GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-09 > 1252336674
From: Clyde Rice <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Very good post Bob.
My brick wall as far as true hard paperwork is still there, but using known and then discovering much more "circumstantial" evidence, virtually a boat load of such, I found the prior, very old and very well known family genealogy. It then fit like a glove and everything discovered from there on, so far has only more confirmed the linage.
Even a long "put away" childhood memory resurfaced. We used to visit my father's aged aunt and uncle, older brother and sister to his dad. God how I hated going there as a kid! Now I wish I could talk to them again! Anyway, I then remembered the great aunt telling me about her childhood on one evening visit. In that conversation, she mentioned that there had been a name change. But sadly, I don't remember her ever mentioning exactly what the original name was. I had to discover that part for myself. (Later confirmed by DNA)
It seems that the original family records "lost" my ggg grandfather when he moved to a different state, and the name changed slightly. (Makes me wonder if maybe a hint of a "Black Sheep" here?) Just disappeared from the family records when he left the original state, after 5 generations, and "became a different man", in the new state. One disappears, same as another just as suddenly appears hundreds of miles away, with no apparent roots. (But he marries a neighbor from "back home", even one who had previous ties between their earlier generations.)
In the first Y-DNA test, the first 12 markers, only one was one repeat off. (And I since have traced the start of that mutation) Since then, (except for that one marker), the rest of my Y-DNA signature, clear out to the full FTDNA 67 markers, matches with the original immigrant to this continent's apparent signature.
Clyde Rice/(Royce) (Now where is my Rolls?)
--- On Mon, 9/7/09, Robert Stafford <> wrote:
From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject)
Date: Monday, September 7, 2009, 9:21 AM
Overall, the chances of breaking down a break wall with DNA testing are
somewhere between slim and none. I note that no firm has ever reported a
survey to find out the % of people who have broken down brick walls with DNA
testing. This assumes that they have exhausted the paper trail before
However, some projects have greatly increased the odds with the BYU
methodology. This allows a shift from bottom-up to top-down research. The
key is the availability of a number of older documented genealogies.
Researchers deduce the ancestral haplotype of each family by testing
descendants of two or more sons of the founder until there are matches on
I have looked at the Jones Project results at FTDNA. Unfortunately, it does
not appear that they are using this methodology. They seem to be mainly a
relatedness project where people are trying to group people by
surname-haplotype. However, it would be a good idea to contact the
administrator to see what is available. You can also look for close matches
and ask for their emails. There is always a small chance that someone would
have an older genealogy.
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Evan Jones <> wrote:
> HI List;
> I am so new at DNA that I squeak.
> The objective is to break through a 40 year old brick wall using DNA and a
> 'Hail Mary'.
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
|Re: [DNA] (no subject) by Clyde Rice <>|