Monday, September 21, 2009

The Vick and Allied Families DNA Project

After my last blog I realized we should rename our new DNA project. We are now calling it the VICK and Allied Families DNA Project. I should also say that while we would like to have members of every VICK clan in our project, so far all of the project members are descendants of Joseph Vick of Lower Parish, Isle of Wight County, Virginia (Joseph1), or an allied family (or both). Among the allied families in our project are the STRICKLANDs, the JOYNERs, and the HOLLANDs.

The STRICKLANDs have a deep history with the VICKs that goes back to Isle of Wight County. In Joseph Vick of Lower Parish, Isle of Wight County, Virginia and His Descendants the authors noted several associations among the VICKs and the STRICKLANDs. For example, on pages 62 and 63 of the book when discussing Robert3 (Robert2, Joseph1) the authors say “From the probable ages of his sons, it seems likely that Robert married twice. A glance at the names associated with his many land transactions will suggest his close association with the Strickland and Taylor families, with whom there may have been some relationship…Mathew STRICKLAND had daughters Sarah, Ann, Elizabeth and Jane all of whom were unmarried at the time of his death and of whom Elizabeth and Jane remain untraced.

We have two STRICKLAND descendants in our project. One is a descendant of Ezekiel STRICKLAND who was born about 1809, probably in North Carolina. Apparently, there is a brick wall at Ezekiel in tracing this line back. Two men who are descendants of Ezekiel have been Y-DNA tested. Their Y-DNA signature (haplotype) matches the signature of the descendants of Joseph1. On the other hand, the Y-DNA signature of the Ezekiel descendants does not match the signature of other southern STRICKLAND men. The match of the Ezekiel STRICKLAND descendants with the Joseph1 descendants may indicate that this branch of the STRICKLAND family descends from Joseph1.

The other STRICKLAND in our project descends from Matthew STRICKLAND (born about 1732 in North Carolina). Because the Y-DNA signature of the two STRICKLAND clans is so different, these two clans cannot have shared a common patrilineal ancestor in a genealogical time period (they are not even in the same haplogroup). However, the two STRICKLAND clans could share “recent” ancestry through a non-patrilineal line. Perhaps we will find something in our project that ties the two branches together.

The HOLLAND member of our project is a descendant of Berry HOLLAND, born 4 Jun 1840 in North Carolina. Barry's line also has not been able to be extended. However, his descendants' Y-DNA signature also matches that of the descendants of Joseph1. So there is good reason to believe that Berry may also have been a patrilineal descendant of Joseph1. More precisely, these HOLLANDs match the Y-DNA signature of Joseph1's son Robert.

In Joseph Vick of Lower Parish, Isle of Wight County, Virginia and His Descendants, there are several references to the VICKs and the HOLLANDs . On page 24 when discussing Sarah3 (Joseph2, Joseph1) it says "SARAH, b. ca. 1718; d. after 1784 in Southampton County, Virginia. She m. JAMES GARDNER ca. 1740 in Southampton County…James and Sarah lived in the vicinity of Cypress Swamp…Children surnamed GARDNER: …5. Juda (m. Thomas Holland)….

On page 460 when discussing Robert5 (Robert 4, ?Isaac3, William2, Joseph1) the book says his probable son “REDDIN, b. ca. 1798 [probably in NC]; m. CHARLOTTE HOLLAND."

Finally, we are also very fortunate to have a JOYNER in our project. The JOYNERs also have a long relationship with the VICKs that goes back to Isle of Wight County, Virginia. Our project member is a descendant of Moses JOYNER and Patience VICK (Joseph2, Joseph1). Now have at least one descendant of each of Joseph1’s sons; however, I am not aware of any project member who is a descendant of Joseph1’s daughter Lucy.

One of things we need in our project is the shortest possible line back to Joseph1, and our JOYNER has that distinction so far. He is in the eighth generation of Joseph1’s line. While we have some sixth cousins in our project, most are seventh or eighth cousins. We need some third, fourth, and fifth cousins to increase our chances of weaving common DNA blocks (or half identical regions) into a quilt of shared ancestry. We will have to work on this weakness. Once the 23andMe beta discount period expires, it will probably be harder to attract new project members.

No comments: