----- Original Message ----- From: "John F. Chandler" <JCHBN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU> To: <SWEET-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 3:42 PM Subject: DNA testing for Sweet genealogy > As a follow-up to my previous note, I should mention that all those > who have responded either to the list or to me privately are female. > The ultimate issue in deciding whether to organize a Sweet DNA study > is whether or not there is enough interest among potential testees to > make a meaningful study. As I said before, the potential testees are > males whose surname is Sweet (or would be Sweet, except for an adoption > or other break in the usual inheritance). If you are a potential > testee and could be convinced to join if and when the study gets going, > it would be nice to have a show of hands. If you are interested, but > not a potential testee, here's what you can do. Basically, there is > a list of prospects, and you just have to work your way down the list > until you find one that works... > > 1. Yourself - if you are female, that's out; if you are male, but not > a Sweet, that's out, and you can also skip #2 and #3; > if you are male and married to a Sweet, then just take > your wife's point of view for the rest of the list... > 2. Brothers - can often be persuaded to participate for your sake... > 3. Father - also very persuadable... > 4. Uncles or 1st cousins - you just have to ask nicely and/or appeal > to their interest (if any) in family history... > 5. 2nd cousins or 1st cousins once removed... > 6. and so on... > > I know that lots of researchers focus on their own ancestors, so that the > "and so on" may require research you haven't done yet, but it's still > something that should be within reach if you start working on it. > > The goal in all this is to come up with (collectively) at least two > descendants of each identifiable Sweet "founder", preferably via > at least two different sons of the founder. Assuming that the > DNA test results agree for the documented descendants of the > progenitor, we can "reconstruct" the DNA pattern for that progenitor > and then compare against the DNA patterns of other progenitors to see > if they were related. It's really that simple. Consider, for example, > the two John Sweets who came to Massachusetts in the early days and > both started out in what became Essex County. As we all know, one > soon relocated to Rhode Island (or, at least, his family did -- the > founder's death is not recorded, so it's not clear whether he actually > moved or not). At any rate, many people assume these two were cousins, > but nobody has any proof. A DNA study might prove that the two were > indeed related, or it might prove they were not. This would move the > whole question from the realm of speculation to the realm of fact. > > John Chandler > > PS In my own case, the nearest Sweet is my wife's mother's mother's > mother, who had a sister, but no brother. Her father had two sisters, > but no brother. HIS father had a sister, but no brother. This gets > us back to 1760 before the possibility of a connection opens up. I > didn't promise it would be easy! > > > ==== SWEET Mailing List ==== > Visit Daisy's Sweet Home Page! > http://www.rootsweb.com/~daisy/sweet.htm > >