Thanks for the thoughtful response, Ian. Surprisingly, I have never heard
genealogists discuss illegitimacy before. Does anyone know of a good source
to learn more about it? For example, I imagine that the estimated % of
illegitimacy has changed during different eras, and has varied with
different geographic or even political cultures.
You have helped me to appreciate that DNA linkage is not necessarily the
same as family. But I'm actually not sure which is more important to me.
For example, if I found out that my genetic Great-Grandpa was actually Mr.
Owens from the neighboring farm, I'd now be very eager to know about Mr.
Owens -- probably even more interested in him than the familial
"Great-Grandpa"! I'd be glad to have uncovered a new family secret. And it
might be helpful to consider Mr. Owens' genetic traits that have been passed
down.
I too, believe that historical records will continue to be the best means
for genealogists to make progress in most situations. But for those dead
ends, DNA can serve as yet another useful clue -- sometimes the only clue --
on how to move forward.
----- Original Message -----
From: "I Thompson" <joscyn(a)hotmail.com>
To: <WLS-ANGLESEY-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: DNA research
There has been a posting on the Anglesey list regarding DNA markers
and
their usefulness in genealogy. I think that this is a very interesting
development for genealogy but can forsee a number of problems with the
technology that make me question whether the not inconsiderable expense is
worthwhile.
First, the estimated level of illegitimacy has been put as high as 30%.
Even assuming a much lower figure, as we go back in the generations and 4
grandparents become 8 greats and 16 great-greats &c, the possibility of
illegitimacy (whether recorded as such or not) creeps in to all our
researches!
Some people have researched only the maternal line for this reason as
pregnancy is much more difficult to fake than paternity!
So you have a DNA marker of a Williams or Smith or Jones family but where
did it come from? Was it your Williams/ Smith/ Jones ancestor that you
thought or someone else completely? It could have been a brother, cousin
or uncle that you didn't expect at any point along the line.
Maybe the same could be said for "traditional" genealogy but
"traditionalists" are dealing with a family context that has been accepted
and, if we know that we can never account for unrecorded illegitimacy, at
least we have a family unit living in a place at a time and passing on
their knowledge and culture.
The records have "run out" so DNA can "plug the gap"? Well, might
they
not also throw up more questions than they answer?
To my way of thinking, DNA markers are useful to assess paternity or
filiation in this generation (like in cases where paternity is doubtful)
and have a use in proving consanguinity in inheritance matters. They are
also fascinating in looking at broad migration trends - as has been done
with maternal mitochondrial DNA but only on a very broad level. Like, you
form part of a group that migrated to Western Europe 2000-3000 years
ago...
I am not sure I would subscribe to the view that DNA can in any way live
up to wills, MIs, PRs, the census, deeds, documents, family stories or the
like. If we come up against a dead end, isn't that it? I have come up
against many which I have "shelved" possibly for the future or had to
accept and move on.
I would be really interested to know other members' views, possibly more
informed about the possibilities than myself.
Yours,
Ian
London SW9
______________________________