GEORGE-L ArchivesArchiver > GEORGE > 2006-02 > 1139797367
From: Bruce and Judy Voran <>
Subject: Re: [GEORGE] Trying to sort out John and Nicholas George
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 19:22:47 -0700
On Sunday, February 12, 2006, at 05:25 PM, Marty Grant wrote:
> Hi Judy and George listers,
> As some of you know I am about 95% finished with a book on the Col.
> George family. I really want to finish it as soon as possible, but of
> nothing goes according to schedule! <g> Just telling you this in case
> were wondering what is taking so long.
> Judy, I've also looked at the DNA results you mentioned. I don't think
> two participants are really part of the Col. John George line. It is
> possible, but I can't imagine how they would tie in. I've never come
> any likely connection for them. Of course something may turn up
That does make a difference. The website is somewhat confusing since
although the statement says: "The following participants are possibly
descendents of Col. John George. The relationship is based on somewhat
strong circumstantial evidence, but there is not definitive proof. For
this reason, the DNA results cannot be used as a benchmark for Col.
John George." Yet the heading says. Col. John George. Wish one of his
known descendants could be persuaded to submit a sample.
> Now, onto the next subject, whether Nicholas and Col. John were
> brothers or
> closely related. I still don't know about that. I think they knew each
> without doubt, so I'd say as a minimum they were cousins. It is
> that they weren't related at all but wound up in the same area and got
They appear to have a common friend in Thomas Taberer. Some research
that I have read suggests that the name could be Taverner. There were
Taverners in Essex at the time. Nicholas George wrote a letter to John
Nichols with whom he patented land mention a "Cozen Taverner."
> We don't really know where John George came from in England. I have
> serious doubts about him being the same John George named in the Will
> Humphries Cole as "son-in-law" as some things just don't add up. In
> Will (recorded in Essex County), Mr. Cole refers to John as John
> Yeoman of Writtle. "Yeoman" was a title, just short of "Gentleman", and
> "Writtle" is a town on the other side of Essex County. We have found
> of John George Yeoman of Writtle that are too early to be our John
> and also an estate record in 1638 same place. That can't be our John
> as he didn't die until the 1670's.
> Also, as far as I know there are no records of Nicholas George in Essex
> either. There is a marriage record of (???) George marrying Margaret
> there, but the transcript I saw said it was too dim to read the given
> Perhaps someone else has looked at this and determined it said
> "Nicholas" or
> perhaps someone assumed it was him, since his wife was also named
> but I don't know since I haven't seen the original record myself.
> food for thought.
My guess is that someone looked at the record, saw "Margaret" and
jumped to a conclusion. It certainly isn't proof, but it has been
published all over the Internet as if it had been proved. A John
Seaward did patent land [June 18, 1638] in the same time frame as
Nicholas George [Feb. 20, 1638], and I believe that Seaward could be
pronounced Saward with a long "a". But that is a long shot.
> Back to DNA testing, Unfortunately, no one who is proven to be from
> the Col.
> John George line has taken the test yet. I wish someone would, but I
> been able to convince anyone yet. Perhaps someday. I'm not a betting
> but I'm thinking there is only about a 50% chance that descendants of
> John will match descendants of Nicholas. If they do match, then that
> be cool. I'd love to claim the huge Nicholas George family as "kin."
My guess, too, is that the samples would not match, but would love to
have a "yay" or "nay."
|Re: [GEORGE] Trying to sort out John and Nicholas George by Bruce and Judy Voran <>|