DNA of the Daniel Family of Middlesex VA

January 2017 - A new test from James' line

Be notified of
page updates

it's private

powered by
ChangeDetection




William Daniel Sr. of Middlesex ("Capt. William") named four sons in his will: William, Robert, James, and Richard. We currently have DNA test results for three of these sons as shown in the tree below; lines are colored based on matching tests and the test kit numbers are included.

We are very interested in finding a descendant of Richard and are always hunting. If you can help in this quest please contact Pam.

1Cpt. Wm d. 1698 Msex, md.1 ??, md.2 Jochebed --- 2Wm Jr. d. 1723 Msex, md.1 Constance Vause, md.2 Mary Moseley 2Robert d. 1720 Msex, md. Margaret Price 2James d. 1748 Msex, md. Margaret Vivion 2Richard b. 1678 Msex, d. 1727 Essex, md. Elizabeth Wortham 3Obadiah d. 1778 VA Goochland, md. Sarah Moseley 3Robert d. 1781 Msex, md. Elizabeth Carter 3Robert 1691-1742 Msex, md.1 Elizabeth ---, md.2 Mary Meacham 3Henry 1701-1767 Msex, md.1 Mary ---, md.2 Betty --- 3James b. 1709 Msex, d. 1761 VA Cumberland/Albemarle, md. Jane Hicks 3Peter b. ca1706 Msex, d. 1777 VA Stafford, md. Sarah Travers 3Charles b. 1708/9 Msex, d. VA Orange, md. Jane Mickleborough 4Moseley 1744/5-1795 VA Goochland, md. Nanny Thurston 4Ichabod 1756-1829 VA Goochland, md. Rachel --- 4Robert 1741-1782 Msex, md. Sarah Mickleborough 4Samuel b. 1729 Msex, d. VA Orange, md. Eliza --- 4Benjamin b. 1736 Msex, d. 1774 Msex, md. Elizabeth --- 4Chesley b. 1730/1 Msex, d. 1814 NC Granville, md. Judith Woodson Christian 4Josiah b. 1743/4 VA Albemarle, d. 1811 NC Granville, md. Elizabeth Key 4James b. 1747 VA Albemarle, d. 1820 KY Christian, md. Sally Cocke 5William b. ca 1776 VA Goochland 5Travis b. Msex, d. 1805 VA Essex, md. Peggy Dillard 5Robert d. 1801 Msex, md. Phoebe Sadler 5JamesK b. 1766 NC Granville, d. 1851 MO Jackson, md. Sally Brown 5Thomas b. 1769 NC Granville, md. Elizabeth Satterwhite 5Leonard b. 1770 NC Granville, d. 1852 NC Rutherford, md. Ann Graves 5Samuel b. 1790 NC Granville, md. Elizabeth Holloway 5Benjamin d. GA Laurens, md. Lucretia Burgamy 5RobertC b. ca 1765 NC, d. GA Burke, md. Penelope Lane 6John b. VA, d. 1832/35 OH Gallia, md. Elizabeth Leadman 6Robert b. 1798 Msex, d. 1883 MO Jackson, md. Catherine Hanline 6Josiah b. 1805 NC Caswell, d. 1886 MS Union, md. Mary Denton 6JamesB b. 1808 NC Caswell, d. 1904 NC Orange, md. Jane Stuart 6GeorgeB b. ca1817 NC, d. aft1880, md. Rebecca Savage 7Robert b. 1823-28 KY, d. 1884 TX Grayson, md.1 Phoebe Tich, md.2 Nancy Elizabeth Graham 7JamesJ b. 1831 AL Green, d. 1912 TX Johnson, md.1 Mary Lytal, md.2 Mary Long 7WalterK b. 1837 AL, d. 1928 MS Union, md. Susan Dunnam 7Francis M. b. 1852 TX, d. 1927 TX Wilbarger, md.1 Pamela Jane Butler, md.2 Florence --- 8private 8Samuel b. 1878 TX Grayson, d. 1927 TX Hall 8AlvinC b. 1875 TX, d. 1956 TX Bexar, md.1 Maggie Woolridge, md.2 Louella Gage 8ClaudeW b. 1897 TX, d. 1975 TX Hood, md. Evelyn Lindly


Observations, results, answers derived from our tests

1. The mismatch:
Note that matching tests from multiple sons of a man prove his DNA "profile". The tests (in red) for William Jr. and Robert match each other, but differ from the tests (in blue) for James. For an analysis of this mismatch and a solution to the discrepancy see here.

2. The branch markers:
a. The members marked *23 show 23 at marker #447, which now defines this branch, all the other tests in red show a 22 at this marker. Any descendants of this branch can be expected to show a 23. Future testers with something other than 23 at marker #447 are almost surely not from this branch.
The current tests prove this branching marker at the level of Robert (md. Sarah Mickelborough), son of Robert (md. Elizabeth Carter), son of William Jr. The next challenge is to find a tester from a brother to this branching Robert. If he also shows a 23 at marker 447, it will show that the branch marker actually starts with their father Robert (md. Elizabeth Carter). The eligible brothers, i.e. other sons of the older Robert, are: William (1731/2-1783, md.1 Elizabeth --, md.2 Hannah Wood; John (1733-1772, md.1 Sarah Reid, md.2 Elizabeth Rice; Christopher (1736-1793, md. Mary Mickelborough).
b. The members marked *37 show 37 at marker CDYb; the modal is 36. These two tests (20231 and N75969) are from two different sons of Josiah (md. Mary Denton), but Josiah's brother shows the modal, so the mutation began with Josiah. Descendants of this branch can be expected to show a 37.
c. The members marked *17 show 17 at marker 458; the modal is 15. See #4 below for more information about the proposed line which probably makes this a branch marker for Obadiah.

3. A reverse mutation (AKA aback-mutation)!! Test #400169 should, by all rights, show a 23 at marker 447. That branch marker, shown as *23 in the tree, was established by tests 142779 and 119371. But somewhere down the line from Samuel down to the tester #400169, the 23 mutated BACK to the 22 that is the norm for Middlesex Daniel yDNA.

4. Finding the correct fit, correcting previous errors in identification:
a. Tests #20231 and N75969, representing James J. and Walter K. Daniel, show DNA supporting the almost certain place of their father Josiah Daniel (b. 1805, md. Mary Denton) in the family of James K. Daniel, son of Josiah Daniel. There is already much evidence for this, location and dates, various namesakes, the presence of an unnamed son in early census that fits, etc., but migration at a critical age for this younger Josiah means that one necessary record that clinches it is still to be found. However, the DNA match makes this placement of Josiah almost certain.
b. Like the test of Josiah (#20231) described above, the test representing George B. Daniel (marked "anc.dna") shows DNA supporting his almost certain place in the family of James K. Daniel, son of Josiah Daniel. There is already much evidence for this, location and dates, various namesakes, the presence of an unnamed son in early census that fits, etc., but migration at a critical age for this George B. means that one necessary record that clinches it is still to be found. For a very good description of the evidence see the discussion at rootsweb about this George B.. The DNA match makes this placement of George B. almost certain.
c. Test #143930 resolves a longstanding confusion over various William H. Daniel's of Alabama and Georgia, all born in close years (ca 1826); the correct William H. has now confirmed his place as the son of Samuel Daniel and Elizabeth Holloway and thus his Middlesex ancestry by DNA! See Jan's fuller info and happy announcement here!
d. Test #48481 represents James Daniel (1747-1820) who md. Sally Cocke. In his counties of Christian KY, Person NC, and Granville NC there is always another (often more than one) James Daniel. Old works melded them and made errors in placing the various James's, resulting in some very "creative" genealogies. These errors became so "written in stone" that, even when the different James's were eventually distinguished by research into their lands, ages and other data from the records, it didn't seem proof enough to overturn the old errors. DNA finally placed this James (48481) in his correct line, as the record evidence showed. For further details on this work see "James Daniel is the Son of James of Albemarle".
e. Test #513064 represents Charles, son of Charles, son of James and Margaret (Vivion) Daniel. The tester had been unable to get recent family information and records were simply not available. The test showed he belonged in this line and he was finally able to obtain the one piece of information needed to trace back accurately!

5. Using a special mutation to propose a likely line membership and a potential branch marker AND digging deeper into the records to prove:
Test #223826 arrived with the oldest documented ancestor as John Daniel, b. VA, md. 1832 in WVA Kanawha to Elizabeth Leadman (b. ca 1815). John d. young in 1832-1836, leaving only one son. The son Christopher Columbus Daniels and all further descendants consistently go by Daniels. The two step mutation at marker 458 made this tester a very likely descendant of Obadiah, s/o William Jr., s/o Capt. William. A one step mutation on this test could merely be used to suggest a relation to Obadiah, but it could also have represented a mutation that could have happened in any of the other branches.
Obadiah had four sons, Moseley, John, Ezekiel, and Ichabod.
By elimination, Ichabod is not the ancestor, his descendants are well documented and the entire family goes to TN after Ichabod's death.
Ezekiel d. before 22 Jun 1790 when his will was probated. His estate goes to his siblings and their heirs, i.e. he died unmarried and childless.
John had a son Garrett, but it currently looks like he may have also gone to TN (this idea still needs more proof).
Moseley had three children, William, Sarah, and Mary. Moseley died ca 1795 and his children are named in a chancery suit in 1801 regarding their uncle Ezekiel, with William representing himself and his underaged sisters. William drops out of the Goochland records before 1830. Sister Sarah md. Francis Blankenship in 1809 VA Goochland, and it looks certain that they moved to WVA Kanawha before 1830. Brother William had several children, including sons in the right years to be this test's ancestor John who also md. in WVA Kanawha. My theory was that we were looking at the herding of some family members: Sarah (Daniel) Blankenship and her brother William (or maybe a son of William) went to WVA Kanawha together. This drove us to the tax records which had not been examined, both in VA Goochland and in WVA Kanawha. The two records show a perfect migration of father William and his children. The lists also reveal the names of other sons of William: Micajah, Leonard M., and the John of the test.
This test was originally shown with a broken "proposed" line from William to John - that has now been solidified, but I've left the expanded lineage because of how this test and breakthrough occurred.

6. Linking a line from both directions:
Test #236042 - The descendants searching back were not going to be able to break through out of KY: the records there stop with a Leonard b. in Virginia ca 1793. This Leonard appears in Daviess County KY and then back to Shelby County, where at least three different Daniel lines met up, meaning it might have been possible to erroneously "assign" their Leonard to the wrong line. This Leonard's children do show some interesting namesakes for Middlesex, e.g. Josiah (a son of Benjamin), so Middlesex was an interesting possibility to look at.
At the same time the searchers of descendants of Benjamin of Middlesex come to a stop with his son Leonard b. before 1765. This older Leonard disappears from the Middlesex records by 1791, but where to? The 1810-1820 census only shows one Leonard the right age to be the Leonard son of Benjamin who left Middlesex; he's in Shelby KY and has a son the correct age to be the younger Leonard described above. A young Leonard married Maria Cox in 1826 in Shelby and he is there in 1830 with a new wife and child and an older woman (i.e. could be a mother), then this younger Leonard disappears from the Shelby records right as a Leonard of the same age shows up in Daviess KY. The wife of this Leonard in Daviess turns out to be Maria. It makes sense that the young Leonard of Shelby is the young Leonard of Daviess. But we couldn't just declare the two Leonards to be father and son without another major piece of linking evidence, and it was provided by the matching DNA!

7. Getting on the right track:
Tests #13086 and #20707 have previously been thought to come from other lines, but their match shows them to be somehow related to the Middlesex Daniel family. Although there is still a ways to go to find how they fit into the family, at least the searchers now know in which direction to head and which erroneous lines they can now discard.
Placing these tests directly into Middlesex families has proved difficult thus far and the research on them has led both to some burned counties in NC and SC, breaking through has not been possible to date. One question to ponder is whether it's possible these tests actually come from a related line that didn't start in Middlesex, but arrived at a different time and place.


Below are the DNA results for the Middlesex Daniels. The branch mutations at markers #458, #447, and CDYb are shown in bold and outlined together. The back mutation described above is shown as *22*. The significance of the 66/67 Davis match is explained here (This is the same article mentioned and linked to in #1 above.).

Ancestor, remarks

Kit #

H
a
p
l
o

3
9
3

3
9
0

1
9

3
9
1

3
8
5
a

3
8
5
b

4
2
6

3
8
8

4
3
9

3
8
9
-
1

3
9
2

3
8
9
-
2

4
5
8

4
5
9
a

4
5
9
b

4
5
5

4
5
4

4
4
7

4
3
7

4
4
8

4
4
9

4
6
4
a

4
6
4
b

4
6
4
c

4
6
4
d

4
6
0

G
A
T
A

H
4

C
A
II
a

C
A
II
b

4
5
6

6
0
7

5
7
6

5
7
0

C
D
Y
a

C
D
Y
b

4
4
2

4
3
8

by sons of William Jr d. 1723 Msex


Obadiah d. 1778 Goochland > Moseley > William > John
    d. 1832/35 WVA Kanawha

223826

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

17

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Obadiah d. 1778 Goochland > Ichabod

100256

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

17

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Robert d. 1781 Msex > Robert > Travis

142779

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

23

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Robert d. 1781 Msex > Robert > Robert > Robert > Robert > private

119371

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

23

16

20

26

12

14

15

15













Robert d. 1781 Msex > Robert > Robert > Robert > Robert > Samuel

400169

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

*22*

16

20

26

12

14

15

15













by sons of Robert d. 1720 Msex


Robert 1691-1742 > Samuel 1729-ca 1798 NC

126627

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Robert 1691-1742 > Benjamin 1691-1742

236042

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Henry 1701/2-1767 > Robert 1744-1784

108355

I1

13

22

15

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

James d. 1761 > Chesley 1730/1 VA-1814 NC

40078

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

James d. 1761 > Josiah > James K. > James B.

20230

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

James d. 1761 > Josiah > James K.-
   probable son of James K. = Josiah > James

20231

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

37

12

10

James d. 1761 > Josiah > James K.-
   probable son of James K. = Josiah > Walter

N75969

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

37

12

10

continued

11

8

15

15

8

11

10

8

9

10

12

22

25

15

10

12

12

16

8

13

27

20

13

13

11

12

11

11

12

11




James d. 1761 > Josiah > James K. > prob son Geo B.

172081

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

continued

11

8

15

15

8

11

10

8

9

10

12

22

25

15

10

12

12

16

8

13

27

20

13

13

11

12

11

11

12

11




James d. 1761 > Josiah > Thomas

176514

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

James d. 1761 > Josiah > Leonard

N86320

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28


























James d. 1761 > Josiah > Samuel > William H.

143930

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

35

12

10

continued

11

8

15

15

8

11

10

8

9

10

12

22

25

15

10

12

12

16

8

13

27

20

13

13

11

12

11

11

12

11




James d. 1761 > James 1747 VA-1820 KY

48481

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

unknown connection to Msex


Benjamin NC-GA, md. Lucretia Burgamy

13086

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

Robert C. NC-GA, md. Penny Lane

20707

I1

13

22

14

10

13

14

11

14

10

12

11

28

15

8

9

8

11

22

16

20

26

12

14

15

15

11

9

19

21

15

15

16

19

35

36

12

10

continued

11

8

15

15

8

11

10

8

9

10

12

22

25

15

10

12

12

16

8

13

27

20

13

13

11

12

11

11

12

11




by sons of James d. 1748 Msex


Peter > Travers

4163

R1b1b2

13

23

14

10

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29


























Charles > Charles

513064

R1b1b2

13

23

14

10

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

16

9

9

11

11

24

15

19

30

15

15

18

18

11

11

19

22

15

14

18

17

39

39

12

12

continued

11

9

15

16

8

10

10

8

10

10

12

22

23

17

10

12

12

15

8

12

22

20

13

12

11

13

11

11

13

12




Charles > Thomas

59830

R1b1b2

13

23

14

10

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

16

9

9

11

11

24

15

19

30

15

15

18

18

11

11

19

22

15

14

18

17

38

39

12

12

continued

11

9

15

16

8

10

10

8

10

10

12

22

23

17

10

12

12

15

8

12

22

20

12

12

11

13

11

11

13

12




Samuel Davis 1799-1865 KY Nicholas

93703

R1b1a2

13

23

14

10

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

17

9

9

11

11

24

15

19

30

15

15

18

18

11

11

19

22

15

14

18

17

38

39

12

12

continued

11

9

15

16

8

10

10

8

10

10

12

22

23

17

10

12

12

15

8

12

22

20

12

12

11

13

11

11

13

12




Daniel surname, no info but potential match

N73223

R1b1a2

13

23

14

10

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29




























PLEASE - If you are a Daniel male, or have a male Daniel relative, please join the DNA project and help all Daniel searchers in their quest! The join site is here.
If you know you are a Middlesex Daniel or if your results match any of ours, I also hope you'll allow me to include them on this page.


Comments or connections?
Email me at

(Sorry, have to copy by hand, the harvesters and spammers have gotten to be too much.)

Return to my main Genealogy Page












































































Coupon Offer Codes