Search This Blog

Thursday, September 27, 2012

My mtDNA Analysis, Updated

I just ran yet another analysis of my mitochondria, using James Lick's mitohap analyzer... Very interesting results this time.  It's almost identical to one of my earlier ones, but includes the hg "X2m1" as the first best match.

http://dna.jameslick.com/mthap/

mthap version 0.19 (2012-08-11); haplogroup data version PhyloTree Build 14 (2012-04-05) +mods
raw data source XXXXXX-FASTA.fasta (16KB)
FASTA format was uploaded. Based on the markers found, assuming the following regions were completely sequenced: HVR1 (16001~16569).
Found 569 markers at 569 positions covering 3.4% of mtDNA.


Markers found (shown as differences to rCRS):

HVR2:
CR:
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)


Best mtDNA Haplogroup Matches:
1) X2m1
Defining Markers for haplogroup X2m1:
HVR2: 73G 143A 195C (225A) 226C 235G 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 1719A 2706G 4769G 6221C 6371T 7028T 8860G 11719A 12705T 13966G 14470C 14766T 15326G
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup X2m1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 6221C 6371T 13966G 14470C 16189C 16278T ⇨ X 153G ⇨ X1'2'3 195C 1719A ⇨ X2 (225A) ⇨ X2(G225A) 153A ⇨ X2(G225A G153A) 143A 226C ⇨ X2m 235G 16292T ⇨ X2m1 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(4): 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T
Extras(1): 16295T (16519C)
Untested(22): 73 143 153 195 225 226 235 263 750 1438 1719 2706 4769 6221 6371 7028 8860 11719 12705 13966 14470 14766 15326


2) X
Defining Markers for haplogroup X:
HVR2: 73G 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 2706G 4769G 6221C 6371T 7028T 8860G 11719A 12705T 13966G 14470C 14766T 15326G
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup X (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 6221C 6371T 13966G 14470C 16189C 16278T ⇨ X 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(3): 16189C 16223T 16278T
Extras(2): 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(16): 73 263 750 1438 2706 4769 6221 6371 7028 8860 11719 12705 13966 14470 14766 15326


3) X1'2'3
Defining Markers for haplogroup X1'2'3:
HVR2: 73G 153G 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 2706G 4769G 6221C 6371T 7028T 8860G 11719A 12705T 13966G 14470C 14766T 15326G
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup X1'2'3 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 6221C 6371T 13966G 14470C 16189C 16278T ⇨ X 153G ⇨ X1'2'3 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(3): 16189C 16223T 16278T
Extras(2): 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(17): 73 153 263 750 1438 2706 4769 6221 6371 7028 8860 11719 12705 13966 14470 14766 15326


3) X1'3
Defining Markers for haplogroup X1'3:
HVR2: 73G 146C 153G 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 2706G 4769G 6221C 6371T 7028T 8860G 11719A 12705T 13966G 14470C 14766T 15326G
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup X1'3 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 6221C 6371T 13966G 14470C 16189C 16278T ⇨ X 153G

X1'2'3 146C ⇨ X1'3 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(3): 16189C 16223T 16278T
Extras(2): 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(18): 73 146 153 263 750 1438 2706 4769 6221 6371 7028 8860 11719 12705 13966 14470 14766 15326

*************************************************
 
Another take, based on Lick's adaptation to Family Tree DNA data.  Why Family Tree and Genographic need adaptations, I'll probably never understand... I'd heard that the geneticists rearranged the H haplotypes, and boy did they ever.

UPDATE:  After further investigations, I have good reasons to believe that the following dataset, along with the second one presented to me before, by James Lick himself, is in error and should be thrown out.
 
 
mthap version 0.19 (2012-08-11); haplogroup data version PhyloTree Build 14 (2012-04-05) +mods
raw data source XXXXXX-FASTA.fasta (16KB)
FASTA format was uploaded. Based on the markers found, assuming the following regions were completely sequenced: HVR1 (16001~16569).
Found 569 markers at 569 positions covering 3.4% of mtDNA.

 
Markers found (shown as differences to rCRS):

HVR2:
CR:
HVR1: 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Derived markers for FTDNA/Genographic predicted haplogroup w:
CR: 1243T 2758G 3594C 3970C 4248T 4580G 5178C 6371C 7028C 10034T 10238T 10400C 10550A 10873T 11467A 11719G 12612A 12705C 13263A 13368G 14766C
(Differences to rCRS are in bold. Derived markers are based on using the Family Tree DNA or The Genographic Project predicted haplogroup to determine the results of the 22 SNP panel of CR markers used. Using new panel.)

 
Best mtDNA Haplogroup Matches:
1) w
Defining Markers for haplogroup w:
HVR2:
CR:
HVR1:

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup w (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Extras(5): 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

 
2) H3(T16189C)
Defining Markers for haplogroup H3(T16189C):
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 4769G 6776C 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H3(T16189C) (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 6776C ⇨ H3 16189C ⇨ H3(T16189C) 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(7): 263 750 1438 4769 6776 8860 15326

 
2) H1(T16189C)
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1(T16189C):
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1(T16189C) (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(7): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 15326

 
2) H1aa
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1aa:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4131G 4769G 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1aa (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 4131G ⇨ H1aa 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 4131 4769 8860 15326

 
2) H1ab
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1ab:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 15047A 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1ab (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 15047A ⇨ H1ab 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 15047 15326

 
2) H1g
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1g:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 14212C 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1g (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 14212C ⇨ H1g 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 14212 15326

 
2) H1ac
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1ac:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 11893G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1ac (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 11893G ⇨ H1ac 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 11893 15326

 
2) H1ad
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1ad:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 3504C 4769G 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1ad (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 3504C ⇨ H1ad 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 3504 4769 8860 15326

 
2) H1y
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1y:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 15299C 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1y (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 15299C ⇨ H1y 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(8): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 15299 15326

 
3) H1g2
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1g2:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 9230C 14212C 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1g2 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 14212C ⇨ H1g 9230C ⇨ H1g2 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(9): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 9230 14212 15326

 
3) H1z
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1z:
HVR2: 263G 327T
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 11428T 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1z (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 327T 11428T ⇨ H1z 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(9): 263 327 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 11428 15326

 
3) H1f
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1f:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4452C 4769G 8860G 9066G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1f (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 4452C 9066G ⇨ H1f 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(9): 263 750 1438 3010 4452 4769 8860 9066 15326

 
3) H1g1
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1g1:
HVR2: 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8602C 8860G 14212C 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1g1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 16189C ⇨ H1(T16189C) 14212C ⇨ H1g 8602C ⇨ H1g1 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(9): 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8602 8860 14212 15326

 
3) H1ap1
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1ap1:
HVR2: 152C 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 5780A 8410T 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1ap1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 8410T ⇨ H1ap 152C 5780A 16189C ⇨ H1ap1 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(10): 152 263 750 1438 3010 4769 5780 8410 8860 15326

 
3) H1ao
Defining Markers for haplogroup H1ao:
HVR2: 93G 146C 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 3010A 4769G 8860G 11809C 15326G
HVR1: 16278T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H1ao (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 3010A ⇨ H1 93G 146C 11809C 16278T ⇨ H1ao 16189C 16223T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16278T
Extras(4): 16189C 16223T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(10): 93 146 263 750 1438 3010 4769 8860 11809 15326

 
3) H3av
Defining Markers for haplogroup H3av:
HVR2: 152C 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 4769G 6776C 7849T 8383C 8860G 15326G
HVR1: 16189C

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H3av (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 6776C ⇨ H3 16189C ⇨ H3(T16189C) 152C 7849T 8383C ⇨ H3av 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16189C
Extras(4): 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(10): 152 263 750 1438 4769 6776 7849 8383 8860 15326

 
3) H3c3
Defining Markers for haplogroup H3c3:
HVR2: 260A 263G
CR: 750G 1438G 4769G 6776C 8860G 12957C 15326G 15769G
HVR1: 16278T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup H3c3 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 6776C ⇨ H3 12957C ⇨ H3c 260A 15769G 16278T ⇨ H3c3 16189C 16223T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(1): 16278T
Extras(4): 16189C 16223T 16292T 16295T (16519C)
Untested(10): 260 263 750 1438 4769 6776 8860 12957 15326 15769

However, when I ran the modified analysis again, including BOTH the Family Tree conclusion AND the Genographic snps for my mtDNA -- I got a ~repeat of the ~first one above.  The second one here was analyzed with only the added information, that Family Tree DNA's classification of my DNA is "W".  This is so frustrating; I really wish I could afford some more testing soon (although, really I shouldn't have to pay twice, for the same information, only ACCURATE this time).

Again, when I analyzed my DNA using yet another method on mitohap, this time just going by the rCRS mutations, I got the top list.  That makes three out of four, for that set of results, using four different methods of analysis on James Lick's site.  He doesn't seem to have a way to analyze differences to the RCRS, though (the newest, latest Human Genome comparison).  It's getting late today, so maybe I'll try again tomorrow.

UPDATE:  After testing the data numerous times, I got the first set of data about 24/25 times, and since I believe the second set is in error (as I now believe the second set presented to me by James Lick himself was also in error -- probably based on some careless mistake in the data entry process), I'm throwing out the second sets of both sessions.  I now fully believe that the first set shown here (which has been updated from the first set that I got last time I checked it) is the correct dataset.  This means that instead of W, or W1e (as Family Tree DNA has classified me, after CHANGING my classification from X) -- is INACCURATE.  Whether that was done deliberately or not, remains to be seen.  I am fully aware of their nasty, snide attitude concerning my claim that my mtDNA is authentic Cherokee.  I also have plenty of reason to suspect that the US government (perhaps DHS) got involved and meddled in my business, somehow.

Regardless, the numbers don't lie:  it looks like my mtDNA really is in the X cluster (not that W isn't also in the X cluster, as is I).  Not only that, but according to these results, it is extremely similar, if not identical to known Native American mtDNA.  I believe with all my heart, that the US government (along with their sycophants) is trying to exclude me and my family from any past or future reparations which might be due us.  I certainly wouldn't put it past them.


An old paper; still looking for newer ones (I know they're out there somewhere).


(Both W and X, which are very closely related of course, are located in the Europe & Near-East/Caucasus region of the chart for ancient mtDNA... YEAH!)

My comment posted to the above blog, in response to Dr. German Dzeibel's comment:

"It also further supports my claim of Native American lineage through my mtDNA, the subclade of which is at least very, very closely related to X2a (the one "European" group documented to have be found among NA's).  If Amerindian mtDNA of Mongoloid origin may be found in both ancient and modern Europe, then it follows that DNA of Caucasoid origin may also be found in ancient and modern North America, among certain lineages of some Native peoples (like, the Cherokee)."

UPDATE: He published my comment this time, too.  Yippee!  Lol.

Dzeibel is on the trail, too.  I like his uniquely objective observations.

University of Adelaide, in Australia




Interesting details about haplogroup X, including the fact that both X2a and X2g have now been documented among Native Americans.  Also, it states that these same subclades, unlike other NA DNA, is not closely associated with East Asia.  It further states that Altai X2e is a more recent migration from the Caucasus region.  My possible subclade, X2m1, is apparently far too recently identified, for any informative commentary; because there's nothing to be found on the subject.  I also noticed that it is quite rarely found on mitosearch, only a few individuals with that DNA.  And, I predict that there will be future revelations concerning the close relationship between W1e and these X subclades.  I wouldn't be surprised if W1e is someday included among documented NA mtDNA subclades.


I believe blood factors, such as "Diego" and "Rhesus", are going to be one of the main keys to solving the puzzles of Human origins.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/12/talk-by-christina-papageorgopoulou-on.html

http://www.searchforancestors.com/utility/

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/10/ancient-mtdna-haplogroup-x2-from.html

http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf-docs/mt_migrationmap.pdf

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/01/genetic-evidence-for-colonization-of.html

http://www.thecid.com/genograp.htm

http://www.mtdnacommunity.org/human-mtdna-phylogeny.aspx

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/ancient_european_dna.shtml

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_mtdna_haplogroups_frequency.shtml

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_haplogroups_timeline.shtml

 

Neanderthals and Other Hybrids, Info & Reference

http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2012/07/how-to-interpret-patterns-of-genetic-variation-admixture-divergence-inbreeding/
http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2012/09/stability-vs-diversity-a-novel-method-for-analyzing-worldwide-linguistic-structures/

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/710.full#F3
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/723.full
http://scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts/2008/03/24/species-framing-and-stuff/
(Discussion about the definition of species, etc.).

http://mtmanager.yonsei.ac.kr/help/MutationMotifs.pdf
http://www.phylotree.org/rCRS-oriented_version.htm
http://www.phylotree.org/
http://dna.jameslick.com/mthap/

http://www.bartleby.com/hc/
(Complete Harvard Classics online; this one is Fiction)!
http://www.bartleby.com/nonfiction/
(Nonfiction).
http://www.bartleby.com/11/9001.html
(Hybridism).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter8.html
(A different link for the same chapter, on Hybridism).
http://www.bartleby.com/11/
(Origin of Species, by Darwin).
http://darwin-online.org.uk/EditorialIntroductions/Freeman_TheDescentofMan.html
(Full text for Darwin's Descent of Man, volumes I and II).

