, if (in our case) we did not know and have documentation, plus family bibles to support our claims of descent. Then ... somewhere in the USA are STONEs who descend from our line, who do not know that their ?x great-grandfather, was not a STONE on his marriage certificate .... was he illegitimate, then his mother married a STONE? or was illegitimate, then his parents married each other, but his name was not legally STONE, under British law? His *father* did come to Canada with him (+ his wife & 3 children) .... all under the name of STONE. So much for DNA & the STONE name in this case, if he was truly not a STONE, genetically. Unfortunately, the other name is just as common ... BALLS. Warmest regards ... from an enquiring mind. Trena ... Ontario, Canada. ******************************************************** FHH Brat Reunion (1950-1965) Visit our web site: www.kingsweb.net/fhhbrats ********************************************************* ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pam Eagleson" <peagleson@adelphia.net> To: <STONE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 12:21 PM Subject: [STONE] Re: STONE-D Digest V02 #43 > > Virginia- > There are many Stone surname lines in the United States (and world wide) > that we cannot connect to each other through the conventional paper trail of > written birth, marriage and death records. It has been demonstrated that > DNA tests of the male Y-chromosone can be used to trace the descendants of a > particular man through many generations.

Trena H wrote: > Perhaps I am missing something here. I have more than a passing interest in > DNA, though not normally from the genealogy angle. So what I do not > understand is how those seeking DNA testing to prove they descend from a > particular ancestor, who has been dead for 200 or more years, without > knowing his DNA, expect to actually prove it? A group of people who are > tested can prove whether or not they are from the same family/ancestor, but > if they are not following the same lines in their reseach, what happens? I > would think there would be a limit to how far back DNA research can take > you. You can only take samples from living people. Unless the plan is to > dig up our ancestors (I doubt the authorities would grant this, *just* for > general genealogy research), how else can DNA testing prove you descend from > Joe Bloggs born c1700 or whatever? > > We are somewhat lucky within our reseach, as we know back 6 generations from > myself, with our STONES, documentation from the 5th ... but in each > generation the first son has the exact same name as his father before him - > Edward, which carries down as well. From the 3rd generation before me to > the 3rd generation below me, each second son is named John ... each third > son is named Robert ... George .... Thomas ... William .. Ours' follows > this pattern to the present day. Females follow a similar pattern. Ok .. > so we know from the 5th before me .. to the 3rd after me .... but we do not > know who the siblings of our 5th & 6th great-grandparents are, or what their > birth order nor names are. Or even exactly where the men were born ... we > have unproven place for one ... but is it correct? We do not know yet. > > So how will DNA testing help in our case? By the way, our STONE line came > to Canada, from Hunts UK, c1855. We now know for sure the 5th gggf & 6th > gggf (82 yrs old in 1881, Canada census) were not born in Hunts. To confuse > matters further, the 5th gggf was not married under the name STONE, nor were > his first two sons registered at birth, as STONE, although, on his marriage > certificate, his father is a STONE. As far as I can see, we would have to > get every present day STONE, in the UK (for starters!) to be tested, not to > mention our own men here, to try to locate exactly where our line > originated. What happens if one group in the USA do not match up with any > others? How are they going to know where they belong? They would have to > convince STONEs around the world, the UK in particular to be tested too. > Again .. they can only go back to the living ... how are they going to > actually prove that this John/Edward/George/Thomas/William etc Stone, or > that John/etc etc Stone is in fact their John/etc etc Stone. There were > far too many with those names who were unrelated living in many different > areas, not only in the UK, but also in Canada, the USA, Australia and so > forth. We know (positively) there were two families of Stones living in a > small village, in NS, both of which had many of the same Christian names ... > totally unrelated. Birth order and daughters' names are what helped > separate the two families there. DNA would help present day members, who do > not know much about their lineage, to form groups ... but not any further > back, if (in our case) we did not know and have documentation, plus family > bibles to support our claims of descent. Then ... somewhere in the USA are > STONEs who descend from our line, who do not know that their ?x > great-grandfather, was not a STONE on his marriage certificate .... was he > illegitimate, then his mother married a STONE? or was illegitimate, then > his parents married each other, but his name was not legally STONE, under > British law? His *father* did come to Canada with him (+ his wife & 3 > children) .... all under the name of STONE. > So much for DNA & the STONE name in this case, if he was truly not a STONE, > genetically. Unfortunately, the other name is just as common ... BALLS. > > Warmest regards ... from an enquiring mind. > Trena ... Ontario, Canada. > > ******************************************************** > FHH Brat Reunion (1950-1965) > Visit our web site: www.kingsweb.net/fhhbrats > ********************************************************* > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pam Eagleson" <peagleson@adelphia.net> > To: <STONE-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 12:21 PM > Subject: [STONE] Re: STONE-D Digest V02 #43 > > > > > Virginia- > > There are many Stone surname lines in the United States (and world wide) > > that we cannot connect to each other through the conventional paper trail > of > > written birth, marriage and death records. It has been demonstrated > that > > DNA tests of the male Y-chromosone can be used to trace the descendants of > a > > particular man through many generations.