GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1116804887


From: "Eric Olson" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DAR, SAR, UELA and DNA
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 16:46:31 -0700
References: <052220052131.18262.4290FA2500053F73000047562200762194050B989A0E00@comcast.net> <017201c55f21$32b50210$1002a8c0@Sharon>


Sharon,

DNA cannot be used for DAR purposes of proof. DAR requires the traditional
original documents of birth, marriage and death - the primary sources.
Photocopies are allowed but computer generated documents such as JPEG's are
not allowed as proof. Neither are most family history books, etc.
Here are the current DAR requirements for genealogical proof.

"Once you've found a chapter, you will begin the application process. You
will need to provide proof for each date and place, for each generation,
starting with yourself and going back lineally to your Patriot. In the first
three generations, these proofs would consist of photocopies of birth,
marriage, and death documents. For other generations back to the Patriot,
one or more of the following items would usually be considered acceptable
proof: cemetery records, tombstone inscriptions, obituaries, probate
records, wills, census records, Bible records, local histories, and
well-documented genealogies. Relationships between generations MUST be
proven. Data submitted as proof is subject to DAR standards and
interpretation. For further information concerning acceptable proof or for
locating sources of proof, contact the Chapter Registrar or Chapter Lineage
Research Chairman."

Eric
Seattle

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Bryant" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] DAR, SAR, UELA and DNA


> Hi,
>
> Could someone out there tell me how DNA could be utilized for DAR
purposes?
> Remember, these are females who are trying to prove their descent from a
> male (presumably) RWS or some who provided Patriotic Service.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sharon Bryant
> (lapsed member of NSDAR and
> US Daughters of the War of 1812)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 5:31 PM
> Subject: [DNA] DAR, SAR, UELA and DNA
>
>
> > Lets not forget the United Empire Loyalist's Association of Canada. In
> > 1974 (when I made my application) or just before, new rules were enacted
> > as to documentation and even the definition as to who was considered to
be
> > a Loyalist. I am descended (via three branches) from the "loathsome
Tory"
> > who fought in Butler's Rangers until age required retirement to set up a
> > farming settlement to feed the military at Niagara. I found a
descendant
> > of his eldest son Lt.John Young of the Six Nations Indian Department and
a
> > descendant of the second son, Sgt. Daniel Young of Butler's Rangers
(both
> > my ancestors and so both participants my distant cousins, who I know).
> > Their DNA matched 36/37. Lets just say that anyone with the surname
Young
> > who claims descent from any of the three sons of Adam Young will have to
> > show a close match to either descendant already tested or the paper
trail
> > can be considered to reflect something other than a biological
connection
> > in the direct male line. Hope!
> > fully some day there will be DNA (Y and mtDNA) databanks for the DAR,
SAR
> > and UELA that could at least tip the scales if the evidence was
considered
> > to be circumstantial - with each application being assessed on its own
> > merit.
> >
> > David F.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> >
> >> Yep.
> >>
> >> We had to reprove for DAR, every primary document submitted in 1898 by
an
> >> ancestor, to gain entrance to those halls. It took several years, was
> >> expensive, and akin to doing a PhD thesis - but, in the end was well
> >> worth
> >> it. Nothing quite so bracing as knowing your genealogical research is
all
> >> your own, and owning certified copies of all primary records. DAR has
> >> mended their ways. Wish I could say the same about SAR.
> >>
> >> Eric
> >> Seattle
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Robert Stafford"
> >> To:
> >> Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 4:09 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [DNA] backlash?
> >>
> >>
> >> > Refuting spurious family trees, especially those devised by
> >> > "professional"
> >> genealogist of previous eras is one of the strongest uses of DNA. It is
> >> fairly clear why it was often called the "oldest profession," a play on
> >> the
> >> lineages in Genesis and another profession.
> >> >
> >> > Past genealogists let it be known, "If you need a Revolutionary War
> >> ancestor, we guarantee we will find one for your DAR application." DAR
> >> has
> >> since cleaned out their files. However, many organizations have not.
> >> >
> >> > Bob Stafford
> >> >
> >> > "Dale E. Reddick" wrote:
> >> > Hey Bob,
> >> >
> >> > I think that Richard Reddick (another member of this list, and
someone
> >> > to whom I am not related via patrilineal descent) and I can attest
that
> >> > we now have DNA evidence that de-constructed a -whole- gigantic
attempt
> >> > to force all of the Reddicks, Redditts, Reddochs, Ruddicks, and
others
> >> > into a single lineage.
> >
> >
> >
> > ==============================
> > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
> > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
> > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ==============================
> View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find
> marriage announcements and more. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx
>

This thread: