Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
Boy, this has been a very busy day DNA-wise. We now have another new participant -- Doug Clendenin. Doug is a descendant of Adam and Winifred Clendenin and is, in fact, our second participant on that line.
This provides us with another opportunity to determine if Adam had a relationship with Charles Clendenin as many have thought in the past. Bill Clendenin is descended from Adam through his grandson John m Polly McKinney while Doug is descended from Adam through his grandson Archibald m Shada Pennington.
It will probably be about 10 weeks before we have Doug's results back. Bill's are tentatively scheduled for the end of July.
Sharon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Bryant" <SharonBryant(a)cox.net>
To: <BLLHN(a)aol.com>; <CLENDINEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: CLENDINEN-D Digest V04 #57
> Hi Lori,
>
> Exciting, isn't it? Let me answer the interpretation question first: Ron
> doesn't seem to match, he DOES match George, Randal and Michael exactly on
> 25/25 markers. What does this mean? It means that they share a common male
> ancestor whose Y-DNA has been transmitted down through the generations
> without a change.
>
> But, better than that is the fact that the first eight men in the chart
> share a common ancestor. The trick now is getting the traditional
> genealogical research to reflect that. Everyone in this study needs to dig
> deeper looking for genealogical records past their present most remote
> ancestor. Only in that way will we all have a better idea of how these men
> are related to each other.
>
> So far the "paper" shows us that Don and Willie are fifth cousins. I don't
> remember exactly the cousinship of George and Randal but they are
descended
> from a pair of brothers. And look at the way they spell their names!
> Michael's family has used the traditional Gl-- while the rest have used
Cl--
> .
>
> We do have a descendant of John and Janet Houston Clendenin in the
study --
> Nick. His kit has just been ordered so I expect it to be another 8 weeks
> before we get his results.
>
> You also asked >>If John Clendenin and William of NC were brothers would
> decendents have exact matches?<< The answer to that is "not necessarily."
In
> each branch and each generation and actually in each male birth there is
the
> possibility that the DNA at any specific alelle may mutate. In other words
> instead of copying 14 times at one location, it may copy 13 times or 15
> times or any of several other variations. However, these mutations can be
> used to determine sub-branches of families.
>
> You asked if you should upgrade. I would recommend it. Michael has ordered
> his upgrade to 26-37 markers. Since Ron matches him exactly at this point,
a
> mutation in that area may give us a clue where the DNA split as a specific
> man had more than one son. But it still has to be coupled with traditional
> genealogical research to be sure we're coming up with the right answers.
>
> That common ancestor may be several generations back and in a far far away
> country but he is there. We just have to find our way to him. I hope I
> answered your questions. If you have others, just let me know.
>
> Sharon
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BLLHN(a)aol.com>
> To: <CLENDINEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 8:04 PM
> Subject: Re: CLENDINEN-D Digest V04 #57
>
>
> > Re: DNA results uploaded today for Ron Clendennen. He seems to match
> > George, Randal and Michael. What do I do to upgrade or would it not be
> helpful?
> > Also, how do I interpret this? I'm interested to see if a decendent of
> John and
> > Janet Huston Clendenin matches also to this group. If John Clendenin
and
> > William of NC were brothers would decendents have exact matches?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Lori
> >
> >
> > ==== CLENDINEN Mailing List ====
> > Don't forget to check out the Clendenin Family Research Website at
> http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~clendin
> >
> > ==============================
> > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
> > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237
> >
> >
>
Good morning,
I woke today to find two sets of 25 marker DNA test results in. Both of them were surprises. I anticipated due to name spellings and locations of oldest known ancestors that neither of them would match anyone else who had been tested.
Well, silly me! Ron matched Randal, George and James exactly. Alan matched Barney and Warren exactly 25/25. Now, you all have to find some information to solidify the paper trail.
Any comments?
Sharon
I hate being the bearer of bad tidings, but ...
I just checked the Group Administrator Page for our DNA project and found that the test results for Guy, Alan and Ron have been postponed once again.
They are all three being rerun again. Apparently the results they have posted have been inconclusive and they want to do the tests again. A note of explanation: that's why when you receive the test kit there are two vials and two scrapers. They can extract DNA from each vial twice. So they start with Vial A and after two tests if the results are still inconclusive they go to Vial B. If after four tests have been run the results are still inconclusive they send out a new kit for additional scrapings.
