BS: DNA at Jamestown

Subject: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 15 Jun 05 - 04:41 PM

A thread started during the brief "tween" period seems to have disappeared. I copied the following from Shanghaiceltic's original post, and my reply. The URL shown in my notes goes to another thread, so apparently this one was lost when the older thread with the same record id came back.

Sorry, but I didn't get a couple of later brief comments copied. I do recall that gargoyle contributed a typically wry witicism in response to a flippant(?) comment by someone, but I believe there were only about 5 or 6 posts when it disappeared.

Obviously, it would be appropriate to merge or delete this one if the original reappears.

ORIGINAL:
Subject: BS: DNA links to Jamestown
From: Shanghaiceltic - PM
Date: 14 Jun 05 - 07:46 PM

Saw this online, amazing how things can be traced using DNA. Any Catters from the Jamestown area or nearby?


Suffolk skeletons hold key to riddle of US pioneer
By Roya Nikkhah and Charles Laurence
(Filed: 12/06/2005)

Archaeologists are to exhume the remains of two British women buried 400 years ago, believed to be relatives of a founding father of the United States.

Scientists will compare DNA from remains thought to belong to Bartholomew Gosnold, the English explorer, with bone samples from his sister and niece, buried in Suffolk.

Capt Gosnold is thought by many historians to have been instrumental in the establishment of the first English settlement in North America at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607.

The dig, which begins tomorrow, will be led by American archaeologists from the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, which recently discovered the skeleton of a 17th-century sea captain at what is thought to be the site of the Jamestown settlement.

Dr William Kelso, the association's director of archaeology, said: "We are confident that the remains excavated at Jamestown are those of Gosnold.

''If we can find matching DNA, we can confirm the identity of this great man and raise awareness about his contribution to the founding of the United States.

"Gosnold was one of the most influential leaders of the Jamestown colony, which eventually gave birth to the development of the United States. America's English language, rule of law and government all evolved from his pioneering efforts."

Archaeologists from the association and Suffolk county council will excavate first at All Saints Church in the village of Shelley, where records show that Elizabeth Gosnold Tilney, Gosnold's sister, is buried.

Samples will also be taken from a vault at St Peter and St Mary Church in Stowmarket, 20 miles away, which is the resting place of Katherine Blackerby, Gosnold's niece.

The genetic samples from Gosnold's descendants are needed because skeletal DNA can be traced best through maternal relatives.

Dr Joanna Martin, a historian specialising in Suffolk genealogy, assisted the project by studying hundreds of documents, including wills and church records, to uncover the resting place of Gosnold's sister and niece.

"There is strong documentary evidence to suggest that the women buried in these churches are his direct descendants," she said. "If their DNA matches that of the remains in Virginia, it will be an important discovery in identifying one of North America's first settlers."

Gosnold grew up at Otley Hall in Ipswich and attended Cambridge University before studying law at Middle Temple in London. In 1602, 18 years before the Mayflower's voyage, he sailed to what was to become New England on his ship Concord.

During that journey, he named Cape Cod after fish that he found there, and Martha's Vineyard, the island of the southern Cape coast, in remembrance of his daughter who died in infancy.

Five years later, he returned to America aboard the Godspeed and established Jamestown. However, Gosnold's role as a key founding father remained largely unrecognised as he died from a fever three months after arriving at Virginia, at the age of 36.

A spokesman for the Diocese of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich said: "It is very exciting that we might finally be able to solve the 400-year-old mystery of what happened to the Suffolk boy who went on to become one of the founders of the United States."


Subject: RE: BS: DNA links to Jamestown
From: JohnInKansas - PM
Date: 14 Jun 05 - 10:31 PM

Close, but probably no cigars. The genealogical records give me a pretty positive trace to some "Godbey" (and Tugwell/Tuggle) family members who were in England ca. 1585 or before - and died here in the very early 1600s, but no precise record when the crossed over and in most cases only vague records of when/where they died. A couple seem to have been here by 1605 or 1607 or so, from land records, so maybe they knew the ol' boy; but no records of it in the family heirlooms (or the family fruit o' the looms far as I know).

There is an ongoing project at the National Geographic DNA Trace Project to test large numbers of people to see if maternal lines can be developed. Might be of interest to some, although it's not "free," which disqualifies me. Several smaller projects have been reported, but this one is apparently still open for new subjects/volunteers. My sister has indicated she may get into this one, so maybe I can steal her results.

John

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 15 Jun 05 - 05:08 PM

JohnInKansas,
   What you relate in your post is so exciting to me and other members of "The Popham Dig." You really have to contact Jeffrey P. Brain, the Director of Archeaology at the "Fort St. George" archeaological examination at Popham Beach, Maine. He can be reached at the Archeaolocical Lab at the Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusettes, USA.
   The Popham Colony was the sister colony to Jamestown in New England...1607 which was still called Virginia at that time. George Popham led over 100 men to settle on the coast of Maine, a highly contested beachfront between the French and English. I must say no more now that I have wetted your appetite.

Thank you

Peter

Fort St. George
weboftime.org or com.

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 16 Jun 05 - 11:59 PM

Refresh

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 12:16 AM

My roots are there.... (according to their disclouser.)

I am no better or worse that another side traces to the "Mayflower."

It is not "who your family was"does.

Sincrely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 12:22 AM

Popham just drifted away, though, didn't it? The fellow in charge got bored or went broke--so he sailed back to England and married a rich woman and stayed there, didn't he?

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 02:35 AM

I don't recall seeing Gosnold's name in any of the few records I've come across, although it would be easy to have missed him since I wasn't looking specifically for him. There are any number of fascinating tales in some of the genealogy site records. Some people post entire books, quite often the ones they've written for themselves. The gen records do give a somewhat different view of early settlers than one probably got from schoolbook history lessons.

The first cited research effort does raise some questions of methodology. When someone goes out looking for evidence to "prove" a theory they've already pretty well made up, the results always seem to have a bit of a of an "aroma" about them. Of course, we'll have to wait for the final press release to decide whether to trust the conclusions. It usually comes down to whether you trust the ones who did the research, and those involved do seem "impressively credentialled" and serious in their purpose.

On paper only of course, I can claim an ancestor who was on the 1608 **passenger list on the "Deliverance" out of London; but I'm not sure that outweighs the numerous and more recent "untraceables" who - probably for good reasons - just weren't too anxious to have anyone know where they came from (or where they were going next). A close but separate line appears in "Middlesex VA" records ca. 1634 or so, but with no indication of when they might have arrived. Both lines are "believably documented" but one never knows for sure.

** Almost anyone in the US for a few generations can make the same claim. Most of us can't really prove it.

In some ways, LiK has it a lot simpler, since most of her ancestors came over recently enough, and at fairly well known times, to be recorded in Ellis Island records - with confirmable links back to European record sources (we'll ignore the pundit who says "where they could read and write").

Fascinating - but not critically important to most of us.

John

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 05:15 AM

It is the first time the Church has allowed exhumation for other than forensic tests.
The historical research was judged to be of sufficient importance.
Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: Rapparee
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 09:30 AM

Gosnold also discovered the Elizabeth Islands and Martha's Vineyard. Without Gosnold folks like the Clintons and the Kerrys and even Republicans wouldn't be able to go to "The Vineyard" for the Summer.

Yeah, I know and you know that those Islands weren't really lost. He sorta bumped into them. There were folks living on them already, too.

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 09:48 AM

He named Martha's Vineyard and Cape Cod.
(One of them was after his wife)

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 09:35 PM

He married a fishwife?

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: Rapparee
Date: 17 Jun 05 - 09:40 PM

Oh, come on! You know he was only coddin'!

Subject: RE: BS: DNA at Jamestown
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 01:23 PM

As I recall, it appears Gosnold may be at least as prominent a leader of the Jamestown colony as John Smith. Of course Smith blew his own horn a lot more effectively. I'm sure it helped that Smith did not die in Jamestown at age 36.