Re: How many Lancaster lines in Virginia?
-
In reply to:
Re: How many Lancaster lines in Virginia?
Nancy Mathews 2/13/08
Hi Nancy,
Thank you so much for the information you posted. Much of this is new to me, and most notably the identification of the wife of William Sanders Lancaster (b. 1760), the documentation for which a number of researchers, including me, have looked for years. I remember there was a close association between the Bryants and the Lancasters in Wayne County, NC.
I'll post the information on my grandfather's children today or tomorrow.
With respect to the Lancaster/Lancashire/Lancashear issue, it's possible that DNA evidence will help sort this out. Andrew Lancaster has identified several family lines in England to whom Lancasters in America and other lands could possibly be related. They are introduced on the Lancaster Surname page that he administers. The link to that page is: http://users.skynet.be/lancaster/Lancaster.htmhttp://users.skynet.be/lancaster/Lancaster.htm
Regarding the surgeon Robert Lancaster who died aboard the Unicorne in 1684, the earliest work I've seen placing him as ancestor to an American Lancaster family was in 2000 when at least one researcher thought Robert the surgeon was probably the father of the York/New Kent Lancaster family. He was listed as father of Robert Lancaster in that line. I think this may have been prior to the discovery of evidence that John Gowen Lancaster was the progenitor there. Since then some researchers have shown Robert Lancaster the surgeon as father of Robert Lancaster Sr. of IOW/Surry. There are a few such GEDCOMs posted on Rootsweb and Ancestry.com currently. My impression is that, as you mentioned, some have confused the Robert Lancasters in York/New Kent with those in IOW/Surry. That is not to say that the English family from which Robert Lancaster the surgeon came is not related to some American Lancasters; I just don't know of evidence, yet. It is apparent from his will that Robert the surgeon had interests and presumably contacts in Virginia, but I'm not aware that anyone has found out where and who they were. As you pointed out, the will does not mention children.
With respect to the DNA tests, my understanding is that every father transmits to every son his Y-chromosome, virtually unchanged. So my Y-chromosome should be essentially identical to that of Robert Lancaster Sr. (d. 1720) and to the DNA of his father (whoever he may have been) in England. If, for example, the English father of Robert Lancaster Sr. has an unbroken line of male descendants in England, and if one of these should agree to submit a DNA sample for testing, this could prove the family connection across the water.
Likewise, if Lem is a descendant of Robert Lancaster Sr. through Robert’s son Samuel and an unbroken chain of Lancaster-surnamed men, Lem’s Y-chromosome should be essentially identical to mine, passed down from Robert Lancaster Sr. to Samuel, etc. Comparison of our original tests—mine by Ancestry.com and his by Family Tree DNA—indicate the possibility that this may be the case. The additional Y-chromosome markers that we’re having evaluated now should provide a much higher degree of certainty about that.
One reason for the additional testing is that Family Tree DNA and Ancestry.com do not test exactly the same markers, so I had some tested that Lem didn’t, and he had some tested that I didn’t. The other reason for additional testing is that, in general, the more markers that can be compared, the more precise the scientific prediction can be. A 12-marker test is not nearly as predictive as a 37-marker test, and a 67-marker test is better yet. I had a 46-marker test with Ancestry and am now having a 37-marker test with Family Tree DNA (some of the 37 and 46 are the same). Lem and I are following the recommendation of Andrew Lancaster in this matter. Lem originally had a 37-marker test with Family Tree DNA and is having 10 additional markers tested by them. So, I understand we will have a comparison of 47 markers. That should tell us something fairly specific.
Your father and your brothers should have identical Y-chromosomes, so you have the option of testing either your father or a brother. You could test them all, but the results should all be the same. Results should be the same for any male in the family who is a direct descendant of Robert Lancaster Sr. or his son Samuel through an unbroken chain of men surnamed Lancaster. And theirs should be the same as mine.
You’re right that the Y-chromosome test works only with males, since females don’t have a Y-chromosome. There is a mitochondrial DNA test that can check the maternal line, but it’s considered less useful for genealogy. You’re also correct that your descent from Robert Lancaster Sr. through your maternal line won’t be helpful for this particular test. The Y-chromosome of Robert Lancaster Sr. will not have gone further down your maternal line than the last male surnamed Lancaster, William N. Lancaster (1775-1845).
That’s as I understand it. If you want more detailed and scientific information, the Family Tree DNA and the Ancestry.com DNA sites have extensive explanations of how and why this DNA testing works.
Thanks again, Nancy. I appreciate your work more than I can say.
More Replies:
-
Re: How many Lancaster lines in Virginia?
John Lancaster 2/13/08