Davis: Family of New Jersey & Upstate New York, H. Johnson

"William Davis Pvt NJ Militia Rev War Mar 21 1758 Jan vi 1845"
Courtesy findagrave.com. Known as "Greenbrier Billy."

How-do-you-do Davis descendants, researchers and interested followers,

Nosotros've got two new matches at the 67-marker level to consider and just got find that we have another new match at the 37- marker level who we will await at in the next mail service, when we become all the details.

For now, nosotros have two new matches to recollect most and they are both in the same neighborhood on the Brisley side of the Davis family tree. The "Brisley side" means that both testers descend from William1 Davis and his first wife, Elizabeth Brisley, via their first son, John2.

William had 4 more sons via second married woman, Elizabeth Pavior, who are on the "Pavior side" of the family unit tree, but we have tested descendants of but ane of those 4 sons, James2.

The ancestor in common for both new matches is Thomas "William"3 Davis, son of John2, who was built-in in 1719 in Rhode Island and migrated to Shrewsbury, New Jersey. He migrated again with his adult children and other Seventh Baptist families in 1789, merely to dice in White Day Creek, Monongalia County, Virginia, in 1791, having not yet reached Salem, (W) Virginia.

Two of Thomas William3's 3 sons: William "Greenbrier Billy"4 and Rev. Nathan4, caput up the carve up lines of our two new matches.

About our starting time match- the dark-green line on the chart

At the last post, we had just received news of a new match, at the 67-mark level. He is kit #219 (kit numbers are shortened to the starting time 3 numbers) and is a descendant of William "Greenbrier Billy"4 Davis.

This lucifer'south granddad was Deuron Clifford8 Davis and Deuron's father was Sylvanis7 Davis, both coal miners from Coal township, Harrison County, WV.

Sylvanis Davis, 1846 WV- 1929 Clarksburg, WV
Courtesy Sharon Sprouse Bramhall

If we follow Deuron's line upwards, we find Sylvanis7 was the son of Absalom6 Davis who was, in 1850, a farmer living in Doddridge County, West Virginia. His wife, Polina S.W.5, was also a Davis, a descendant of William "Lesser Baton"3 Davis. They had xiv children and adopted a fifteenth.

Absalom Davis Bible, Births, Courtesy Sharon Sprouse Bramhall

Absalom'due south father was Rev. Peter5 Davis, a Seventh Day Baptist minister in New Salem, Harrison Co., WV and Rev. Peter'southward begetter was William "Greenbrier Billy"4.

(See Ancestor Photos page for images of nativity, death and marriage pages from Absalom's and Sylvanis' Bibles.)

"Rev. Peter Davis, Died Mch. 4 1873, Aged 89 Ys, 5Ms 16Ds"
Courtesy findagrave.com

Susie Nicholson says: "Peter Davis was about half dozen years onetime when his parents [Greenbrier Billy4 Davis and Elizabeth Johnston] joined in the 1789 migration with the 7th 24-hour interval Baptist group from Shrewsbury, New Jersey to Western Virginia… He outlived both wives [Sarah Davis and Sarah Fitz-Randolph] and was cared for past his daughter, Jemima, wife of Rev. Jacob Davis." -excerpted from Davis, The Settlers of Salem, West Virginia, past Susie Davis Nicholson, 1979, pg 32.

About our second match- the aqua line on the chart

"Stephen C. Davis,
Built-in Sept. thirty, 1781, Died Aug sixteen, 1869, Aged 87 Ys 10 Mos. xvi Ds"
Son of Rev. Nathan Sr. Davis
Courtesy findagrave.com

Our second new match, besides matching on the 67-marking test, is kit #320. He is a descendant of Rev. Nathan4 Davis, Greenbrier Billy4's older brother. Our second friction match's granddaddy was Howard Lee9 Davis, born in Clarksburg, Harrison County, Due west Virginia.

Howard Lee Davis, abt 1918

Track this line back, all in West Virginia ("Virginia," earlier 1863), and you lot find Howard's father was Mingo H. 8. Mingo's wife was Jean7, also a Davis, one thousand-daughter of William "Buckeye Billy"5 Davis, who was the grandson of William "Lesser Billy"iii Davis.

Information technology's like shooting fish in a barrel to wonder where the proper name "Mingo" came from since it is such an unusual name, especially in 1871 when Mingo H. was born. With no stories handed down in the Davis family unit about its origin, a bit of enquiry finds that there is a canton in West Virginia named "Mingo" merely it was formed in 1895. Mingo H. Davis was already 24 years one-time in 1895.

The other mention of the name Mingo is that of an unincorporated expanse in West Virginia chosen "Mingo," or "Mingo Flats," which was named later the historic Iroquoian Mingo people who migrated west to Ohio around 1750. Mingo Flats had manifestly been the site of one of their villages. The migrants were called "Mingos," a corruption of "mingwe," originally meaning "principal" or "greatest," afterward significant "colonial," referring to their Iroquoian outpost in WV.

Descendants of the settlers of Mingo Flats had stories handed down from their ancestors about the aboriginal Mingo village and, in 1920, wanted to honor its being past erecting a statue.

Beingness that Mingo Flats was not very far from Clarksburg, Harrison County, might it be that those same stories, much more vibrant in 1871, were the inspiration for the proper name "Mingo H.?"

Going further up the line, we find Mingo'south father was Mark7. During the Ceremonious War, Mark Davis was in the Confederate Cavalry while his brothers served in the W Virginia Militia and Union Army.  And after the war, they went dorsum to being neighbors. Mark's male parent was David D.half-dozen. On the 1850 Doddridge Canton, Virginia census, David D. Davis' occupation is listed as "Cost Gate No. ten."

David D. and Absalom, ancestors of these two lines, were 2nd cousins, born within 5 years of each other and both lived in Doddridge County, VA in 1850. They probably knew each other well.

David'south wife was Anna5 Davis, also a descendant of William "Bottom Billy"iii Davis, leading us to Stephen C.5 .

Stephen C.5 is the ancestor in common for lines #two and #three. He was the son of Rev. Nathan4, Greenbrier Billy4's older blood brother.

That's a lot of Davis beginnings in one line!

Follow the lines on a chart

On the chart below, the new tests are lines two (aqua) and 5 (green), highlighted with red shadow.

Testers on this nautical chart have been placed in sequence of oldest to youngest, left to correct. At each generation, the oldest son and his descendants are listed start, on the far left of tree, and the youngest son and his descendants are listed last, on the far right of tree. This places testers descending from the same ancestor in common next to each other.

Who do y'all call up will match?

1. Nosotros would expect new tester #320, line ii, to friction match closely to previous tester #275, line 3 (aqua lines) because they descend from brothers at gen 6 (Brothers are David D.vi and Nathan G.6.)

two. We would too wait new tester #278, line 5, to match closely to previous tester #219, line 6 (greenish lines) because they descend from brothers at gen5 (Brothers are Rev. Peter5 and George Johnston5).

Lineage chart of 2 new matches (shadowed red)

[Chart being updated]

(Click 2x to enlarge, dorsum button to return)

 Comparison of results
and some questions to inquire

Now that we have the lines, permit'south compare the DYS values, possibly answering some questions:

1. How shut will the lines match?

2. Are there whatsoever markers or combination of markers that distinguish any lines from each other?

iii. Practice the markers display the relationships that we already know?

That is, if you lot didn't know who the new matches descended from, could you predict their likely lines from their DYS results?

DYS Marker Comparison

As we gain more testers, our test comparisons get more complex, so this flake of analysis may accept some patience.  (Non the usual webpage sound bites here).

A chart is the best style to compare markers merely information technology'southward hard to run into patterns in a large nautical chart with 67 markers. And so, to simplify the results, the following is a smaller chart of our grouping's 12 changing markers only.

• The marker results that all testers had in common were omitted, duplicate tests were omitted, less than 67-marker tests were omitted and non-Davis tests with many mismatches were omitted.

• The testers were sorted by line and color-coded past antecedent in common (matching colors of the lineage chart). Marker results were colored by blazon: bibelot results (only 1 or ii testers show that marking result) were colored yellow, unusual results colored green, variations in marker values colored shades of blue and identical marking values colored pinkish.

• The order of DYS columns was changed to line up same-value markers together. Fast-changing DYS names are in crimson text.

[Nautical chart being updated]
(Click 2x to enlarge, back button to render)

• Rev. Nathan4's  four lines, are the starting time four rows. (The starting time 2 rows, colored blueish and light bluish, are lines 1 and 4, both previous testers.)

• The third and fourth rows, colored aqua and low-cal aqua, are line ii (with new tester #320) and line three.

• The 5th and sixth rows, colored green and light green, are Wm Greenbrier Billy4's two lines, line 5 (with new tester #278) and line six.

• The other rows, purples, pinks and golds, are other previous testers' lines.

Motility dorsum and forth betwixt the lineage nautical chart of new lines and this DYS marking nautical chart to get a feel for how the markers reverberate the lines that they represent.

Analysis of Results

So what do we find?

1. How close practice the new lines friction match?

New tester, kit #320 on line 2 (aqua), does match kit #275, on line three, but with two  steps off, a bit more than genetic distance than expected.

In 6 generations, there were 2 mutations.

New tester, kit #278 on line 5 (green), does match kit #219, on line 6, with 1 step off, equally expected.

In  half-dozen generations, in that location was i mutation.

2.  Tin the lines be distinguished by their DYS results?

• Yep. On new line 2, (kit #320, aqua), DYS 481=22 appears to be an anomaly. No other tester shows this issue. This temporarily does distinguish line 2, kit #320 (until it shows up later on in another line). All other testers bear witness DYS 481=23.

• And no. On new line 5, (kit #278, green), shows a combination of  three values: DYS 391=eleven, CDY=34-34 and 576=21.
  But that same combination, 11, 34-34 and 21, shows upward in an exact match from another previous tester, kit #151, on the Archie E. Davis line, (first dark purple row on the DYS comparison chart), proving that the iii DYS combo does not distinguish line #five (kit #278) from the other lines.

three. Do the markers predict known relationships?

No. If you lot didn't know where to place kit #278, you might expect for an antecedent of that previous tester, kit #151, on the Archie E. line, considering #151 is an exact match to kit #278.

This exact match implies that #151 would be closer to #278 on the paper tree than #219 would be, since #219 is i footstep off.

Simply we know that, on the newspaper tree, kit#219's line is closer to kit #278's line and we see kit#151, Archie E.'south line, would be a very wrong management to inquiry because kit #151's line descends from David Rogers Jr.four, an entirely different line of the tree than the William Greenbrier Billy4 line from which kit #278 actually descends. (Meet kits # 278, 219 and 151 on the Proven Lines, Brisley Branch chart below.)

So the exact friction match would give researchers a bum steer.

All Davis descendants on the Davis family tree are related, so we could phrase this odd observation as:

Fifth cousins, kit#278 (line v) and kit #219 (line 6), who are close to each other on the newspaper tree, match one step off;

merely sixth cousins, kit #278 (line 5) and kit #151 (Archie E.seven line), who are farther away from each other on the newspaper tree, match exactly.

Hmm.

4. As to placing kit#320 (line 2, the aqua line, on the lineage chart), if you looked at just the get-go 2 changing markers, DYS 391=11, CDY=35-35 (the "almost anomaly"),  you might wait (correctly) to kit #275, on line 3 (light aqua line) because kit #275 also has the aforementioned kickoff 2 markers. If so, yous'd have kit #320 placed pretty close to where he belonged.

But, considering kit #275'due south 3rd and fourth changing markers are each one pace off from kit#320, you might continue to look elsewhere.

You might have chanced to run across that previous tester, kit #152, on the William6, b 1810, NY line, also matches with 391=xi, CDY=35-35 ,with an additional 3rd marking match at 576=21 (See Proven Lines, Brisley Branch, chart).

Those kickoff 3 matching markers might have sent you off searching for ancestors on kit #152's line. That pick would take yous off in a very wrong direction because kit#152, descends from Thomas William4, along an entirely different line than kit#320's actual line from Rev. Nathan4.

