December 6, 2003 - Pamunkey, Thomas of Dorchester, Danforth, plus more
Note - there are more than DNA results here. Make sure you read the last section of this message.
-----------
The results of two more DNA tests have come in for the Davenport Surname DNA Project. We are trying to get DNA samples from all of the branches of the various Davenport lines to see how we are related. For more information and to see the results go to http://www.DavenportDNA.com So far we have 37 participants with complete results in for 32.
-----------------
The first return is kit # 11120. He is a Pamunkey tracing his ancestry from Davis (b. abt 1660) > Thomas > Julius > Thomas > etc... For a little background - Davis resided in Virginia and is believed to have had five sons: Martin, Thomas, John, Richard, and Elias. All but John are known to have left descendants.
Kit # 11120 matched 25/25 our Elias and one of the Martin participants. The other Martin (Davis > Martin > William) had a 24/25 match. This seems to confirm my earlier report stating that there was a "mutation" somewhere down the Davis > Martin > William branch. So if the opportunity arises we may be able to place an unknown Davenport directly into this branch. Remember these mutations are neither good nor bad. They occur on "junk DNA" that is passed down from father to son and has no use - except to us genealogists. A 25/25 match is good but a 24/25 match with the other branches could make it unique and easier to track.
-----------------
A couple months ago we received the results from one of our Thomas of Dorchester participants. He was descended from son John. (Thomas > John > Samuel > Seth). We already had three results from sons Charles(2) and Jonathan(1) which matched exactly 25/25 with each other. We were mildly surprised when the John descendant had a 24/25 match. In an effort to pinpoint where in this branch the "mutation" occurred we recruited another John descendant (Thomas > John > Samuel > Samuel). Kit # 13434 was the new guy and his results are in.
Kit # 13434 had an exact 25/25 match with the other descendants and a 24/25 match with the other John participant. Since Samuel and Seth were the only sons of Samuel that grew to adulthood and produced offspring - we now know the mutation occurred somewhere down Seth's branch. This may not seem important or even relevant, but it will be to someone, as we shall see in a moment.
In October I reported on the results of Kit # 11382 who traced his ancestry back to Benoni Davenport, born about 1799 in Connecticut. I said "Based on the similarities between these samples it appears highly likely that Benoni is from the Thomas of Dorchester line." I will now add onto that and say he is most likely from the Thomas > John > Samuel > Seth branch. Research should be concentrated in that area.
-----------------
And now for something entirely different. About ten days ago I reported on a DNA connection between Isaac Davenport and Francis Davenport via a participant with the surname Danforth. An ancestor of this individual changed his name from Davenport to Danforth over two hundred years ago. This brings up a "weak link" in our studies. We are missing potential "brick wall breakers" because we may not be looking at the all the right names.
For example. I am a Thomas of Dorchester descendant. In the 1600s when Thomas lived in the Boston area there was also a Thomas Danforth. Both were about the same age and became a Freeman within a couple years of each other. Many researchers confuse the two. When you look through the old records there were some very creative ways of spelling Davenport. In one paragraph the same person might be referred to as Davenport, Danforth, and Danford. If the Davenport was illiterate then the clerk just wrote down what it sounded like - which may have been wrong. This spelling might carry on down through that person's line.
Anyway, I have scanned through the Danforth and Davenport mailing lists and message boards and have found several instances where people mentioned name changes or the Davenport/Danforth combination. So, I believe (with your help) I shall start encouraging Danforths and Danfords to join our DNA project. My initial intent is to keep them separate from the Davenport results - unless they match.
Since I am not familiar with the various Danforth lines - if anybody knows an "expert" on the group please let me know. Also if there are other spellings that we should look into - again let me know. I do not mean one time spellings in the census (Davenfort, Davennport, etc) but a name that got carried through the generations.
Any comments or suggestions?
-----------
If anyone would like to join the DNA project or has any questions please contact me.