This
page contains two notes. Scroll down to each of them:
LeStrange/Strange/Strang/Stronge/Strong
DNA Study Note #01:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Capezza"
To: "David B. Strong"
Sent:
Subject: Re: Preliminary Update re DNA Study
David,
I was interested in your comments about the HG2 grouping. If my
speculations are correct, the Stranges of New Kent,
VA can trace their lineage back to the LeStrange line
in
Wales are hard to find.
I believe that one of the Robert Stranges that fall
in my line is the younger son of Henry LeStrange and
Katherine Drury (the names Drury, Henry and Robert Strange repeat throughout
our line). "Sir Roger L'Estrange, Knight.
Esquire of the body to King Henry VII, high sheriff of Norfolk in the 11th year
of Henry VI, 1495, buried under the raised tomb in the middle
of Hunstanton church." (ob., s. p. 27, Oct.
1506, Weaver's Funeral Monuments, p. 822, his will bears dates.) was the eldest son of Henry, who inherited the title and
lands in
The LeStrange/Strange line that I beleve
we are linked to is: (John Strange1635 Devon, John Strange1570 Devon, John
LeStrange1547 London, Edmond 1527 Norfolk, Thomas 1494 Norfolk, Robert 1460
Norfolk, Henry 1437 Norfolk).
The use of the LeStrange name switched to L'Estrange and to Strange in the1500's, different members
of the family choosing to use the different spellings. It should be noted that John Mayer disputes
this in his “Hypotheses of Hunstonian Descent” in Extraneus, p. 103-110)
Since the LeStranges were most certainly Normans and,
since the Roman Empire was certainly spread throughout Western Europe, the
connection could very well exist to some Southern European lines. As I
noted, the above lineage is not
thoroughly proved at this point, since I have yet to trace the movement of
I'm still working on this part of the line, but I am more directly involved
right now in determining the missing link in the American line that makes the
connection of Henry (1780) to the line leading back to Alexander (1651) who is
definitely the son of the John Strange (1635) above.
Thanks for keeping us up to date and sharing all the neat data you're
collecting!
============================================================
Editor’s Note: Re tracing the lineage of the Norman LeStrange families, see:
Patrick Harris’ Genealogy of the LeStrange Family
============================================================
============================================================
LeStrange/Strange/Strang/Stronge/Strong
DNA Study Note #02
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Capezza"
To: "David B. Strong"
Sent:
Subject: Re: New DNA Test Results Posted for a Group Member
David…
…..I did note one match in the FTM database with 25 out of
25 markers. That was a surprise, since
the name is Mitchell, not either Strange or Strong. I am going to pursue
this lead, since there is a Mitchell in our tree who married my G-G-grandfather's
half-sister and this looks to be a close tie to us.
I look forward to seeing more results over the coming weeks and years. I
think this trend of research is producing some pretty amazing information, even
if it hasn't done anything for me so far but tell me that we have a unique haplotype to date.
==========================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Capezza"
To: "David B. Strong"
Sent:
Subject: Re: New DNA Test Results Posted for a Group Member
Well, my initial contact with that Mitchell who shares 25
out of 25 of my brother's haploids is very interesting. He traces his
ancestry back to New Kent County, VA and the Stranges
that come from that area are the ones to whom I believe my branch of the family
is related. In addition, the first of those Stranges
to have emigrated to
married to Phebe Chandler Mitchell. There are
several subsequent marriages between Stranges and Mitchells in VA in the succeeding generations.
This increases my belief that my Henry Strange (1780) is a descendent of John Strange and Phebe
Mitchell of
generations. Also interesting is the fact that the Mitchell man who
matches so closely to my brother does not match any of the other Mitchells who have been tested.
Thought you might be interested, even though it doesn't fit with the Strong
line.
=========================
The following excerpt from “Facts & Genes”
See: (http://www.familytreeDNA.com/facts_genes.asp) ; may be of interest here:
“Why would someone with a different surname match your Y DNA
result? Many
different situations could have occurred in the past that caused this
result. These situations are described below.
”1. Adoption: In the past, when a woman
was widowed with children, and
remarried, the children would often take on the surname of the new
husband. There were not formal adoption proceedings, as we have today.
The children simply started using the surname. If this informal adoption
occurred during the time period of recorded records, genealogy research
may uncover evidence of the event, such as you find the children births
recorded under one surname and the children's marriage under the mother's
second husbands surname. DNA testing can be used
to identify the adoption
event in your tree for further genealogical research.
”2. Extramarital event: It has been
estimated that between 2 and 5 % of
all births are extramarital births. DNA testing can be utilized to
isolate the extramarital birth.
”3. The two participants had a common ancestor
preceding the adoption of
surnames.
”4. One of the participant's ancestors changed
their name for some reason.
The reasons are as varied as the ancestors, and could range from a
phonetic difference in a new country, to personal preference. On
occasion, if the wife's line was ending due to the lack of adult males,
her husband would take on her surname to continue the Line.
”5. An orphan was given a randomly selected
surname.
”6. Convergence: Mutations over time led
to two different surnames having
a matching result today. A detailed explanation of Convergence is
available in Facts & Genes, Volume I, Issue 5, at the Family Tree DNA web
site:
http://www.familytreeDNA.com/facts_genes.asp?act=show&nk=1.5
“
Editor’s Notes: There are a few thoughts arising
out of the foregoing notes:
1) perhaps the Mitchell contact might want to associate with our study
2) perhaps the Mitchell contact
might have additional info which could be shared re the
joint Strange-Mitchell history which might shed light on the research?
3) this might pose an interesting example for the
"doubtful" out there
about how DNA testing can turn up interesting and potentially useful info...
certainly our participant and the Mitchell contact now have another whole line
of
inquiry to pursue...
4) there may be some Strange contacts in
5) Participant’s belief
about Henry's antecedents in
So, we have a Strange participant who can directly trace
lineage to a Henry Strange in the early days of the colonization of
Our present participant would be very interested whether a DNA match can be
established.
===========================================
USE Back Button to
return to DNA Study Results page!