Thanks, Gary.
My hope is that the degree of match will reflect the degree of
relatedness in a way that can we compare the genotypes of Isaac's
known descendants and those of known descendants of Thomas, and
determine once and for all if Isaac descended from Thomas, if they
were distant cousins, or if they were unrelated.
But, in any event, it'd be good to know whether my great great great
grandfather really was William of Giles, or if it really was my
maternal great great great great uncle Elmer.
Rees
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Gary Chapman
<gary.chapman(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Rees,
I would encourage you to participate in the study. It is my understanding
that the "y" we are studying is passed only from male to male. Anyone you
match "y" with shares a common father or grandfather with varying numbers of
g's in front of the grandfather. Any known cousins with a direct male line
to a common male ancestor, no matter how many generations removed, would
match very closely.
In your example of Isaac and Thomas Chapman, if they both have a direct male
line to a common male ancestor, they are obviously related and a "y" DNA
test done by their direct male descendants would reflect it. If two
chappies who happen to be direct male descendants of Isaac and Thomas would
take the DNA test, their results would be extremely similar if Isaac and
Thomas were actually related. If the two descendants' DNA tests were
totally different, either Isaac and Thomas were not related or the two
descendants who took the test were not direct descendants after all. They
could be adopted, etc., or have misunderstood their family tree way back
there.
My ancestors came from North Carolina, leaving Virginia around 1750. The
closest DNA match I have found to me is from another of our chappies, who
also happens to have ancestors from Virginia in the same time frame.
If a few more Chapman men would take the test, the chances of identifying
common ancestors would obviously increase. I hope I have not muddied the
water.
Thanks,
Gary Chapman
Alpharetta, GA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rees Chapman" <winwinsit(a)gmail.com>
To: <CHAPMAN-DNA(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 6:27 AM
Subject: [CHAPMAN-DNA] how sophisticated is the DNA project?
> I'm back, considering participating in the study, and asking: Is the
> Chapman DNA project capable of confirming or rejecting hypothetical
> lineages involving removed cousins with common surnames?
>
> What relationship may have existed between Isaac Chapman (who died in
> Orange county VA in 1747) and Thomas Chapman (who arrived at Jordon's
> Journey VA on the Tryall in 1610)? This lineage is taken for granted
> by many descendants of Isaac Chapman, in that it was claimed in the
> Genealogy of Joseph Peck (1955) by George Roberts. But, in twelve
> years of searching, I have found NO documentation of such a connection
> between Isaac and Thomas, and instead find several historical
> references to Isaac having come to Virginia through New England. My
> findings and beliefs on this topic are stated below.
>
> Is the Chapman DNA project sophisticated enough to demonstrate such a
> connection, or the lack of one, or the strength of one? What if Isaac
> and Thomas were related, albeit not in a direct line?
>
> For example, what if Isaac and Thomas had a common ancestor
> Bartholomew Chapman who lived in England a century before, and had two
> sons, Aaron Chapman and Zachariah Chapman. Suppose Thomas of Jordan's
> Journey was the grandson of Aaron, while Isaac of Orange was
> Zachariah's fifth great grandson; I believe that would make Isaac and
> Thomas second cousins thrice removed. Would the DNA of Isaac's
> descendants be distinguishable from the DNA of Thomas'?
>
> In that the Y chromosome (the measly haploid runt that makes me the
> man I am) changes little, if at all, across multiple generations,
> would not my Y chromosome match that of any male with whom I share a
> common ancestor?
>
> Rees Chapman
> Dahlonega GA
> winwinsit at G mail dot com.
> ___________________________________________
>
> Many descendants of Isaac Chapman of Orange County VA, through the
> Giles County Chapmans (including Isaac, John, Richard and Jemima),
> believe their line passes through Thomas Chapman who came to America
> at Jordon's Journey in 1610 on the Tryall. I regard this as false, and
> believe it originated with George Roberts' terribly flawed work,
> Genealogy of Joseph Peck (1955), which traces Isaac Chapman of Orange
> Co. VA back to Thomas Chapman of 1610 Colonial Virginia. He lays out
> the following lineage:
>
> Thomas Chapman I (b. 1590) came to Jordon's Journey VA on the Tryall
> in 1610, m. Ann in 1618, had two children: Thomas II (b. 1619) and
> Ann (b. 1622), both in Jordon's Journey.
>
> Thomas II settled Elizabeth River VA and had a son Thomas III b. ca. 1642.
>
> Thomas III settled in Charles Co. MD in 1662 and supposedly m.
> Elizabeth Craxon in 1689. Had two children: Thomas IV (b. 3-26-1690)
> and Mary (b. 8-19-1693) before relocating to Stafford Co. VA in 1695.
>
> Thomas IV ultimately settled in Orange Co, probably what became
> Culpeper Co., VA
>
> There are problems with this lineage. Thomas III would have 48 years
> old, and Elizabeth (b. 1644) would have been 46, when Thomas IV was
> born; 51 and 49 respectively for Mary. Indeed, 49 year old women in
> Colonial America, such as Elizabeth Craxon Chapman in 1693, did have
> children - but it was quite unusual. Referring to Thomas Chapman III,
> Brian Berry's Generations 1-5 of the Family and Descendants of Thomas
> Chapman of Jordan's Journey notes that after 1641 "for the next three
> decades, no records for Thomas have been located." Two alternative
> explanations seem more plausible: Thomas III was really the
> grandfather of Thomas IV (with a lost generation interceding), or
> Thomas IV was from a different line of Chapmans altogether.
>
> According to Roberts, the Thomas Chapman born March 26, 1690 in
> Charles Co. MD is "probably" the same Thomas Chapman whose death
> inventory we find in Culpeper VA dated Nov. 18, 1782. Later, says
> Roberts, "it may have been his son, b. ca. 1810-12." (I assume he
> intended to estimate this birthdate a century earlier: 1710-12.) Is he
> conjecturing a Thomas V? Would this be Isaac's father, or his brother?
> Thus, we see that Roberts was uncertain that the Thomas Chapman born
> in Charles Co. MD in 1690 was the same as the Thomas Chapman who died
> in Culpeper VA in 1782.
>
> According to Roberts, Johnston's 1906 History of Middle New River
> Settlements mentions an Isaac Chapman "born in Charles County,
> Maryland," although there is no evidence of this birth in county
> records. But, this is not what was actually said by Johnston, who
> made no mention of an Isaac born in Maryland. Roberts, attempting to
> dismiss Johnston's apparent difference of opinion regarding Isaac's
> origins, states: "Considering the relationship between the Chapmans,
> Abbotts and the Johnstons, it is a foregone conclusion that Col. David
> E. Johnston, the writer of the Middle New River History, had a
> storehouse of first hand information on the subject, especially with
> relation to the Chapman family, but when we consider that Thomas
> Chapman left Charles County, Md., in 1695 and the History was not
> written until 1906, we may also conclude that the elapsed time in the
> amount of 210 years is ample for discrepancies to creep into
> traditions handed down. We give much credit to Col. Johnston for his
> great work, but when we find that a certain passage is contrary to the
> record we shall bow to the record." But "the record" to which he
> allegedly bows is not substantiated.
>
> Culbertson's Hunter Genealogy, says Roberts, lists Thomas' children as
> Nathaniel, George, John, and an unidentified daughter; no mention is
> made of an Isaac. For some reason, says Roberts, "to this we would add
> Isaac." And "we are certain that Isaac was a son of Thomas IV." But,
> there is no evidence supporting this. Then, Roberts goes on to state
> that there is "no recorded evidence that the other members (i.e.,
> Nathaniel and George) were brothers of Isaac and John, therefore, they
> shall not be considered further.. ."
>
> So - there is no evidence of an Isaac Chapman born in Charles Co., but
> Roberts insists he must be the undocumented son of Thomas IV born in
> Charles Co. in 1690, who is either the Thomas Chapman who died in
> Culpeper in 1782 or another undocumented son. And although there is
> apparently evidence that Thomas IV had children George and Nathaniel,
> there is no evidence of Isaac being brother of George and Nathaniel -
> thus, we dismiss them as Thomas' sons. This is very sloppy reasoning,
> supported by erroneous assumptions and no real evidence! It leads me
> to suspect that Roberts attempted to graft Isaac Chapman's family tree
> onto Thomas', thus stretching the lineage back to 1610.
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
CHAPMAN-DNA-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CHAPMAN-DNA-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the
message