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120330182817AAzZVYI
(A short discussion on Hybridism and Common Descent).

http://rokus01.wordpress.com/2012/09/29/expanding-hybrids-and-the-rise-of-our-common-denominator/
http://rokus01.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/the-hybrid-driven-evolution-of-hominids/

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/commentary/5176/the_doubly_divided_self.html

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09/more-on-surprising-link-between.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/09/inference-of-ancient-human-demography.html

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/denisova/skoglund-jakobsson-2011-south-china.html

http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm

http://5ocietyx.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/1830/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stan_Gooch
(His 'theory of personality' is based on the idea that AMH's are a Hybrid between two different types of archaic Humans:  Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.  I believe he was onto something; his theory is very similar, but not identical, to my own.  I believe Cro-Magnon was the true Human type, which hybridized with certain Apes and Monkeys, to create the Neanderthal and other so-called 'archaic' hominids.  After they were bred, they later were absorbed into the Human population.)
http://suite101.com/article/a-sad-end-for-reclusive-writer-a301122
(Stan Gooch, Ph.D.).
http://www.amazon.com/Neanderthal-Legacy-Reawakening-Genetic-Cultural/dp/1594771855
http://www.amazon.com/The-Dream-Culture-Neanderthals-Guardians/dp/159477093X/ref=pd_rhf_cr_s_cp_1
http://www.amazon.com/Cities-Dreams-Gooch/dp/1898541027/ref=pd_sim_b_1
http://www.brentlogan.net/sg/bio.htm



http://suite101.com/article/dna-links-neanderthals-to-modern-humans-a239091
http://suite101.com/article/do-neanderthals-and-modern-humans-belong-to-the-same-species-a362812

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/11/who-inhabited-jubbah-lake-in-nefud.html

http://clusteredmaps.blogspot.com/2010/09/y-haplogroups-and-aggressive-behavior.html

UPDATE (11/29/2012): An exciting new breakthrough in yDNA knowledge.
http://dna-explained.com/2012/11/16/the-new-root-haplogroup-a00/comment-page-1/#comment-1440
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O3GHIhEvOY&feature=youtu.be
(An excellent lecture by Mike Hammer.)
http://www.ysearch.org/

(Here, you can look up the DNA patterns for Chimps - 6RCUU, Gorillas - 9ED3A, and the new Human yDNA root - 6M5JA. The new root is called A00, and is thought to be "closer to Neanderthals or other archaic humans than we thought." LMAO.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/11/a00-at-ftdna2012-history-in-making.html
Dienekes found this long before I caught on, lol.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/11/pinpointing-roma-origins-out-of.html

http://www.cherokeetribune.com/view/full_story/19089205/article-Did-Neanderthals-suffer-for-their-art-
Some Cherokee humor.

http://cherokeenational.blogspot.com/2012/06/indian-homosapiens-vs-caucasian.html
An interesting, though fairly typical opinion -- but from Cherokee X, this time.

http://cherokee.dnaconsultants.com/_blog/DNA_Consultants_Blog/post/How_Did_That_Neanderthal_DNA_Get_Into_Me/
If Neanderthals and Humans didn't have babies in the past, then why do they now?  People with Neanderthal genes often have babies with Homo Sapiens (Humans) without them, so they most likely did so in the past, too.  The Cambridge University study doesn't prove that Neanderthals were/are not a hybrid subspecies of Homo Sapiens.

http://dnaconsultants.com/newsletters/Aug2010
"Watch DNA Consultants Principal Investigator and Native American historian and advocate Donald N. Yates, Ph.D. and author Rod L. Meldrum take on the controversy surrounding Haplogroup X from Barry McLerran and Rick Stout’s newly released documentary film The Lost Civilizations of North America...  Did all North American Indians come across the Bering land-bridge tens of thousands of years ago or did some, including the Cherokee, originate more recently in the ancient Middle East? You decide."

I'm one of those rare "X" Cherokee Indians... how'd that happen?  It's so frustrating, being controversial.

http://cherokee.dnaconsultants.com/_blog/DNA_Consultants_Blog/post/Neanderthals_in_America/
"There are many cases of 'archaic' type skulls that are associated with the Maritime Archaic who migrated to North America (by boat) from 7000 - 2000 BC.  They eventually migrated in to the Great lakes region.  These are a few of headlines of giant skeletons with Neanderthal like skulls in the Great Lakes http://gianthumanskeletons.blogspot.com/2012/01/giant-human-skeletons-with-archaic.html  This link will take you to headlines from the coastal regions, where more of these Neanderthal looking skulls were uncovered.
http://gianthumanskeletons.blogspot.com/2012/01/giant-human-skeletons-headlines.html "
(Comment by Fritz Zimmerman)

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/real-neanderthal-man/
Interesting documentary film, with an equally interesting discussion following.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/science-technology/1507903-maybe-early-humans-werent-nasty-our-3.html
More interesting discussion.

http://www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/2012/07/25/the-genographic-project-announces-geno-2-0/
More advanced testing.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120328182025AAfvA1J
More interesting discussion.  OP asks whether she and a Neanderthal boyfriend might produce offspring... In my opinion, the answer is "yes".  Then she asks whether or not that would be considered "bestiality", lol... Again, YES (in my opinion).

http://www.rickpotvin.com/search/label/Neanderthal%20invasion%20-%20Chronos%20Complex

http://michaelbradley.info/esau/esau-chapter2.htm

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/01/ancient-dna-from-tianyuan-cave.html#uds-search-results

Paula Deen's Gooey Butter Cake Recipe

http://www.pauladeen.com/recipes/view2/gooey_butter_cake
http://www.pauladeen.com/

I love her recipes! This one is actually more like a brownie than a cake; it's awesome.

Ingredients

Cake:

1 18 1/4-ounce package yellow cake mix
1 egg
8 tablespoons butter, melted

Filling:

1 8-ounce package cream cheese, softened
2 eggs
1 teaspoon vanilla
8 tablespoons butter, melted
1 16-ounce box powdered sugar

Directions

Preheat oven to 350 degrees F.

Combine the cake mix, egg, and butter and mix well with an electric mixer. Pat the mixture into the bottom of a lightly greased 13 by 9-inch baking pan.

In a large bowl, beat the cream cheese until smooth. Add the eggs, vanilla, and butter and beat together.

Next, add the powdered sugar and mix well. Spread over cake batter and bake for 40 to 50 minutes. Make sure not to over bake as the center should be a little gooey.

http://www.pauladeen.com/recipes/recipe_view/sour_cream_scones/

This one, for Sour Cream Scones, is another of my favorites:

Ingredients

2 cup all-purpose flour
3 tablespoon sugar
2 teaspoon baking powder
1 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 teaspoon salt
5 tablespoon butter, cubed
1 cup sour cream
1 egg yolk
1/2 cup heavy cream
1/4 cup sugar in the raw

Directions

Preheat oven to 400 degrees F.

In a food processor, pulse flour, sugar, baking powder, baking soda, and salt together. Add the cubed butter until a coarse meal forms. Pulse in the sour cream and egg yolk until just combined.

Turn the sticky dough out onto a lightly floured surface and knead until the dough comes together into a ball. Gently pat the dough down into a 3/4-inch thick square shape. With a large knife cut the dough square into 4 smaller, equal squares. Then cut each smaller square diagonally, with an X, making 4 smaller triangles.

Transfer the 16 triangles onto a parchment paper lined baking sheet. Brush the tops of each scone with heavy cream and sprinkle it with some sugar in the raw. This will create a shiny and crunchy top for the scones. Bake in preheated oven for 12 to 14 minutes until the bottoms of the scones are light brown.

Remove from oven, cool slightly on the sheet pan and then transfer to a wire rack to cool completely.

*************************************************

Both of these recipes will melt in your mouth, and they're perfect for warming up a wintery day.

 

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Denman Surname Origin Mystery: Danish Viking, or Norman?

http://archive.org/stream/normanpeopleand00unkngoog/normanpeopleand00unkngoog_djvu.txt
http://books.google.com/books?id=TVMBAAAAQAAJ&oe=UTF-8

"The Norman People and Their Existing Descendants in the British Dominions and the United States of America", c1874 by Sir Matthew Hale, published by Henry S. King & Co., 65 Cornhill & 12 Pasternoster Row, London.

Ok, researching our family history has been quite a journey filled with many surprises and more questions than answers... Nevertheless, I can't get enough of it!  Most Denmans assume that the name is Danish-English, since it seems to trace back to shortly after the Viking invasions AND because the coat of arms always contains a Raven, the national symbol of Denmark.  It even seems to have linguistic correlations (I'd figured it meant, "The Man", in Old or Middle English; just as Denmark means "The Borderland", etc., in the same language)... But, this new find complicates matters quite a lot, giving me yet more puzzles to untangle while I pull my hair out.

"PREFACE".... "It is the aim of the following pages to apply genealogy to the illustration of English ethnology.  The former branch of knowledge has been supposed to lie exclusively within the domain of the antiquary; but a closer examination will, it is thought, show that the scientific observer, and the historian also, may find in it classes of facts which are not beneath their notice and investigation.

If by placing genealogy on a critical and historical basis and applying it to ethnology, we should be enabled to prove the fallacy of some generally received maxims as to the composition of the English nation -- to show that the Norman settlement at the Conquest consisted of something more than a slight infusion of a foreign element -- that it involved the addition of a numerous and mighty people, equally probably a moiety of the conquered population -- that the people thus introduced has continued to exist without merger or absorption in any other race -- that, as a race, it is as distinguishable now as it was a thousand years since, and that at this hour its descendants may be counted by tens of millions in this country and in the United States of America; if this be so, then it will  be admitted that English ethnology is not uninterested in the progress of critical English genealogy -- that it may find there a hitherto neglected series of facts, of incalculable value to English and even to foreign ethnology.

"If, in addition to this, it be possible to show on historical grounds, that the earlier Northman or Danish immigration had seated in England a people scarcely inferior in number to the Anglo-Saxons; and, in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, to infer by a process of ananlogical reasoning from the case of the Normans, that this Danish race also has continued to exist up to the present moment, increasing in like ratio with them and the Anglo-Saxons; and that it consequently now rivals each of them in point of numbers; if this be so, history, which at present usually contemplates ancient events in England exclusively from the Anglo-Saxon point of view, and under the influence of Anglo-Saxon feeling, will acquire greater breadth and impartiality, and will extend to the Scandinavian ancestors of a majority of the English and American people that equitable judgment and that filial interest which are now reserved for the Anglo-Saxon ancestors of a minority.
 
"Such are some of the results which may be anticipated from the application of historical genealogy to ethnology, in which this work is a first essay.
 
"The genealogy of the Norman race leads up to its connexion with the Danish and the Anglo-Saxon, which, with it, form the three great constituents of the English nation.  To trace that connexion it has been found necessary to enter on the relationship between the Gothic and Teutonic races, which, as far as the author is aware, has not as yet been treated systematically by English writers.  It is hoped, however, that the views here enunciated will be found to harmonise generally with those entertained by the most enlightened enquirers.
 
"The later Scandinavian or Norman immigration into England has formed the subject of the following pages; the earlier Scandinavian or Danish has been very slightly noticed in connexion with it.  The extent and difficulty of the latter subject have induced the author to reserve its further consideration for another work... 1874."