Now, they are saying the results will be ready on/around 7/5/04.
I guess I should have told you to "study up" in preparation for this test. :>(
Sorry guys.
Sharon
This went out of my out box on Sunday but I understand that Rootsweb had some problems then and this may not have gotten through.
Since I have some further updates I will add them to this message.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sharon Bryant
To: clendinen-l(a)rootsweb.com ; CLENDENIN-L(a)rootsweb.com
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 9:11 AM
Subject: Update
Hello everyone,
We have a new DNA participant - Nicholas J Clendenin. Nick is Mary Lou Townsend's brother and they are descended from John Clendenin and Janet Huston.
Another new DNA participant is William L. Clendenin, believed to be a descendant of Adam and Winifred Clendenin. I'm excited about this, particularly as it will either tell us yes, or no, that Adam was a son of Charles Clendenin. We can compare Bill's results with Denver's results.
We are still waiting for the 13-25 markers on Guy's test. It has once again been bumped out - this time to 6/24. 6/24 Haven't heard a word about this test.
Ron and Alan's results for 1-12 markers were due 6/19 (yesterday as you all know) and the 13-25 markers are due 6/24. These dates have basically be reversed. The 13-25 markers were due 6/19 (haven't gotten them). Markers 1-12 results were in on 6/11 and they decided they needed to be retested and set the date for 6/24. Haven't heard anything about these either.
It is extremely important that we locate and test descendants of William and Robert, sons of Charles Clendenin of Virginia.
It would also be very helpful if either George or Randal and Michael upgraded their tests to 37 markers. These three men have, at 25 markers, exact result matches. In order to help determine where their most recent common ancestor is located the 37 marker tests would be valuable. Up to you, gentlemen!
Don contacted me with a sample letter to send to possible participants that he is aware of. If you have any correspondents who would be eligible to participate (male named Clendenin or one of the variants) please send Don a message to get a copy of the sample letter. Or, Don, if you would rather you could send it to me again and I will post it to the mailing list or you can.
That's about it, folks.
P. S. Oh, I have been busy posting IGI marriages and births/christenings for Scottish parishes on the website. They start about 1598-99 and will go through 1854. I feel like I have just about gone blind looking up these IGI microfilm numbers for y'all.
Oh, and another thing: Don sent me a paper copy of D. W. Clendenan's Synoptical Family History .... Folks, there are no references cited in this document. It is not a book. Simply a notice he had printed stating that he was looking for more family information in order to compile a family history. If you have used any information from this document to compile your lineage, check out the information by trying to find documentary proof.
I'll quit there. You're probably tired of reading all this.
Hello everyone,
We have a new DNA participant - Nicholas J Clendenin. Nick is Mary Lou Townsend's brother and they are descended from John Clendenin and Janet Huston.
Another new DNA participant is William L. Clendenin, believed to be a descendant of Adam and Winifred Clendenin. I'm excited about this, particularly as it will either tell us yes, or no, that Adam was a son of Charles Clendenin. We can compare Bill's results with Denver's results.
We are still waiting for the 13-25 markers on Guy's test. It has once again been bumped out - this time to 6/24.
Ron and Alan's results for 1-12 markers were due 6/19 (yesterday as you all know) and the 13-25 markers are due 6/24.
It is extremely important that we locate and test descendants of William and Robert, sons of Charles Clendenin of Virginia.
It would also be very helpful if either George or Randal and Michael upgraded their tests to 37 markers. These three men have, at 25 markers, exact result matches. In order to help determine where their most recent common ancestor is located the 37 marker tests would be valuable. Up to you, gentlemen!
That's about it, folks.
Hi,
At the present time we have two new participants whose kits have not yet been returned to the company.
There are three sets of results we're awaiting. Guy's 13-25 results have again been pushed back. Now instead of 6/22 they're saying 6/24.
Alan Clendenon and Ron Clendennen's results are supposed to be back this week. We'll see; but I'm not masochistic enough to try holding my breath.
A handful of us representing UK, Canada, Australia and the U.S. have formed a group to try to document the information presented in GTC's "The House of Glendonwyn." We'll let you know what we discover.
That's it folks.
We still need participants to represent the following branches of the family: William, son of Charles and Robert, son of Charles.
I may have had contact with a representative of Archibald's family as well as the family of Adam (m. Winifred -----). We'll see; I have discussed with them the need to be tested.
Sharon
Are you going to a Clendenin family reunion this summer? That would be a great time to tell family members about the DNA project and solicit people to sign on and be tested!
Don't have the money (hey, I've been unemployed since last August) and believe me I know what "tighten the belt" means. So, take up a collection -- pass the hat, whatever it takes to come up with the money.
Sharon
I subscribe to a mailing list that deals with Genealogy and DNA testing. The following is a questions/comment which came in yesterday:
>>My question/problem is that I have a 37/37 match, a surname match and a
geographic proximity to one other. His paper trail ends back 4 generations, mine goes back 5.<<
Three answers/comments have come in from people who have been at this longer than I have and I hope that you will benefit by what these people had to say.
1. "Given what you know I would say you should be able to do some traditional
genealogical research to find that connection. 4 generations isn't very
far. Only 100 to 140 years depending on the ages at which the direct lines
were born. Even census records should be an enormous help potentially. I
would go looking for another researcher with the same surname and deeper
genealogy who may have data crossing the same geographical area. Get a
test on their branch and, if there is confirmation of the DNA, work your
way back down the tree."
2. "MRCA calculations are useful in setting general guidelines, but can be
nearly useless when you get to a precise situation.
Let me give you a real world example. My father and his brother are only
25/26, as my father is the originator of a mutation - that his brother
doesn't have. The MRCA calculation shows a 1% probability of their being
related in one generation. (which is the actual fact) The 50% probability
is that they are related within 14-15 generations and the 90% probability is
that they are related within 33 generations. So, the probabilities are
proven to be correct, but who would choose to use the 1% probability, which
is the actual case. (And who wants to look out 14 or 33 generations to find
the common ancestor of brothers)
Now take another example. My uncle (same guy as above) and my [business] partner ... are 26/26 and 32/33 (the rest of the results aren't in yet - they could be 41/42 for all I know at this point). My uncle's paper trail goes back to a Virginian born in the 1640s, while my partner's paper trail goes back to a Lancashireman (England) born in 1689. They are separated by at least 11 generations, probably a few more. The probability of them being related at 11 generations, based on 26/26 is 73%. The probability of them being related at 11 generations, based on 32/33 drops to 49%. The probabilities changed, but the relationship did not change. They
will be related at the generation that they are related (which we don't know) and the calculations only tell us whether we're "in the range".
Bottom Line: put most of your energy into traditional genealogy and the rest
of your energy into creating a family dna tree using strategically placed
participants. Use MRCA calculations as a really fuzzy guideline - or not at
all. With a 37/37 match, you should be working really hard to make
traditional genealogy give you your common ancestor with your 37/37 match.
You've already got the bullseye on the target."
3. "Ditto. Pushing 270 tested samples and I take the same approach when
dealing with our participants. We have clusters of perfect matches where
we know the common ancestor is probably back in 1500s if not beyond. I am
anxious to see if we can't get some traction on the expanded tests. Trying
to guess the MRCA is pretty meaningless if you are not able to find a paper
trail to him. One of the most valuable aspects of the DNA is that it
allows one to focus their genealogical research on a specific family group
and forget the rest of the families with the same surname but different DNA
haplotypes."
If you have been tested, received your results, and are saying, "well, okay I have a 50% probability of being related to Joe." Don't do that! DNA is a tool, the same way you use library resources, microfilm, cemetery transcriptions, public records, etc.
The variant spellings of the name doesn't help either. If you are ignoring data because the name is not spelled the same way as you spell it, then you are wasting your time and money. I recently saw a document in which the name was spelled three different ways on the same piece of paper written by the same person.
Another example was in a recent census: The name of the head of the household was spelled one way and three lines down in the same household, his brother's last name was spelled differently!
Do you have a record of the family that was given to you by your great-aunt's cousin three times removed? Fine. Now, verify the information for yourself. Maybe they didn't remember it quite right. It can make one devil of a difference.
The only reason I can think of for anyone not being tested is if they are female or male not named Clendenin/variant spelling.
Sharon
Well, here we are again. Most of you have answered the roll call. Those who haven't please do so.
I reported to you this morning that we had another 25/25 match and that is true. What I didn't know until just a short time ago is that we are going to have to wait for Guy's results for a while longer. It seems the results are in but the testing is being rerun for some reason. They estimate 6/22.
We have had some good fortune in contacting possibles in Australia and I located one in South Africa. Don't know if that will help or not.
I just posted the updated dna results chart on the website at http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~clendin Go take a look for yourself. There is a link from each set of results to that individual's lineage.
Sharon
I received this a few days ago and thought it worth passing on. If you have a large collection of genealogical files, notes, trees, etc. I'm sure you don't want them tossed on a bonfire when you're gone. Remember that what's important to you may not be important to your survivors.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This was a subject discussed on the the VA-ROOTS mailing list and the
following was suggested. I'm sending it with Paul's permission.
From: "Paul Drake" <pauldrake(a)CHARTER.NET>
There have been so very many questions concerning what will happen to our
genealogy files at death, that I have decided to set forth my own form for
disposing of such materials.
All should know that I have NOT practiced law for many years, and that the
laws of the United States vary from State to State and from time to time in
matters of estates. Further, this is but my Codicil, and your collection
may require more diligence and consideration in preparation.
With that in mind, remember that any lawyer can draft such a codicil, and I
do suggest that you gain that assistance if you have books, documents, or
materials within your files that have considerable monetary value to other
than yourself. So, if you have valuable items that might be considered as
within "Mom's genealogy stuff", you could easily create conflicts after your
death for those who will appraise your personal property. Your genealogy
files might well include mementos, artifacts, paintings, documents, etc.,
etc., that should be included within your inventory of personal property
owned BECAUSE those have value in the market.
Be sure that any specific mementos, artifacts, letters, and documents that
are of some worth in dollars on the market go to specifically named
individuals in your will, or give those to your family now. After that, in
disposing of your files and all other materials that have genealogical
value, though not much in money, do your own simple codicil.
Follow the form here, and in a few words state as a Preamble generally what
files you want to be included. Again, be SURE that there are no items in
those "files and papers" that have recognizable property value. Be sure to
sign it with your witnesses present as you do.
***************
Codicil to My Last Will and Testament Concerning Genealogy Materials:
Preamble: I here mean to dispose of the materials owned or properly in my
possession at death that have genealogical value, though have little or no
worth on the market as personal property. My genealogical efforts have
required no small measure of thought, time, travel, and money and may be of
substantial value to other researchers. I would ask that my file cabinets,
folders, materials in my desk, and any and all my research materials stored
elsewhere be gathered together and included in this category. It is my hope
that all such materials might be disposed of in the following manner.
Following my death, I request that any and all of my genealogical records,
both those prepared or written by me, as well as all other family history
records which may be in my possession, including all files, notebooks,
books, correspondence, copies of documents, and such as computer programs or
computer memory devices, remain together and protected for a period for
eighteen (18)months or until a recipient is found for such materials,
whichever comes first.
Further, I request that immediate efforts be made by my family to identify
one or more persons or institutions who would have knowledge of be willing
to take custody of such materials and assume the responsibility of
maintaining and perhaps continuing the family histories and research.
I suggest that the persons be contacted regarding their willingness to
assume custody of these materials include:
(examples) Jim Jones, 100 Elm St., Saint Francis, KY 12345, phone
111-333-9999
Jane Smith, 250 Money St., Nowhere, TN 98765, phone
222-999-1932
Etc.
Etc.
Whatever Museum and Archives, Main St., Hanging Limb, TN
Worthlittle Else College, Lord Knows Where, AL
Further, in the event no person or organization named here is willing to
preserve such genealogical materials, please contact the various
genealogical organizations of which I have been a member, there to determine
their willingness to accept some or all of these materials.
(Here list the societies or organizations to be contacted; include local
chapters, with their addresses, phone numbers and contacts known to you, if
any)
In witness whereof and before witnesses, I have hereto affixed my name on
the ___ day of ____, 200?
Signature ___________________________
Witness ____________________________ Date ___________
Witness ____________________________ Date ___________
Well, folks, we have another 25/25 match. Mike Glendening's John Glendening who died in Brown Co., OH in 1839 matches with Randal Clendenin and George Clendenin.
Still waiting for Guy's results.
Sharon
GDAY Folks:)
I have the complete Copy of GTCs Book House of Glendonwyn..
I have also Visited our state library here in Adelaide South Australia,
Where GTC Lived, and Browsed thru His Paraphernalia which his Family had
donated to Library...Contained a Lot of Medical Degrees from England , and
Letters To Different Organisations...Was Searching for any more information
on his book etc..But to no avail...Had Photos of the Family etc too.
I had been in contact with his descendants awhile back, But they did not
return my calls, So im guessing they not interested or too busy with their
own lives etc.
Im still waiting on hearing from the Clendinnens in Victoria I rang who are
connected to the South Australian Family of Clendinnens..My mother being a
Clendinnen..One appeared interested and had done some research..So will
pursue that avenue
If i dont hear from them again soon, Will try contacting them again, as
apparently one of them whom i contacted does have some information on the
Irish Clendinnens
Regards from Australia
Cathy:)
_________________________________________________________________
What's your house worth? Click here to find out:
http://www.ninemsn.realestate.com.au
This appeared in the WEBB DNA Project Newsletter.
>>Queries: NC, MO & TX? WEBBs
Does anyone have any information on CLENDENIN-WEBB Marriages? Spelling varies on Clendenin -- Clendenning, Glendenin, etc.
John Clendenin m. Ann Mary Webb c. 1776 (possibly Orange Co., NC)
Joseph Clendenin m. Ann "Nancy" Webb 2/20/1787 Orange Co., NC
George Washington Webb m. Matilda Jane Clendennen 4/18/1844 (possibly Cole Co, MO)
Robert F. Clendenin m. Rebecca Webb 3/19/1829 Cole Co., MO he died in Limestone Co.,TX
Matthew Bolen Clendenin m. Elizabeth Webb 4/28/1829 Cole Co., MO he died in Limestone Co., TX
Catherine Clendenin m. Benjamin Webb c 1830? Cole Co, MO. She died in Limestone Co, TX
Any information on these couples -- parents, siblings, children, etc. is welcome. OF particular interest is whether the two groups of WEBBs were related.<<
I don't normally do this as I think it is counterproductive as far as computer space is concerned but I want to have a roll call. Here's what I want you to do. Use my personal email address: SharonBryant(a)cox.net. In the subject line type Roll Call.
Give me your name and your email address. That's all I want. It doesn't matter if you're on the List or the Digest. Please just do it.
Thanks,
Sharon
Hi,
You all have been remarkably quiet. Can't do it all by myself so I'm going to lay out what I intend to do and hope those of you who can will join in.
1. First, we have a new member in our DNA project -- Steve Clendenan from Canada has requested his kit.
2. Friday, we were told that a lot of 13-25 marker results had been returned from the lab and were ready to be uploaded. We should have results for Michael James and Guy but neither one has been uploaded to just a few minutes ago. Hopefully tomorrow.
3. That leaves us with two other kits which have been submitted and for which we have due dates of the middle of this month.
Now, here's what I'm going to do.
1. We've been able to make contact with other Clendinnens who live in Australia but who are from the brother of Guy's ancestor. One at least seemed interested and has doing some independent research on his ancestral line.
2. There was a branch of that same family who went to South Africa and I am actively attempting to locate a male member of that group with the correct surname.
3. I have been downloading diverse Clendenin (v/s) information from the Internet by doing Google searches for the name in specific locations such as Canada, Ireland, Scotland, etc. I will put that information, as I have time, into my database.
Those of you who have copies of the G. T. Clendinning book The House of Glendonwyn please dig them out. I have come across information just today which leads me to believe that old GTC has a grain of truth in his pages.
We need to verify/document those assertions. I have a large group of photocopies of some of his sources so don't send for anything until we figure out what we need.
If you have a copy of GTC's book (all 12 parts) please let me know with the idea of organizing a separate research group.
I think the first thing we need to do is see if we can verify the validity of his supposed will of William of Quarterland. There appears to be some validity there but we need to determine exactly what.
I have been in contact with two members of two different clans, other than Clan Douglas, that we seem to have matching DNA with. (25/25 with one and 24/25 with the other). I'm going to let that go with no other information until we have something more to offer them. They expect us to have verified/documented lineages. We're not there yet.
Sharon