• Description of the conflicting DNA
• A deeper look at the records and what they indicate
• James' true age
• The terms of the will of Capt. William Daniel (1694) and the codicil (probably 1696)
• Subsequent actions by Capt. William
• Lifespans of the lines
• A developing answer to the DNA discrepancy via new results
• The unlikely alternative

William Daniel Sr. of Middlesex ("Capt. William") named four sons in his will: William, Robert, James, and Richard. Each is called "my loving son" and each received a relatively equal share of land. It is fairly clear from the will and other records that William Jr. and Robert are older sons from a first wife, the second wife being Jochebed. DNA tests for William Jr. and Robert match each other, while tests from James are different. Normally this would be sufficient to show that James is not a blood son. In this case, it may seem a more difficult issue, but that is in great part because of the way the results were represented in the early stages. While the matching DNA of William Jr and Robert and the record evidence that sets James apart from the other three sons are highly persuasive on their own, a test from son Richard will settle the issue for any in doubt.

What's not in doubt is that all four boys were raised by Capt. William. In the early stages of testing for Middlesex Daniel DNA, the mismatch led to discussions of the relative merits of the paper claims of the lines. This is now irrelevant because all the lines are now clearly proved by paper trail, and are further proved by DNA from multiple sons. I am now persuaded that the bloodline is William Jr. and Robert. The point of this writing is: 1) to evaluate the record evidence in terms of the idea that James is not the blood son of Capt. William, but a pregnancy brought into the marriage by Jochebed; and 2) to present new DNA evidence to possibly answer for the discrepancy and identify the surname of the natural father of James. Below are interpretations of primary source records as they show the differing status of James among the four sons.

Analyzing the records

James' birth year and changes in family order:
James was on jury duty "the first Munday" in July 1700 (=5 July 1700) and he was on the 5 August 1700 Grand Jury. So he was born before July 1679. However, Richard was documented as b. 30 September 1678; July of 1679 would be just days over 9 months later, very unlikely even if premature, thus pushing James' birth year to before 1678. Allowing any reasonable time before the Richard pregnancy makes James' birth by or before mid-year 1677.
William and Jochebed's daughter Mary d. 12 September 1678. If she was an infant (more likely than an older child dying per the Rutmans' mortality statistics for early Middlesex), she would have been born in the 1676-1677 range, thus pushing James' birth year back to the 1674-1676 range. There is a reasonable possibility that James is the first child involved with Capt. Wm's second marriage, thus possibly a pregnancy brought into the marriage by Jochebed and "adopted" by Capt. William.
Capt. William was a widower with two small boys by the early 1670s, he wasn't going to wait long to remarry and children would follow soon after, which also fits these ca1674-1677 birth years.
This birth order of the sons conforms to Capt. Wm's will as well. The traditional 1680 birth year for James was estimated by just plugging him into a perceived gap in the children, but it's not based on, or supported by, records of any kind, and is disproved by the jury duty.

The will of Captain William:
The terms of the will should be examined more critically than has been done in the past. Clauses that are out of the norm and special terms in wills are there for a reason and their significance must be included in developing the family layout. The special terms in the will of Captain William and his subsequent actions indicate that James is of a different status from the other sons.

--The residence clause for James:

"Itt Is allso my will & Pleasur y't my Sone James Daniell: shall Live upon ye land: which I have given by this my will, to my Loving Sone Richard Daniell: So long as my Loving wife Shall Live, but after her Deceas, to Remove to his own."

--The timber clause for James (added vertically to the side, but below the codicil).

"ITEM: It is my will that my son James Daniell shall have siperus timber, etc., ofe my Sone Ricd Daniell land for his own youse to build with."

The codicil:
Capt. William originally made Jochebed his executrix along with Richard and James. The original overseers named in 1694 were "Moris Cock & John Smith Sen." In the codicil William Sr. said "I propose my two Sons Will & Robt. Daniell overseers with Mr Jno Smith Sr". John Smith Sr. died before 6 April 1696 and Maurice Cocke died before 3 January 1697/8 (their probate dates). This means the codicil was written before 6 April 1696, helping to narrow down the date of Jochebed's death. After Jochebed's death, Capt. William involved his elder sons with helping to manage his estate, giving them an important job. If they were not his blood sons he would have no reason to give them such a responsibility.

The entails in the will:
In the 1694 will the following entails for want of heirs are made on the various tracts of land:
--William Jr.'s goes to Robert.
--Robert's goes first to Richard and then to James and then to the daughters.
--James' goes to James [sic] and then to the daughters. The start of this bequest has Richard scratched out and James written in. It appears that Capt. William or the writer forgot to correct the rest and the second devisee was to have been Richard and then the daughters.
--Richard's goes straight to the daughters, i.e. bypassing James. The start of this bequest has James scratched out and Richard written in.

(All too often, the published transcriptions of this will correct these paragraphs without telling us about the changes!)

The norm is to keep land in the male heirs' hands when possible: one might expect Richard's to go first to James, but James is given no chance at Richard's land even though it bounds his own tract. William Sr. intends only the one tract to go to James. William Jr. already has heirs so his entail is not going to obtain, but William Sr. does keep it in the family. Robert already has heirs so his entail also is not going to obtain, but if it should occur through the deaths of Robert's children, it first goes to the younger son Richard, and only then to James; Capt. William later undoes William Jr.'s and Robert's entails entirely as shown next.

Undoing the entails:
On 6 September 1697 William Sr. formally deeded the land he had given to his sons William Jr. and Robert and which he had already confirmed in his will. This was not really necessary as they had heirs but, just in case, William is undoing the entails of the will in writing.

These deeds include full quitclaim and defense from any potential claims, such as by the entails of the will:

"unto the possession of my Son Robert Daniell to him and his heirs Lawfully begotten of his body forever. To have and to hold to him and them peaceabley to enjoy forever, and doe by these presents Quitt all Claim by tytle or Intrest to that said land or to any part or parcell thereof from me my heirs Excrs or Admrs forever, I William Daniell Senr Gentleman of the County aforesaid doe by these presents firmly bind my heirs Executrs & Admrs to Sow defend and Keep harmless my Son Robert Daniell & his heirs or and from all maner of trouble damages [?]lett or mollestation of any person or persons whatsoever that Shall or may lay any Just lawfull Claim or tytle thereunto or to any part or parcell thereof"

It doesn't much matter whether Jochebed has died before these 1697 deeds because William had already defined and limited her dower in the will: "And It is also my further will & I do hereby bequeath to my Said dear wife a Negro woman named Anatto, over & above her Sd third part of my Personall estate She being Contented w'th ye use of my Plantation as aforesaid In full of her Dower, or thirds of all my Lands."

The plantation William had given her use of was the one where he lived (and which was going to their son Richard), i.e. she can't easily make dower claim to any of his other lands. At the time of the writing of the will, Jochebed's dower rights could have been a third of 565 acres or 188 acres, but she's being restricted to 115 acres with an extra slave to her own. If she's dead at the time of the 1697 deeds there's no need to worry anyway about her dower claims on any of William and Robert's lands. If she's alive, these deeds do further protect them from her dower claims. But I think it's likely she has died based on the dating of the codicil, and William is now spurred to override the entails in his will; the effect of which is that James is restricted to the single tract of land given by the will and no more.

Capt. William didn't change any of the entails for James or Richard by deed at this time (1697), leaving them the same. James is close to, if not over, 21 and Richard is getting close; finalizing or clarifying their lands after the death of Jochebed might have seemed a reasonable thing to do, but he didn't need to: Richard or the daughters are already the ultimate recipients in the case James has no heirs, and technically James cannot sell his 150 acres to anyone else if he has no heirs.

Lifespans of the various lines:
The lifespans of males in James' line are significantly different from those of Capt. William and the other sons. It is very important to undo here the long held myth of the birth year of William Sr. It is traditionally given as anywhere from 1625-1630. This is totally unfounded and started from the mix-up by early writers of William of Middlesex with the Williams of Over Tabley, of Wigan, etc., all of which are completely disproved. A look at the full records of William Sr. of Middlesex show a man born about 1638-1640; his life actions fall completely in line with this birth range.

Below are the DNA results for the Middlesex Daniels, including the Davis match.