CONTENTS... ADDITIONAL NOTES... I On the Nomenclature of Races... II On the Extent of the Danish Dominion in 879... III On the Family of Hastwgs

CHAPTER I Discovery of the Descendants of the Norman Nobility in England
CHAPTER II Discovery of the Descendants of the Norman Commonalty in England
CHAPTER III Criticism of Family History
CHAPTER IV Constructive Principles of this Work
CHAPTER V National Character of the Norman Settlement in England
CHAPTER VI The Danish Settlement in England
CHAPTER VII Gothic Origin of the Normans, Danes, and Anglo-Saxons; Present Diffusion and Numbers of the Gothic Race

Alphabetical Series of existing Norman Names and Families Taken from the London Post Office Directory:

APPENDIX

Norman Names from AA to ALL taken from the Official Lists at Somerset House

INDEX OF MEDIEVAL Surnames in this work

p224: "DENMAN: or Plochet, a foreign name still to be met in France [[note, I've seen this name recently; it's the name of a French author of a scientific paper I saw just after I found this information... my life is full of both irony and synchronicity, I don't know how much more I can take of it, really]].  Hugh Pluchet, Ploquet, or Pluket [[and other variant spellings]], t. Henry II. [[1154-1189]], witnessed a charter for the priory of Holy Trinity, London.  In the wars of Henry III [[1216-1272]] the estates of Geoffry de Dunham, Notts, were confiscated.  William de Denum occurs, t. Edward III [[1327-1377]].  About 1430 Robert Denham was of Notts, And was grandfather of Sir John D[[enham or enman]] of Kirklington (Surtee Society, vol. xii).

"The name of Denham changed to Denman, the arms of both names being the same.  From this family descended the Denmans of Notts, ancestors of the great Lord Denman, Chief Justice."

I gather from this, that a man named Hugh Pluchet first came with his family to London from Normandy and one of his descendants (Rad Plucket) was subsequently granted Dunham, Notts; then the family later became known as the Denmans, along with other variant spellings.   ???!!!   This is news to me, although it confirms my suspicions that the name had been changed somehow throughout the family's history.   I'm rather stunned and yet excited, all at once, lol.

Dunham on Trent is nearby Retford, so it makes perfect sense; but now I need to research the history of Dunham.  I also need to learn more about the Normans and Goths, I suppose, and this book might be the best place to start my latest adventure.

Viking Invasions of England (Wikipedia):

According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, Viking raiders struck England in 793 and raided Lindisfarne, the monastery that held Saint Cuthbert’s relics. The raiders killed the monks and captured the valuables. This raid marks the beginning of the "Viking Age of Invasion", made possible by the Viking longship. There was great but sporadic violence from the last decade of the 8th century on England’s northern and western shores: Viking raids continued on a small scale across coastal England. While the initial raiding groups were small, it is believed that a great amount of planning was involved. The Norwegians raided during the winter between 840 and 841, rather the usual summer, having waited on an island off Ireland. In 850 Vikings overwintered for the first time in England, on the island of Thanet, Kent. In 854 a raiding party overwintered a second time, at the Isle of Sheppey in the Thames estuary. In 864 they reverted to Thanet for their winter encampment.
 


The Anglo-Saxon dioceses before 925. Normal diocesan life was greatly disrupted in England during the Viking Age.
 
The following year the Great Heathen Army led by the Brothers Ivar the Boneless, Halfdan and Ubbe Ragnarsson, and also by another Viking Guthrum, arrived in East Anglia. They proceeded to cross England into Northumbria and captured York, establishing the Viking community of Jorvik, where some settled as farmers and craftsmen. Most of the English kingdoms, being in turmoil, could not stand against the Vikings. In 867 Northumbria became the northern kingdom of the coalescing Danelaw, after its conquest by the brothers Halfdan Ragnarsson and Ivar the Boneless, who installed an Englishman, Ecgberht, as a puppet king. By 870 the "Great Summer Army" arrived in England, led by a Viking leader called Bagsecg and his Five Earls. Aided by the Great Heathen Army (which had already overrun much of England from its base in Jorvik), Bagsecg's forces, and Halfdan's forces (through an alliance), the combined Viking forces raided much of England until 871, when they planned an invasion of Wessex. On 8 January 871, Bagsecg was killed at the Battle of Ashdown along with his Earls. As a result, many of the Vikings returned to northern England, where Jorvic had become the centre of the Viking kingdom but Alfred of Wessex managed to keep them out of his country. Alfred and his successors continued to drive back the Viking frontier and take York.
A new wave of Norwegian Vikings appeared in England in 947 when Erik Bloodaxe captured York. The Viking presence continued throughout the reign of the Danish King Cnut the Great (1016–1035), after which a series of inheritance arguments weakened power of his descendants. By 1012, the Vikings were in service in England as Thingmen, a personal bodyguard to the King of England. They were offered payment, the Danegeld, which lasted from 1012 to 1066 and stopped Viking raids for almost twenty years. The Viking presence dwindled until 1066, when the invading Norsemen lost their final battle with the English at Stamford Bridge. Nineteen days later the Normans, themselves descended from Norsemen, invaded England and defeated the weakened English army at the Battle of Hastings.

Norman Conquest of Wales:  1060's-1163
Norman Conquest of England:  1066=1071
Norman Conquest of Ireland: 1169-1203

Scandinavian Invasion of Normandy:  800's

So, Scandinavia invaded both England and Normandy first, then Normandy later invaded the British in their attempt to build their own empire.

Dunham is just a tiny little village, less than 400 population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunham-on-Trent,_Nottinghamshire
http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/articles/tts/tts1921/dunham1.htm

"SEVERAL suggestions have been made with regard to the derivation of the name Dunham. The most probable is that the first syllable is a personal name Dun (a), the termination "ham" being the Old English for "homestead" or "village," therefore meaning "the homestead of Dun." Or it may be from "dun " (Old English) "a hill," so that the name may mean "the village on the hill." However one is inclined to believe that the chief part of the village has always been, as it is now, on the level."

"During the reign of King John (1199-1216) frequent mention is made of Dunham. He made a State visit here on May 21st, 1207. He was wont to travel about the country with the Judge of Assize, and in his wanderings he was accompanied by huntsmen and all the paraphernalia of the chase. His Court constantly travelled between thirty and forty miles per day, and on particular occasions the King travelled a distance of fifty miles. In one year he changed his residence 150 times, visiting religious houses and his castles and manors, in some cases consuming the rents due to the Crown, and thus impoverishing the country by the rapacity of his purveyors. Two orders to the Barons of the Exchequer are dated from Dunham, May 22nd. In his Itinerary several visits are recorded to Kingshaugh (in the parish of Dunham). In 1205 there were consigned to the King at Bristol forty tuns of wine, which he ordered to be sent to Nottingham, one tun of which was to be sent, probably by boat, to Dunham, which would no doubt be for use at his mansion at Kingshaugh. In 1212, Matthew, Earl of Boulogne, appears to have been made Lord of the Manor.  In 1216, Henry III., then only nine years of age, gave land to Rad Plucket, 'who gave to the monks of Rufford [[probably Retford]], for the souls of his father and mother and ancestors, one toft in Dunham, on the south part of the town, contiguous to the Gyldehouse, four perches long, and as many broad, and the said monks were not to receive any more land in that town, but by the favour and goodwill of himself and his heirs; the witnesses were Gilbert de Archis, Swain de Hoiland, Robert de Draiton, William de Draiton, Richard de Laxton, Thomas, Clerk of Headon.' (Thoroton).  It is evident that in those days Dunham was a place of some importance."

So there's the name Plucket again, in connection with both Dunham and Retford.  Hmm.  And I suppose Dunham was valued as a river port in those times when much cargo was hauled by boats.  But, I take it that Plucket wasn't Lord of the Manor house in Dunham -- so I fail to see how we ended up with the surname.  Except that our ancestors apparently owned land there.  The Earl of Boulogne was the Lord of the Manor, so his surname would have been Boulogne, I suppose.  Both names are French...

UPDATE:  I've been reading Bryan Sykes' books, "Saxons, Vikings, and Celts", and "DNA USA"... Although I don't agree with him 100 percent on a lot of things, and I deeply resent his falling into the trap of stereotyping Native Americans, I think he deserves credit for pointing out the fact that "European" DNA has been present in the Northern Native American population for at least "10,000 years" -- and, I can't help but love his irrepressible British sense of humor:

"Normans... are just recycled Vikings..."  LMAO!  Seriously though, that makes the Raven symbol on our coat of arms more logical.  I'm not conceding yet, however, on the origin and meaning of the family surname; at least not until I look into it a bit further.  But I do consider this latest information very important and intriguing, anyway.

(What I really mean, is that I resent being stereotyped; I obviously don't fit the usual stereotypes for Native Americans -- yet, I don't believe that fact makes me any less "Indian".  Overall, I found DNA USA to be a 'keeper'; I really would like to get a copy of my own, for reference.)


*************************************************
 
Ok, so I decided to look for other French surnames in our family, all direct lineages (Basset, Montpesson, Montgomery, Gerneaux, Maestereaux, de Xavier, Vernon, Clark):
 
Mopsey, perhaps for Mumpesson or Montpinson, from M[[ontpesson?]]. near Evreux, a baronial family.  Ralph de Montpinson was Dapifer to William the Conqueror (Ord. Vit.)  He witnessed a charter in Normandy 1074 (Gall. Christ, xi. 66), and granted lands to St. Evroidt Abbey.  His son Hugh, who m. a dau. of Hugh de Grantmesnil, and his grandson Ralph, are mentioned by Ordericus.  Philip de M[[ontpesson?]] witnessed 1132 the foundation Charter of Fountains Abbey, York (Mon. v. 306, 307, New Ed.).  The family appears afterwards in Lincoln, Essex, Hertford, Norfolk, Notts[?], and in 1166 the barony of Montpinsun, Normandy consisted of fifteen knights* fees (Feod. Norm. Duchesne.).  Our connection with the Montpessons occurred in 16th century England.  Judith Stoughton's mother, Katherine, I believe.
 
Montgomery or Montgomeri:  Amulph, Hugh, Roger de Monte Goumeril, Normandy 1198 (MRS); Ralph, Robert, Bartholomew, Arnulph, Roger, Hugh de Montgommeri, 1180-95 (Ib.).  These were branches of the house of Montgomeri near Alencon, Earls of Arundel and Salop, of which several branches remained in England and Scotland.  Hence the Earls of Eglinton.

Our connection with the Montgomerys occurred in America in the 19th century, via Rachael Perry Montgomery, my ggg-grandmother.

Basset:  from its ancestor Bathet, or Baset, Duke of the Normans of the Loire 895, 905 (Bouquet, viL 360 J viii. 817).  He acquired Ouilly Basset, and Normanville in 912, and had issue Norman, father of Osmond, Viscount of Vernon, c. 960, whose elder son, Hugh Basset, was Baron of Chateau Basset, held from the Abbey of St. Denis, t. Hugh Capet, which barony passed by his widow to the house of Montmorency, c. 990.  His brother, Fulco De Alneto, was father of 1- Osmond; 2- Robert D'Ouilly, ancestor of the Doyleys; 3- William de Lisures, ancestor of the house of Lisores; 4- Fulco or Fulcelin D'Alnet, ancestor of the Dawnats.  Osmond Basset accompanied the Conqueror 1066, and had issue: 1- Hugh Fitz-Osmond, ancestor of the family of Nobmamville, and Basset of Normandy; 2- Norman, Sire de Montrevel, d. s. p.; 3- Anchetil Fitz-Osmond, ancestor of the Palmers; 4- Ralph Fitz-Osmond, ancestor of the Lords Bassets of Drayton, &c.; 5- Richard Basset, ancestor of the Bassets of Devon; 6- William, ancestor of the Bassets of Essex and Wales.

"Those names are strangely suggestive to one who is familiar with English history.  Their present position tells of strange revolutions in past times.  Those names seem to assort but ill with their present places.  They once belonged to the mighty nobles and chiefs who conquered England, and whose descendants were renowned in Palestine and France.  Those names are now borne by the merchant, the shop-keeper, the artisan, the labourer...

"Whence come these memorials of the eleventh century, these resurrections of what was once so famous in history, these names of the past, formerly surrounded by all the attributes of splendour, and power, and chivalry, and almost kingly dominion?  Are we to suppose those names to be mere impostures, fraudulent assumptions, forgeries?  Or are they not, rather, silent witnesses of the vast changes which time introduces into society?  It was not the custom in England to change hereditary surnames without necessity, and from mere fancy or caprice.  Nor is there any record in England of the system of clan names by which in Scotland and Ireland the adherents of the patriarchal chieftains distinguished themselves.  Clans did not exist in this country, and the adherents of the barons did not adopt the names of their feudal suzerains.  The surnames of England have descended lineally in families from remote ages; and those which are found in the middle and lower classes, and which originally belonged to illustrious houses, are, with very few exceptions, beyond doubt genuine.  The writer expresses this opinion after careful and lengthened inquiry, and is entirely satisfied that these names have not been adopted in modern times; for the families from which they are derived have been so long forgotten that nothing would have been gained by the assumption of their names.  And besides this, a person who wished to obtain the credit of belonging to one of those ancient stocks would at least have been careful, in adopting the name, to preserve its correct orthography; whereas the mass of these old names occur in corrupt forms, and under every conceivable variation of spelling, which clearly indicates the undesigned nature of the changes themselves, and the remoteness of an origin which, in the course of time, had been the source of so many variations...

"Setting aside, therefore, any objection to the genuineness of these masses of ancient names as altogether unfounded, we may consider the real causes of the position which they occupy in the middle, and even in the labouring classes...

"The decadence of ancient and the rise of new families in England are facts which are well known, and which are evidenced by what is daily passing before our eyes.  There is a perpetual ebb and flow in the fortunes of families; and more especially has this been the case for the last three centuries and a half, when the old feudal institutions, which rendered the transfer of estates difficult, and which inpeded the creation of large rentals, have come to an end.  Landed property has long ceased to be destined to the maintenance of a great national army:  it has become an article of commerce -- has been thrown open to the monied classes -- has become capable of being treated as a source of pecuniary profit.  The ancient Norman landholder lived without the aids and appliances of modern luxury.  His grandeur consisted, not in the length of his rent-roll, the brilliancy of his equipages, or the beauty of his palaces and parks, but in the strength of his fortresses, and the numbers of armed and disciplined retainers and feudal tenants who followed his standard.  His splendour consisted in his power.  All this has long since passed away, and land, from the middle of the sixteenth century, began to fall into the position of other marketable property.  The result was that, as commercial enterprise created wealth, the old landed aristocracy was gradually replaced by new families.  If we compare the landed proprietary of any one country in the present day with the lists of its gentry in the reign of Elizabeth, it would seem at first sight as if the whole of the old proprietary had died out.  Rare indeed are the cases in which the same estates have descended in the same name for three centuries.  Mr. Shirley, in his interesting work on the "Gentle and Noble" families of England who have held their estates from a.d. 1500 and previously, is unable to enumerate more than about four hundred altogether, including peers, baronets, and landed gentry -- a mere insignificanct fraction of the landowners of England.  The mass of the old proprietors have either died out or transferred their estates by heiresses to new families; or they have migrated to other parts of England, to Ireland, to Scotland, or to the colonies.  Numbers have taken up their abode in America, and their descendants remain there at the present day.  They have in the majority of cases ceased to be possessed of landed property, and have engaged in commercial or industrial employments.  In former ages, as now, professions and trade were frequently the resource of the younger sons of good families, for the family estate passing to the elder son, the junior branches had to seek their own fortunes.  Nor were their undertakings always fortunate:  branches of aristocratic families gradually fell lower in the world, and became impoverished.  The leading branches of these families, whose importance in some degree upheld the position of these remote kinsmen, gradually died out; the estates passed away by heiresses to new families, or were lost by extravagance, misfortunes, and embarassments; the old names were forgotten by the world; the scions of these ancient families fell lower and lower, till, in some cases, at length nothing remained to them except family names, of whose ancient importance they were no longer conscious.  All traces of their descent had been lost and obliterated; and when rising once more to renewed prosperity, after the lapse of ages, they rose as new families, without [known] antecedents and without [recognized] ancestry.

"Such have been the variations of society in England, where notwithstanding an imparalleled stability of institutions, everything is, like the ocean, in a state of perpetual flux and reflux, the old disappearing before the new, and the new superseded in its turn by the old -- the nobility, the gentry, the middle classes, and the lower, gradually changing places, and gradually resuming their original positions.  In a few generations the noble families of the present will have descended to the ranks of the gentry or the commercial community.  The tradesmen of today will be the forefathers of the peers of tomorrow; and we perhaps ourselves have tenants or servants whose blood may be better than our own.

"The author had at various times been struch by finding such names as Percy, Mortimer, Basset, Pont, Fitzwater, amongst the middle and lower classes, but he had not given any particular attention to the fact, or attempted to found any inferences upon it.  He had also been led by curiosity from time to time to turn to the Post Office Directory of London, as containing the largest printed list of English surnames, with a view to ascertain whether some of the Norman surnames which are to be found in the ancient records were still in existence, and he had occasionally discovered them there.  These casual and transient references conveyed a very imperfect notion of the amount of information actually comprised in that vast repository of surnames."

My paternal grandmother, Lillie Yarbrough Denman (later, Armstrong), told me that Basset is a family name; however, I never got the chance to ask her how it relates to us.  I would assume that it might have been her mother's maiden name, though.

Vernon: "Vemon, a Norman baronial name.  William, Richard, Garvin, Ralph, de Vernon, Normandy 1180-95 (MRS).  Roger was Baron of Vernon c. 1030, about which time his dau. Blithiidis was married.  She in 1082 granted to Trinity, Caen, the lands at Vernon given to her by her father Roger.  The grant was made with consent of William, her nephew, then Lord of Vernon (QaU. Christ, xi. 70, Instr.).  This William recovered Vernon (which had been granted to Count Guy of Burgundy) j and from him descended the Barons of Vernon, who held sixty-one knights' fees in barony; and of whom William de V[ernon] founded the Collegiate Church at Vernon in 1160 (GalL. Christ xi. 583).  William L. had several brothers who came to England 1066, viz., 1- Richard; 2- 432..."

Vernon Winters Denman was my paternal grandfather; and his mother is known to me only as Lillie V... So I think it's quite possible that his given name was her maiden name, since children were often named in that manner in those times.  Of course, I would love to verify that fact, but haven't yet gotten access to the records which would do so.  Mainly, I just want to know who she was and what her maiden name really was.  "Lillie V." is all that is on her gravestone.

Clark:  "This name includes persons of many different families.  Some of these are Norman; at least the name frequently appears in the Duchy.  Robert, Odo, Huard, Osbert, Philip, Richard, Branda Clericus, or Le Clerc, occur 1180-1195 (Mag. Rot Scac.).  Twenty of the name occur 1198 (Ib.); of these, nine also occur in England 1199; and the families of the name generally seem to have had members in both countries.

We are Clarks, via the marriage of John Sevier's eldest daughter, Elizabeth Hawkins Sevier, to William Clark.  Like her father, her husband was an officer in the American Revolution and was I believe a state supreme court judge for Tennessee.  Their daughter, Elizabeth Clark, married John Elston.  The Elstons' daughter, Neaty, married Blake Denman; and our direct ancestor was their son, William C. Denman (Vernon Denman's grandfather).

I couldn't find anything in this book on the other three (all of which were Huguenots, by the way -- Xavier is presumably Basque although some Melungeons descended from John Sevier claim that the family patriarch, Don Juan de Xavier, was a Sephardic Jew -- I doubt it very much), and the other two are presumably Flemish or Germanic.

The de Xavier family of Spain, from which John Sevier descended, was at one time Catholic (St. Francis Xavier was an uncle of John Sevier, so also my uncle n times removed).  They are described in historical accounts, as Basques.  St. Francis Xavier was the heir of Castle Navarre, due to the fact that the castle belonged to his mother, and he was a younger son.  And not long after their castle (which was their home) at Navarre was deeded over to the Jesuits (the Saint was a close friend and associate of Ignatius de Loyola), the family renounced Catholicism and became Huguenot Protestants.

Afterwards, during some civil warfare between the Basques and the Spanish, and also during the time of the Catholic Inquisitions, the family fled Spain for France, thereby becoming 'French Huguenots' at that time.  A town in France is rumored to have been named for the Xavier family.  However, France later joined Spain in becoming one of the worst persecutors of Huguenots, forcing the family (whose patriarch at the time was known as don Juan de Xavier) to flee again, this time to London, England.  There, the spelling of the name was changed to "Sevier".  It was from London that our Sevier ancestor (John Sevier's father or grandfather, both named "Valentine") sailed as a young boy to Baltimore, Maryland; and that's how that particular branch of the Sevier family became American.

My point in this long narrative about the Sevier family history, is that I don't find any real connection to Sephardic Judaism, although if shown clear evidence of it, I wouldn't deny it.  Nevertheless, the point remains that the Seviers / de Xaviers were probably not of Norman stock, since they were probably Basques originally from Spain.  On the other hand, genetically speaking, I've heard that there was most likely an ancient relationship of some sort, between the Basques, Celts and Vikings.

Others of our family names found in Sir Hale's book:  Ellis, Maris, Hawkins, Littleton, Lyon (Lyon being the only one here, for which I haven't yet established a definite, specific link to our family tree -- I only have very good reason to believe that we're related, however closely or distantly).

... The author, Sir Matthew Hale, states that the English are not truly Teutonic or Low German; nor are Scandinavians, Anglo-Saxons or Goths.  He claims that both the English and the Teutons are descended from the aboriginal Getae, which he claims is the greatest of the tribes of Japhet.  Of course, I believe European descent from Japheth is a lie; I'm convinced that Caucasoids are descended from Shem, and that Mongoloids are descended from Japheth.  I believe the Jews switched the two around in their legends and myths, in order to establish themselves as the "chosen" people of God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getae
(Herodotus proclaimed them the "noblest and most just" of all the Thracian tribes.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_romaniagetae.htm
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/06/eshg-2012-abstracts.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08/proto-indo-european-homeland-in.html

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/
http://www.archives.gov/research/search/

http://www.searchforancestors.com/utility/

http://www.denmandna.com/news/

http://www.historyhome.co.uk/primary.htm

http://archive.org/stream/ahistorynotting01browgoog#page/n6/mode/2up

http://books.google.com/books?id=q8c9AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA485&lpg=PA485&dq=the+history+of+the+old+hall+of+the+manor+of+west+retford&source=bl&ots=THeRojMdfd&sig=CJhIKgnDYiDtxksfxHBh9COwv9A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zi73UKSjHfC42QW5-4DgDg&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false
Volume II

http://www.denmandna.com/origin-theory/

http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/books/westretfordmanor1908/titlepage.htm

http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/NTT/

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/01/genomic-history-of-denmark.html

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DSwAAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=fulco+de+alneto&source=bl&ots=Swk04sYvvg&sig=Qy-DDfiDMkto6JtI1vkSgy0Qb_c&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-wkHUaShNeOYyAHL7oHABw&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=fulco%20de%20alneto&f=false
Wow, I love old books.

(You know, I really wish the Satanic Trolls would all go straight to Hell, right NOW.)

http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/Queens/history/newtown.html
http://longislandgenealogy.com/NewtownPresb.pdf

If you google Newtown, Long Island, an amazing amount of information shows up.  In the Presbyterian Church records, I found the marriage of my ancestors, Daniel Denman and Deborah Scudder:  March 22, 1761.  Daniel's home is listed as Elizabethtown, New Jersey; proving that the family maintained social ties with their former 'hood, Newtown.  Of course, the Scudders were tightly connected to the Denman family while living in Long Island -- even back when it was still New Netherlands.

Strangely, Deborah Scudder is listed in the Newtown Deaths records as a widow, on December 23, 1769.  Now, I'm really confused.  If that is accurate, it would mean that Daniel never went to Georgia with his brother John and son, James for the Revolution.  It also would mean that Daniel was a fairly young man, and that James a small child, when he died.  It should also mean that there ought to be a record of his death in Elizabethtown, NJ, or vicinity -- between the years of 1761 and 1769.  But, I also heard a rumor that Deborah remarried after Daniel's death, to his brother, Phillip Denman, relocating to Connecticut.  If she was a widow at time of her death, and if she really died in 1769, then she must have been twice-widowed and left some small children behind to be raised by whom?  I'm very confused, yet this sort of explains all of the haziness around my ancestors, Daniel and Deborah:  it appears that both of them might have died very young.

http://www.one-name.org/profiles/denman.html

http://archive.org/stream/peerageforpeopl00carpgoog#page/n268/mode/2up
Peerage for the People, from the Harvard College Collection, a catalog of biographies of the Aristocracy, has a very large section on the Denman house.  Also, I notice with interest a certain house of "Plunket" -- could they be somehow related to us?