So, practise the markers display the relationships we already know?

With this particular grouping of results for kit #320, the answer is: not actually. The results partially bespeak to a right line but point more so to an incorrect line.

What's a genetic genealogist to practice?

Observations and conclusions

one. The 2 new lines show only 4 changing markers while there are 12 possible changing markers amid all testers to engagement. With such a small pool of changing markers, we might need many more tests before we tin make predictive sense of the marking values.

two. In full general, an anomaly should be a good designator of a unique line. But when an anomaly starts showing upwardly in more than than 1 (or 2?) tests, it ceases to be an anomaly and becomes only another mark variation.

3. Is it a significant observation that, besides #278, nosotros accept 2 other kits, #141 and #204, both with unknown links to the William Davis tree, who are likewise verbal matches to #151, the Archie E. line?

Kit #141'due south oldest ancestor is Benjamin West Davis, born 1786 Chautauqua County, New York and kit #204's oldest ancestor is William Burnett, built-in 1771 Sussex County, New Bailiwick of jersey. Kit #151, Archie Eastward.'s line, originates in Rhode Island, then moves to Lincklaen, NY and then to Wisconsin. They don't seem to have places of origin in common.

Might kit #151, the Archie Eastward. line, perhaps be our patriarch, William Davis', original Dna signature and that's why we have four exact matches to it?

four. Observations equally to matching: a shut relative on paper may prove more genetic distance than a further relative on paper.

five. An verbal or close match, past itself, does not necessarily designate the line from which an unknown tester descends.

For those who don't know where to place themselves on the Davis family tree, these terminal ii observations can exist daunting.

As a result, it makes sense to become equally much information as possible from many tests earlier spending inordinate time researching lines that might exist leading in the wrong direction. At that place are a lot of ancestors, forth a lot of lines, in the 10 generations leading back to William1.

(Click 2x to enlarge, back button to return)

Directions for future testing?

We may have to begin to look to the 111-marker tests to encounter if they bear witness whatever further ability to distinguish results.

We may take to compare results in more than one style: possibly comparison fast-changing markers and slow-changing markers separately and then combining the comparisons.

Tests on more lines might tell us if discord between the results and the paper family tree is the norm or the exception. Are all the Davis genes highly agile or just some lines?

And we may have to simply go on mapping the Davis family tree, trying to exam one descendant of each major line. Nosotros may yet find a pattern emerges if nosotros continue to study marking changes on lines whose relationships we already know.

More cousins

Whether or not we know where we fit on the tree, each test introduces us to however another Davis cousin, another descendant of our original immigrant ancestor. Nosotros may feel like just virtual friends, but Deoxyribonucleic acid doesn't lie. Nosotros are all connected as family unit, fifty-fifty if it is a very large family.

We currently accept 25 members in the WDD Projection (26 with latest friction match) who live all across the U.Southward. and nosotros have many interested potential Davis cousins planning to exam.  One twenty-four hour period in the time to come, we might take on the task of figuring out just how many Davis descendants William Davis has produced altogether in this clan. Of form, nosotros might demand a statistician to aid.

Thanks to all of you who have queried this website and who have been and then gracious to share your family information. And cheers to the contributions of Tim Davis who finds and helps fund testers for the FTdna Davis Surname Project.

If yous accept any questions, additional perspectives or corrections, please add together them in the comment section or email me. And if y'all have whatever other Davis family data, delight let me know and I volition add yours to our growing collection.

Don't forget to check the Antecedent Photos page for more Davis historical photos related to these two lines.

Until the next postal service, or next cousin, whichever comes first.

Best wishes,

-Jan Davis Markle, Director
William Davis Dna Projection (williamdavisdna.org)
jrmarkle at m mail dot com

Proven lines, Brisley Branch, April 2014
(Click 2x to enlarge, back button to return)

Proven lines, Pavior co-operative, April 2014
(Click 2x to enlarge, back button to return)

cheelowen1943.blogspot.com

Source: https://williamdavisdnaproject.wordpress.com/tag/davis-family-history/

Share this post