Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
It is wonderful that Bill started his Polk DNA project. The result that his ancestor John Polk is likely not a son of William and Margaret Taylor Polk may have surprised him, but is not an unusual occurrence for a DNA project. I am a contributor to the Allison DNA project, which has more than 18 different DNA signatures for those who share the Allison surname. Every DNA surname project that I have seen records numerous DNA signatures. I would expect a similar situation for the Polk family.
This concept of multiple DNA signatures is important, especially in light of the static, unreferenced 1848 Polk family tree. What if these early Polk family researchers had linked various Polk families together, each with different DNA, to form the one large 1848 Polk family tree? The early researchers were not aware of DNA. They just thought that every Polk was somehow related in the distant past. With DNA, the old fashion idea that everyone of the same surname is related, or somehow a "cousin", is now obsolete.
Unlike many current Polk family adherents to the old Polk family tree, I only support those portions which can be proven with clearly researched documentation. It is quite ironic, with our current genealogical resources, that everything written or said over 150 years ago, about the Polk family history, is still given more credibility by many Polk descendants, than good research done in the 21st century. Maybe the DNA concept of mutiple Polk families of different origins will address this old Polk family tree issue.
Best regards,
James Allison
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/polk/messages/2209.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|