DAVISON-L Archives

Archiver > DAVISON > 2007-04 > 1176676504


From: John Lisle <>
Subject: Re: [DAVISON] Rees Davidson, Berkely County, Virginia, 1797
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:35:04 -0400
References: <000d01c77fa8$e9f1f510$0200a8c0@richard>
In-Reply-To: <000d01c77fa8$e9f1f510$0200a8c0@richard>


Richard,

Welcome to the list.

It is obvious that you have done a fair amount of research on your
family. I am not at all familiar with your family, but I would like
to make some suggestions. And comments. And possibly become more familiar...

1/ I find it interesting that the surname changes between Davidson
and Davison. A generalization of the research that I have seen is
that Davidson is more likely Scottish whilst Davison is more likely
English. West Virginia (or at least the part of Virginia that became
WV) at that time had some Davisson families. Early script writing
oft-times confused the second "d" as an "s". These Davisson's
descended from I think it was a Daniel Davidsons from New England.

2/ The use of Rees as a name is interesting. It has a Welsh
background. There was a Pennsylvania/Virginia Davidson family in the
early to mid 1700s that was aligned with a Rees/Reece/Reese family.
If fact, my 5-g grandfather George Davidson married a Catharine
Penelope Reese (hence my possible interest in your family...)

http://www.lislefamily.org/davidson/tng/getperson.php?personID=I2715&tree=davidson_main

I have followed this family quite thoroughly and do not know how it
might connect with yours, but it is a reference of a connection
between the Reese and Davidson families.

3/ You mention that the family might be Quaker. If there was a civil
marriage record, then this is unlikely. One characteristic of Quaker
families is that they did not believe or participate in Civil
Registrations of Births, Marriages and Deaths. Tracing them needs to
be done through census, tax, and land records. And, of course,
through Quaker Meeting minutes.

4/ I would strongly suggest that you join the Davidson DNA study (I
am one of the admins for that study.). The study has been going on
now for several years and we have almost 100 members. The likelihood
of finding a match of your DNA to one of the other members DNA is
good. If you were a member of either of the families that I
referenced above, there are several DNA members from those families
in our study already.

Here is a link to join the study:

http://www.familytreedna.com/surname_join.aspx?code=Y70310&special=True&projecttype=S


You can see the current results by looking here:

http://www.davidsongenes.org

I recommend that you purchase the 37 marker test. We have now found
that 12 markers can only tell you if you are not part of a family and
an indication of what clan (called haplogroup) you are part of. 25
marker tests do not definitively show you as part of one specific family.

We have a team of admins that are available to help you interpret the results.

john
Nashua, NH

At 05:56 PM 4/15/2007, Richard Davison wrote:
>I am looking for information about Rees and his ancestors. He is my g.g.g.g
>grandfather. All I know about him is that he married an Ann Lewis September
>5, 1797 Berkley County, VA. (The same Berkley County that is now a part of
>W. VA), and that they had a child George Davidson (my g.g.g grandfather)
>born December 17, 1799 in Clermont County, Ohio. Also, I believe that they
>were Quakers.
>
>As a side note, George Davidson married a Hannah Harrison from Fayette,
>Pennsylvania in Jefferson County, Ohio and they had nine (!) children. They
>farmed in Ohio until about 1841 when the family (except one child) moved to
>Clark County Missouri to farm. One of their children was a Reece Davidson.
>Reece married a Catherine Wynik from Virginia and they had six (!) children
>one of whom was my great grandfather Lyman L. Davison. Lyman married an
>Adeline Eile from Ohio and they had three children one of whom was my
>grandfather, Charles Moses Davison, born 18 May, 1880, Bogard, Carroll
>County, Missouri.
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated and I would be happy to reciprocate as
>I am able.
>
>Thanks,
>Richard Davison


This thread: