Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Matches Coming In

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by PDHOTLEN View Post
    The surname Moore pops up quite frequently in the FF surname collections.
    Moore is the 9th-most common surname in the US.

    Take one of my ancestral names, McLean, at 668: when I get a match with this name, I'm a fair bit more optimistic than I would be with Smiths, Andersons, Joneses, Browns...

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Javelin View Post
      Moore is the 9th-most common surname in the US.

      Take one of my ancestral names, McLean, at 668: when I get a match with this name, I'm a fair bit more optimistic than I would be with Smiths, Andersons, Joneses, Browns...
      From what I've been gathering while putting my tree together, is that I have Greens, Smiths, and apparently Browns as relatives. So now I can add Moore to that list of common surnames. I recall in the Green line, that a male green married a female Green, but they don't seem to be related to each other at all. To complicate matters further, one green line stems from a non-paternal event, or whatever the expression is. That line apparently should be Norton. The non-paternal event was an extramarital female whose name I haven't been able to find out (England in the late 1500s or so).

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Javelin View Post
        Moore is the 9th-most common surname in the US.

        Take one of my ancestral names, McLean, at 668: when I get a match with this name, I'm a fair bit more optimistic than I would be with Smiths, Andersons, Joneses, Browns...

        Actually, Rodriguez is the 9th most common surname in the U.S.

        http://www.census.gov/genealogy/www/...mes/index.html

        http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/17/us/17surnames.html
        Last edited by ahernandez; 29 June 2012, 10:23 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by PDHOTLEN View Post
          I'm as confused now as I ever was, regarding my earliest known ancestress. I'm firmly convinced of a British Isles origin. But then where? Although I have a HVR1+HVR2 match in early Massachusetts (SMGF), she may actually trace to those early tobacco growers in tidewater Virginia. The surname Moore pops up quite frequently in the FF surname collections. One Moore married an Elizabeth Merritt in London, and their daughter Katherine ended up (or her descendant line) in Anson County, North Carolina!; Right where my earliest known ancestress was supposedly born. I was at that point years ago, but eventually rejected it for some reason. Hmm...
          There are many different Moore lines in NC. Just check the Moore Y-DNA project here at FTDNA. I have 2 different Moore surname lines in my family that are not related but were living near each other. Moore is a very common surname.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ahernandez View Post
            Actually, Rodriguez is the 9th most common surname in the U.S.
            Okay, so I was using the 1990 stats. You are using the 2000 stats. Does anyone have the 2010 stats?

            Comment


            • Don't think it's out yet, but I'm hoping Hernandez breaks into the top ten. In 2000 it was 15th. (Right above Moore, coincidentally.)

              Comment


              • I just got six new matches; jumped from 126 to 132 matches now. One of the new ones has a UK email. They are mostly low level matches. But that is to be expected when tracing my distant maternal (English) line.

                Comment


                • 5 for me
                  4 for my wife
                  3 for mum
                  3 for dad
                  4 for father in law

                  mum in law due soon (batch 470)

                  Comment


                  • 2 5th to remote for my mother
                    0 for me

                    Comment


                    • 2 new matches for me today.

                      Comment


                      • My dad got 11, bringing his total to 300. My results are new today and I have a total of 220. Pretty excited, like a kid at Christmas actually!

                        Comment


                        • I'm now inclined to think perhaps that my earliest known female ancestress was a Quaker or had Quaker roots. A couple of low level matches, one of which is a new match, seem to point that way. This is reinforced by looking at a relevant family forum. And it's not the first Quaker connection in my tree.

                          Comment


                          • My Mom got 6 or 7 new matches. I got 1 or 2 of hers and my cousin got 1 of hers plus 1 that neither Mom or I got.

                            Why the imprecision? One name was identical to a new match we received June 22. I contacted the person and he said did the test twice. I'm not certain why anyone would do the FF test twice within 3 weeks.

                            Carol Anne

                            Comment


                            • Mixed matches

                              Reminder you only got half your mother's DNA so if a person matches
                              her on the part you did not get then you will not a match. Same goes for your mother's sister.

                              Comment


                              • New matches came in today. First since 7/6/12 apparently.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X