Karen,

My one and only "Davidson DNA match" (so far) confirmed what I had always 
suspected (thankfully), and without that test, I would never have been able 
to prove my connection back to the Davidsons who were in James City Co., VA 
by the 1680s.  Based on "paper trails"/"documentation" alone, it appears 
that there were at least a dozen (!) or so Davidson/Davison/Davisson 
families in just Virginia alone, from the 1600s through the 1800s.  I never 
dreamed that this surname was that common.  DNA continues to show that at 
least most of these families truly do NOT share a common male 
Davidson/Davison/Davisson ancestor within any "genealogically significant 
timeframe."  I wish that we could get a donor from ALL of those families (we 
probably have donors from about half of them at this time).

Note: As I always like to say, if we believe in a "first man" and a "first 
woman"....who were the ancestors of everyone else....then we are ALL 
related.  It is just a matter of "how far back is too far" for DNA to be a 
useful/reliable tool.  Once you get back to the time before surnames were 
even used (e.g., Jesus, Moses, etc.), genealogy starts to get a little 
"crazy" anyway.

Our Davidson/Davison/Davisson DNA testing project now has about 80 people 
segregated into 16 separate/"unrelated" families.  We also have about 40 
people who do not currently match/closely match anyone (or who have done 
only 12 markers, and that is not enough to make "definitive connections," in 
most cases).  Not only were there more "unrelated" families with the same 
surnames in early-America than most of us apparently expected, there were 
also apparently many more "non-paternity events" (adoptions, "affairs," 
etc.), as well as name changes (for all kinds of reasons), than most people 
probably imagined.

I also have two "non-Davidson" DNA matches/close matches (at the 37 marker 
"level"), and one of these men lives in the United States and has the 
surname of "Bishop."  The other man lives in Finland, and his surname is 
"Paananen" (but he has traced his line back just a few generations to a man 
with the surname of "Johansson").  Per DNA, both men have over a 95% chance 
of sharing a common male ancestor with me within about the last 16 
generations, as I recall.  My DNA test shows that I probably have a "Viking 
heritage" (per my haplotype of "I"), and I can only guess as to when my 
ancestors "adopted" the name of "Davidson."  They probably did so after 
eventually "blending-in" with Scottish society (LONG before Christopher 
Columbus).

In my opinion, anyone who is truly interested in their lineage should have a 
male of the appropriate surname participate in the DNA test.  As a matter of 
fact, I can't even imagine anyone not participating (I would literally not 
take a million dollars for my "match results").  Unfortunately, not everyone 
can find a male with the surname of interest, and some cannot afford the 
roughly $190 for a 37 marker test.  The Davidson/Davison/Davisson group is 
in the early stages of trying to set-up a fund, to which people can 
contribute.  This fund would then be used to help pay for DNA testing, where 
needed.

DNA testing for "genealogy purposes" is still fairly new.  I think that we 
are the "pioneers" in the use this technology, and we need to get as many 
men as possible to join.....before certain "male surname lines" are gone 
forever.  I look at genealogy as just another search of history....just on a 
more individual/family level.  To "lose history" forever (or to simply 
ignore it) is always rather sad, in my opinion.  I know of "non-Davidson" 
men, as well as several Davidson and "non-Davidson" women, who would LOVE to 
find a viable male Davidson from their family who would join the DNA test, 
and many of these folks would gladly pay for the test, if such a donor was 
available, but not willing (or able) to pay.

It appears that some people do not have the proper understanding of just how 
good and reliable the Y chromosome DNA test is.  Many don't see how this 
test can possibly "zero-in" on their father's direct line, since there are 
untold numbers of other families/surnames in his "blood"/"family tree."  The 
key is, of course, that this particular test "looks" just at the common DNA 
that goes from father to son, and it essentially "ignores" all of the other 
male and female lines that we all have in our "blood"/"family trees."  That 
is why my test was able to show that I have a 99+% chance of sharing a 
common ancestor with my matching Davidson donor, despite our "most recent 
common ancestor" being all the way back in the early-mid 1700s.  This type 
of result is quite typical, so many people probably don't realize "what they 
are missing" by not joining.  Even if a person matches no one, that is still 
great information (no sense "chasing" the "wrong" family in future research 
efforts).

You mentioned the Mason family.  My Davidson family married into the Mason 
family in Charlotte Co., VA, and it appears that this Mason family came out 
of Campbell Co., VA.  Was this Mason family in the 
Charlotte/Campbell/Bedford Co., VA area related to your Mason family?

Best regards,

Bill Davidson 

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html