DNA is wonderful. But in some cases it doesn't help. Our family's earliest ancestor was first recorded in 1763 when he married. He was an orphan and was given his surname. All efforts to find ANY name of that ilk have been fruitless. Even trips to England etc. Now we took a DNA test of our oldest available descendant. That was almost seven months ago. We have yet to come across a surname that matches even to 2 markers off. So..DNA is fine when you have some type of match in your surname line, but boy it sure doesn't help if you can't find a match in ANY surname.

Hi Marge,   I was just advocating it in case of one running out of records. Unfortunately we have too many burnt counties because of war or courthouse fires, etc. That really gets frustrating.   Best Wishes, Marianne --- On Tue, 1/6/09, Marge <msealock@mchsi.com> wrote: From: Marge <msealock@mchsi.com> Subject: Re: [VACULPEP] It's all relative To: vaculpep@rootsweb.com Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 7:40 AM DNA is wonderful. But in some cases it doesn't help. Our family's earliest ancestor was first recorded in 1763 when he married. He was an orphan and was given his surname. All efforts to find ANY name of that ilk have been fruitless. Even trips to England etc. Now we took a DNA test of our oldest available descendant. That was almost seven months ago. We have yet to come across a surname that matches even to 2 markers off. So..DNA is fine when you have some type of match in your surname line, but boy it sure doesn't help if you can't find a match in ANY surname. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to VACULPEP-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message