Monday, December 7, 2015

THOSE ANCESTRY.COM DNA TEST RESULTS MAY SHOCK YOU

For  $100,   Ancestry.com   will  send  you  a  package  which  includes  a  vial  into  which  you  spit,   so  that  you  can  send  it  to  their  lab  which  finds  and  analyzes   your  DNA  in  your   spit  sample;  and  then  Ancestry.com   publishes  your  results  online,    in  an  easy-to-understand  format  accessible  only  to  you.

By  this  analysis,  you  quickly  learn  the  places  from  which  your  immigrant  ancestors  came,  according  to  your  DNA,  within  an  easy-to-read  color-coded  pie  chart  method.

By  this  pie  chart  presentation,  we  were  able  to  deduce  that  a  great  great  grandfather  Fuller   from  Northern  Ireland  whose  given  name  we  do  not  know  can't  possibly  have  been   a  Scotch-Irish  individual,  as  our  father  had  always  told  us,  but  rather  a  wholly  Scandinavian  individual  probably  from  the  Scandinavian   quarter  of  Londonderry.

However,  the  Ancestry.com  DNA  data   told  us  some  other  things  of  a  soapy  and  surprising  nature.

One  of  the  services  provided  by  Ancestry.com  is  that  they  give  you  a  list  of  others  whose  DNA  has  been  tested  who  are  related  to  you.

Though  it  is  a  statistical  association  --  ultimately,   in  every  case,   they  are  saying,  "Odds  are  that  you  are  related  to  this  person"  --  I  have  been  able  to  verify  the  relationship  to  even  some  of  the  most  distantly-related   people  in  Ancestry.com's  list,  because  of  a  fluke  in  my  family's  genealogy.   

We  are  descended,  in  our  family,  from  people  in  history  with  some  of  the  most  well-established  genealogies  in  the  world,  the  Pilgrims  of  the  Mayflower.   As  a  result,  our  family's  family  tree  goes  back  very  far.  When  the  list  of  people  whose  DNA  shows  that  they  are  cousins  of  ours,  according  to  Ancestry.com,  includes  someone  who  names  a  very  remote  ancestor  on  their  family  tree,   we  can  frequently  verify  that  Ancestry.com's  allegation  of  DNA  connection   even  with  such  a  person  is  substantially  reliable,  because  the  same  remote  ancestor  is  in  our  family  tree,  too.

This  reliability  of  the  work  of  the  Ancestry.com  folks   makes  significant  two  other  trends  within  their  DNA  data ...

INTERRACIAL  RELATIONSHIPS
So  far,  out  of  about  2,500  people  that  Ancestry.com  has  identified  as  being  visibly  related  to  me  on  account  of  DNA similarities  in  our  respective  DNA  test  results,   about  10  of  them  have  been  distant  African  American  cousins.


African  American  distant  cousins

African  American???!!!   But,  wait!!!  Mom!  Dad!    Aren't  I  100%  white?  You  told  me  that  all  of  my  ancestors  were  Celtic  stock  from  the  British  Isles,  France,  Belgium,  the  Netherlands,  and  Germany!

Yes,  in  fact,  they  are,  as  far  back  as  anyone  can  see  in  the  records.

However,  something  else  in  the  data  explains  why  there  are  African  Americans  whom  I  should  address  as  "blood."   (One  of  my  good  friends  is  a  former  law  client  named  Delevear.    Del  is  one  of  the  most  honest,  hard-working  people  I  know.   When  I   got  back  my  DNA  test  results  showing  that  I  have  African  American  cousins,  I  called  him  and  with  an  African  American  lilt  in  my  voice  I  greeted  him,  "Hey,  blood!"  Del,  who  is  a  really  smart  guy,  responded,  "You  had  your  DNA  checked!")

The  other  tendency  within  the  data  which  helps  to  explain  having  African  American  cousins  --  but  this  time  within  the  pedigree  charts  of  the  African  Americans  whose  DNA  verified  relationship  with  me  and  my  family   --  is  the  appearance  of  two  surnames  in  their  pedigree  charts  that  are  surnames  of  ancestors  in  my  pedigree  charts   --  Pitman  and  Snapp.

Why  would  these  two  surnames  feature  prominently  among  distant  African  American  cousins?

Because  of  this ...



Because  I  have  slave  owners  of  the  Old  South  --  of  the  pre - Civil War  South  --  among  my  Pitman  and  Snapp  ancestors.

White  owners  of  the  slaves   in  the  Old  South   regularly  "took  adulterous  sexual  liberties  with"    the  good-looking  women  and  girls  among  the  black   slaves  working  on  their  farms  and  plantations  when  the  wife  wasn't  around.

Famous  southern  Civil  War  chronicler  Mary  Chestnut  wrote ...

"God forgive us, but ours is a monstrous system of  wrong and iniquity. Perhaps the rest of the world is as bad—this only I see. Like thpatriarchs our old men live all in one house with their wives and their concubines, and the mulattoes one sees in every family exactly resemble the white children—and every lady tells you who is the father of all the mulatto children in everybody's household, but those in her own she seems to think drop from the clouds, or pretends so to think."



So,  it  is  not  surprising  that,  several  times,   the  ancestors  in  the  pedigree  charts  of   those  African  Americans  who  are  my  cousins  include  Pitman's  and  Snapp's,  the  surnames  of  the  two  families  as  to  whom  records,  beginning  with  the  Census  of  1790,  verify  that  they  were  slave-owners  on  their  farms  in  the  Old  South.

In  other  words,  the  same  southern  men  of  German  extraction  who  fathered  my  ancestors  engaged  in  "The  Southern  Vice"  --  choosing   mistresses  from  among  their  female  slaves  and  fathering  children  by  them,   who  carefully  preserved  the  memory  of  that  paternity  by  adopting  their  master's  surname.


The  most  famous  master-and-slave  couple
from  the  pre - Civil War  South,
President  Thomas  Jefferson  and  his  slave  Sally  Hemmings

Since  Ancestry.com  surely  received  DNA  samples  from  less  than  1/10  of  1%   of  African  Americans,  we  can,  with  relative  statistical  certainty,  assume  that  I  and  my  siblings  have  upwards  of  10,000  African  American  cousins.

After  the  Civil  War,   hundreds  of  thousands  of  liberated  slaves   who  had  long  since  survived  wave  after  wave  of  tropical  disease  on  the  farms  and  plantations  of  their  southern  slave  masters  came  north  with  the  returning  Union  soldiers  and  settled  in  the  cities  of  the  North,  unaware  that  many  were  carriers  of  those  tropical  diseases   and  so  bringing  the  diseases  with  them  to  the  cities  of  the  North.

And  so  we  see  the  cities  of  the  North   afflicted  with  one  epidemic  of  tropical  disease  after  another  in  the  post - Civil War  period.  More  Northerners  were  killed  by  these  epidemics  than  Southern  bullets.

My  great  grandfather   William  Samuel  Charles  Dawson  was  among  those  killed.  When  at  39  years  of  age  he  and  his  wife  Annie  Fuller  Mallon  Dawson  and  their  5  kids  were  hob-nobbing  with  the  Upper  Middle  Class   in  their  large  Uber  Street  residence  just  off  Columbia  Avenue  in  North  Philadelphia,  in  1868  to  1869,  a  boarding  house   for  liberated  slaves  was  opened  in  the  residence  next  to  his.    In  short  order,  William  Samuel  Charles  Dawson  was  dead  of  typhoid  fever.

How  ironic  it  would  have  been  if  this  ancestor  of  my  father  had  contracted  the  disease  which  killed  him  by  shaking  hands  with  a  descendant  of  one  of  the   slave-owing   ancestors  of  my  mother  who  had  had  sex  with and  conceived  a  child  by  one  of  his  female  slaves.


The  master / slave  relationship   which  was  the  context  of  such  interracial  concubinage  in  the  pre - Civil War South  does  not  permit  any  easy  distinction  between  concubinage  and  rape  by  historians:  "The  boss  says,  'Lay  down,'   and  so  I  got  to  lay  down!"  So,  if  we  ask,  "Which  was  it?  Concubinage  or  rape?,"  no  one  can  tell.

Whatever  it  was,   it  ultimately  had  a  good  result,  ironically.   It  generated  African  American  descendants  which  challenge  us  descendants  of  European  immigrants  with  African  American  cousins,  more  than   other  Caucasian  Christian  folks,  to  accept  the  concept  of  "The  Family  of  Man":    "They"   aren't  "they."    "They"  are  "us."

ADULTERY
A  few  of  the  folks  who  had  their  DNA  tested  by  Ancestry.com  and  whose  DNA  proves  that  they  are  distant  cousins   have  their  pedigree  on  the  pedigree  charts  worked  out  nearly  as  thoroughly  and  as  far  back  as  I  do.

Now,  the  list  of  DNA  cousins  which  Ancestry.com  gives  you,   and  constantly  updates,  as  more  DNA  results  come  in,    is  broken-up  into  several  groups  of  closer  and  more  distant  cousins:  

The  "4TH  COUSINS"  group,  which  itself  is  re-parsed  into  the  "EXTREMELY  HIGH  LIKELIHOOD"   group  and  "VERY  HIGH  LIKELIHOOD"  group.

This  group  includes  everyone  from  brothers  and  sisters  to   first,  second,  third,  and  fourth  cousins.

And  then  there  is  the  "DISTANT  COUSINS"  group,   which  is  again  re-parsed  into   a  "VERY  HIGH  LIKELIHOOD,"   "HIGH  LIKELIHOOD"  and  "GOOD  LIKELIHOOD"  groups.

This  group  includes  relatives  who  are  usually   in  the  4th  to  9th  cousin  range.

Now,  a  mystery  sometimes  arises  in  the  DNA  results  when  someone  is  in  the  "4TH  COUSINS"   grouping,  or  in  the  top  of  the  "DISTANT  COUSINS"  grouping,   and  also  has  an  extremely  well  done  pedigree  chart: 

 They  share  no  surnames,  at  all,  with  my  ancestors.

How  could  this  be?   There  are  several  cases  where  the  DNA  results  prove  that  so-and-so  is  a  very  close  relative,   but  yet  his  ancestry  shares  no  last  names  with  my  ancestry  on  the  pedigree  charts.

I  puzzled  over  this  for  a  few  years  --  and  then  the  obvious  explanation  dawned  on  me:

Philandering.

Liaisons.

Adultery.



Unknown  to  daddy,  some  of  the  children  who  popped  out  of  mommy   in  my  ancestors'  families  or  in  my  relative's  ancestors' families,  who  later  became  my  ancestors  or  his  ancestors,  WEREN'T  daddy's!

And,  lo  and  behold,   we  know  of  at  least  one  philandering  ancestor  on  my  mother's  side.

No comments:

Post a Comment