About us
So far only 2 separate Crumley lines have been identified, James and George, both of East Tennessee.
The original goal was to determine if the early Crumley men, James (b 1712/20 Yorkshire, England, died 1794 Frederick Co Va, married Catherine Gilkey) and George (b 1740 Germany d 1806 Sullivan Co., Tn, wife Elizabeth may be second wife), were related. Both of these men (and or their descendants) lived in Tennessee, in the Claiborne and Hancock county area, and the Lee Co Va area, at one time or another. This is partly what led us to think that they might be related, along with some similar names, and it also makes it almost impossible to tell the descendants apart after both lines entered the same geographic area.
We found a descendant of James to test, participant 1 (P1).
We found a descendant of George, participant 2 (P2).
Their DNA tests were definitive that they do NOT descend from a common ancestor, so George and James were not related.
Typically in DNA testing, we try to verify that the results are accurate by testing, if possible, from two entirely different lines from the oldest known ancestor.
Therefore, James had another son, and our third participant (P3)also represents the James line but descended from a different son than P1 descends from. This assures us that James DNA really looks the same as what P1's DNA looks like - that there was not an undocumented adoption in his line.
Since P1 and P3, the two descendants of James Crumley match (within the normal mutation expectations) match, then we know that James DNA really is what we thought it was.
A second descendant of George has not yet come forth to be tested. We would need a descendant from a different child of George,if possible. P2 descends from George's son George.
Until we are able to verify George's DNA with a second participant, we won't know for sure. However, until we are able to verify this, we will operate on the assumption that this is accurate, because it most likely is accurate.
Now, for people who might not know which Crumley line they descend from, or anyone else doing genealogy and they have hit a Crumley brick wall, they can test and see which of these lines they match. If they don't match either line, then we have a new line represented. This new line could be a different immigrant ancestor, or an undocumented adoption in either George's or James line. Paper genealogy combined with DNA results will help us determine what actually occurred.
I hope this helps unravel the discussion about DNA testing, already obtained results, and testing for new participants.
The original goal was to determine if the early Crumley men, James (b 1712/20 Yorkshire, England, died 1794 Frederick Co Va, married Catherine Gilkey) and George (b 1740 Germany d 1806 Sullivan Co., Tn, wife Elizabeth may be second wife), were related. Both of these men (and or their descendants) lived in Tennessee, in the Claiborne and Hancock county area, and the Lee Co Va area, at one time or another. This is partly what led us to think that they might be related, along with some similar names, and it also makes it almost impossible to tell the descendants apart after both lines entered the same geographic area.
We found a descendant of James to test, participant 1 (P1).
We found a descendant of George, participant 2 (P2).
Their DNA tests were definitive that they do NOT descend from a common ancestor, so George and James were not related.
Typically in DNA testing, we try to verify that the results are accurate by testing, if possible, from two entirely different lines from the oldest known ancestor.
Therefore, James had another son, and our third participant (P3)also represents the James line but descended from a different son than P1 descends from. This assures us that James DNA really looks the same as what P1's DNA looks like - that there was not an undocumented adoption in his line.
Since P1 and P3, the two descendants of James Crumley match (within the normal mutation expectations) match, then we know that James DNA really is what we thought it was.
A second descendant of George has not yet come forth to be tested. We would need a descendant from a different child of George,if possible. P2 descends from George's son George.
Until we are able to verify George's DNA with a second participant, we won't know for sure. However, until we are able to verify this, we will operate on the assumption that this is accurate, because it most likely is accurate.
Now, for people who might not know which Crumley line they descend from, or anyone else doing genealogy and they have hit a Crumley brick wall, they can test and see which of these lines they match. If they don't match either line, then we have a new line represented. This new line could be a different immigrant ancestor, or an undocumented adoption in either George's or James line. Paper genealogy combined with DNA results will help us determine what actually occurred.
I hope this helps unravel the discussion about DNA testing, already obtained results, and testing for new participants.