Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1270072470

From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Questions about alternate means of searching DNAGenealogy -creating a modal haplotype from a few samples
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:01:17 -0500
References: <d8c.1d027bc.38e4b9ac@UNKNOWN><><>
In-Reply-To: <>

I found them in Giles County. This may explain why they were not married:

Search Giles Co. with Clyburn. Mary Clyburn sued William Clyburn in 1832 for
separate maintenance. Divorce was very difficult to obtain at the time.

It seems likely that the children were his, especially since there was
nearby a namesake for the son's relatively uncommon name. The timing of the
above separation is compatible with the births of the children.

Failure to find a match may be due to lack of test subjects from the Giles
group. If the family arrived in the mid 1700's in the Scotch-Irish wave, as
some of the given names suggest, they may be the only ancestors in the U.S.
I would try to find a descendant of the elder Lemuel to test. He and William
are both reported to be from NC in the 1850 census.

There may be something in the court orders, if the children were born out of
wedlock. They are hard to search if there is no index or they are not
transcribed. However, they can be a gold mine of information.

The LDS library in Salt Lake City has almost all early VA records on
microfilm. It also has many transcriptions. You can borrow microfilm from
the Library of Virginia through local libraries or LDS through their Family
History Centers. Check the online LDS and LVA catalogs for what records are
available, especially transcriptions. VA counties have death records
1853-1896. They may show the parents of William and/or Christina and are on

I would research the state tax lists 1782-1850. They will show when people
arrived, left or died and may suggest father-son relationships.

Bob Stafford

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Johnathan Clayborn <
> wrote:

> I know through paper trails my ancestors bore the Clayborn surname post
> 1860. (In fact, in the 1860 census for Loudon Co, VA he shows up as a
> Clayborn). Since we are Clayborns now we had no reason to ever assume that
> at some point we were not Clayborns. We missed a vital clue on the 1850
> Census Record where it lists:
> Clayborn, Willima
> Croy, Christina
> Lemuel
> Sarah
> So, having exhuasted all other means currently available to me I turned to
> the genealogy aspect of it.
> My genetic markers match the R1b root model fairly closely with noteable
> exceptions at DYS439, DYS389-I, DYS389-II, DYS458, DYS454, DYS437, and
> DYS464c&d.

This thread: