GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-01 > 1073180272


From: "Lucy Hubrich" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DNAPrint Test Worked for Me
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:49:04 -0600
References: <002a01c3d241$366769c0$0a0110ac@mminshel>


Mary,

I cannot disagree with you on the paper trail, but to my point in my previous email, sometimes paper trails were explicitly eliminated or altered--or sometimes just plain missing. For example, a cousin and I have been searching for a marriage record for one of my 2x great-grandparents for years (nothing to do with this NA discussion), however, NOTHING has shown up. No church, no county, no city, no state. This was in the 1860's and at that point it was not mandatory to record things in Wisconsin. We know what church they spent their life at, and all their children had their baptisms recorded there, and we know it was a strict church which would not have baptized the children if the parents weren't married, but those church records were looked through MULTIPLE times and no record is there. Our theory (based on other info--I don't want to make this story too long), is that there was a religious difference between the two and to prevent complete discord between the famili!
es, they may have had an unrecorded civil ceremony--as I said, "unrecorded" was not uncommon in those days in Wisconsin.

However, to your point, although I do not have time at the present, I do intend to do additional follow-up with the church that my great-grandparents were married at. I could not find a county record, but was told by one of the LDS centers that the county I was interested in had about 30,000 records that someone had found that had not been microfilmed. They did not know if/when they would be.

Also, during this particular time period, the federal government was forcibly moving Native Americans to west of the Mississippi. The Native Americans / Metis were told that they had to make a choice of either declaring themselves Native Americans and leaving with their tribes, or deciding to give up this identity and to live as Whites. I suspect those who gave up their identity have little record of them being Native American since they were probably not listed in the tribal records. But, as I said, I do not intend to give up my search.

I don't know if anyone else in this forum is from Wisconsin, but if they are, they may be interested in the book, "A Little History of My Forest Life", by Eliza Morrison and edited by Victoria Brehm. Ms. Brehm does a fantastic job of annotating with a large number of historical sources what life was like for Native Americans and Metis in Wisconsin in the 1800's. One of her more interesting notes was that although Native Americans were still forcibly moved from Wisconsin, far fewer of them were removed than from other states because in the rural areas of Wisconsin the white men loudly protested since many could only find Native American women for wives as white women did not want to endure the hardships of being in such remote areas.

I do agree with you on the lack of competition in this area--reminds me a bit of Microsoft.

Lucy Hubrich


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary AsaWoman" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] DNAPrint Test Worked for Me


> One way to truly prove American Indian ancestry is by a thorough paper trail
> search, using government records, birth, christening/baptism, school,
> marriage, death records, etc. In the past, there have been mention of Native
> American genealogical databases, but, as I do not have any American Indian
> ancestry to speak of (as noted by both paper trail and DNAPrint search), I
> did not bookmark them. However, if one really thinks they have American
> Indian ancestors, they should, by all means, encouraged to search for them,
> regardless of the DNAPrint results. If someone could recall the genealogical
> sources for American Indian records, would they please post them here?
>
> The problem with AncestrybyDNA is that the lab has no competition. Why isn't
> there another lab out there offering the same kind of testing for deep
> ancestry? Because DNAPrint has patented the process? Well, one can do a
> patent search on Frudakis, the company, etc., locate the actual patents, and
> then, I am sure there are some very capable DNA scientists who can use other
> markers, do workarounds, or such, and come up with other testing methods.
> Then, DNAPrint will have to come out with 2.5 and 3.0 or lose business. And
> FTDNA will have at least one other choice where to send its ancestry
> testing.
>
> Mary, the one with the two cats

This thread: