Re: Summary of BARTLETT-DNA Lines as of May 2007
-
In reply to:
Re: Summary of BARTLETT-DNA Lines as of May 2007
Alice Battaglia 6/13/07
Alice;
I have to be careful what I say here - each of the BARTLETT DNA Groups are very separate and do not have a common ancestor in Colonial America, or perhaps for a thousand years. However, the fact that they all are R1b1c means that there was one man who had that particular mutation and he was the ancestor of all those BARTLETTs - I'd have to do some research, but it could have been 2000 to 20,000 years ago.Soon the National Geographic's Genographic project (a DNA study of the migration patterns of man) will be publishing maps of how our ancestors migrated - the maps will probably show when and where the mutation for R1b1c happened...
As for our ancestors in England - my DNA Group A may be misleading, and I need to make it more clear. NONE of the individuals on that list is related to any other person on that list for well over 500 years.The BARTLETTs you mentioned may relate to ONE of the BARTLETT lines in Colonial America, but they cannot (statistically from a DNA point of view) be the ancestors of more than one line. The story that all American BARTLETTs descend from Adam de BARTOLETT (or anyone one else) is a myth - by the DNA testing we've done, it proves there were many different BARTLETT lines, some which cannot relate for over 10,000 years.
I strongly encourage BARTLETTs in England, and particularly with known ancestral lines, to participate in the BARTLETT DNA Project - we have yet to find a link to our English forefathers.
Jim
Jim