GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118372601


From: "William L Gammage" <>
Subject: Your Opinions on values
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 22:03:21 -0500


Hi, I’m very new at this, so I’m asking for your opinions on how you
would classify the following 12 markers. We so far have 2 that have
matched on all 12.



Marker Gammage1 Gammage2 Gammage3 Gamage

393 15 15 14
13

390 23 23 24
22

19* 16 16
13 14

391 10 10 10
10

385a 15 15 16
13

385b 16 16 18
14

426 11 11 11
11

388 13 13 12
12

439 11 11 12
11

389-1 13 13 14
13

392 12 12 11
11

389-2 29 29 31
30



Those 2 I believe to be in the I1c group. The 3rd set has been pegged
to E3b. The last set was a 50/50 flip between E3b and G. At present,
there is one more kit on it’s way back to FTDNA, and hopefully by the
end of the month we’ll have a few more, as I have ordered several for a
family reunion that’s planned. We do have variations in the spelling of
the surname. Your expert opinions are all welcome, as I can use this to
help give explanations to all that participate, and to other family
members that are also doing research trying to cross the “pond”. The
4th person is verified with British roots that can for sure go back to
the 1800s. I am also looking into how the MtDNA tests might help out,
as we do have a lot of female family members that would want to
contribute to the cause. We do have history going back to the early/mid
1700’s in the US, and the 3rd individual can go back that far on a male
line 7 generations. This line is at a stoppage with 3 brothers. There’s
a very large number of folks surnamed Gamage but those lines also seem
to stop in the 1600s with one individual. I don’t believe we have tied
these together yet. There’s a lot of history for Gammage, Gamage, and
Gamache all over, but I’m sure there’s a lot more folks with those
surnames that just have never been mentioned. Thanks for all your
support and responses.



William.







This thread: