WHITNEY-L Archives

Archiver > WHITNEY > 2003-02 > 1046364273


From: Whitney Keen <>
Subject: [WHITNEY-L] Finally, a few more dna reports
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:44:33 -0500


At last we have received the reports for two more participants, both
firmly in the John-1 line. The matches are 12 out of 12 perfect match.
We have two kits for Henry-1 people, one submitted but the results are
not yet back, and one just submitted and not yet sent to Arizona for the
testing. Kits are sent to Arizona weekly so it should go tomorrow. I
await those two with baited breath, since the one Henry-1 line we do
have is quite different from the John-1 line. If the two
as-yet-unanalyzed and returned samples match the one Henry-1 we have,
and do not match John-1, we are definitely talking about two different
families of Whitneys, not closely related. We still need more Henry-1
people, some Samuel-1 people (we have none of them) and some more
British/Welsh Whitneys. We have one British Whitney whose kit has not
yet been received back. We definitely need more. So, you fence-sitters,
ante up a few cheek cells for the project! We may be able to sort out
one of the family's on-going mysteries.

I also want to point out to the brick wall Whitneys that we probably
have a good enough profile to be able to tell you if you are from the
John-1 line. Feel free to submit samples, but note on your application
form that you are a line unknown. If you aren't John-1, at this stage
you will be "maybe" Henry-1 or Samuel-1 or some other. Keep in mind
that when you get back into the 14th and 15th centuries, people didn't
necessarily have last names, and taking the name of the town you live
in, or of the local prominent family, happened frequently. Many people
from the town of Whitney might bear the name "Whitney" without being
closely related. As we get more samples from people who are pretty
certain of their line, we will have better prototypes for the other
Whitney lines.

By the way, if you can get your hands on the Carl Elliott article on
genetics in the latest Wilson Quarterly, you will find it interesting.
See Karl Schwerin's list post of 1-30-03. I think that it affirms the
use of testing as we are using it, but cautions not to put too much
credence in the lists of places where your have relatives or some sort
of racial profile. To determine whether a known ancestor is common to a
group of participants is one thing the test will show. It is a useful
adjunct to research in written records.

This thread: