THE GLEASON FAMILY DNA TESTING PROJECT
There are a number of descendents of Thomas Gleason (4) - Susannah Page, who met and established frequent communication through the Internet. Currently they meet privately on a Gleason WEB page, courtesy of MyFamily.com, a genealogy based WEB site. They are related through different length branches from a common ancestor, Thomas Leeson/Gleason (4), by both male and mixed male-female lineages.
Genealogy of the Descendants of Thomas Gleason
The established links to Thomas Gleason (4) appear to be better documented than many family surname groups. Much of the early American family history was researched and published in 1909 in a book entitled Genealogy of the Descendants of Thomas Gleason by John Barber White. The book is often referred to as the “Gleason Bible.” It has been widely accepted by Thomas Gleason (4) descendants as a source for their early American roots.
Given the research and history of the Thomas (Leeson) Gleason (4) - Susannah Page family, the early Gleason genealogists concluded that Thomas (4) was likely the son of Thomas Leeson (3) and Margaret Kirton. This line descends from Thomas Leeson-Jane Lowe (2), who descends from Robert Leeson (1) and Susan Stotesbury all of Sulgrave, Northampton Co. England.
The White book does contain some errors. However, it is reasonably accurate and has no known relationship errors. John Barber White cites as a primary source, a book by Daniel A. Gleason. Except for slight location discrepancies, the books are in good agreement. White states in his introduction:
"In the English records, the name is invariably spelled without the "G", and appears, generally as Leeson, and a rather numerous family of that name lived in Northampton County, England. This, coupled with the fact that, in the earliest records in this country, those of Watertown and Cambridge, Mass., the name appears as Leson and Leason, respectively, affords grounds for the belief that Thomas of Watertown was a descendant of the Leesons of Northampton County and this belief is further strengthened by the similarity of Christian names, used by the Northampton County family and those appearing in the early generations of the American family."
The Gleason Lineage
Thomas (4) was born about 1607 in Sulgrave, Northampton, England. It is believed that Thomas’s (4) first son, Thomas (5), was born in Sulgrave, England about 1637. The parents (4) and at least one child (5) and probably an older daughter, Susannah, b. abt. 1634, are thought to have arrived in America during 1638 or soon thereafter. Their second son, Joseph (5), was born in Watertown, MA about 1642. There are many spellings of the name “Gleason” and by all accounts, Thomas Gleason (4) of Sulgrave was actually Thomas Leeson (4) at birth. The name change from Leeson to Gleason occurred for a yet unknown reason several years after their arrival in America.
What is known is that Thomas (4) was a Puritan. This gives reasonable cause for his move from England to America. The dissenter (Puritan) movement from the Church of England resulted in the settlement by over one thousand Puritans in 1630 alone and several thousand more in the years that followed to Boston, Massachusetts. Puritans were an intolerant group who did not allow any other group within their (Massachusetts) jurisdiction. Therefore, it is certain that these were English Gleasons and not Irish Gleasons since the protestant Puritan movement didn’t extend welcome to Catholic Ireland. In addition, the majority of Irish Gleasons didn’t arrive in America until the 1840s as a result of the potato famine in Ireland.
The Issue
The Robert Leeson (1) - Thomas Gleason (4) family tie was challenged in 1999 when the Gleason WEB clan was contacted by The Honourable William A. L. Stotesbury-Leeson (16), who through the Internet, questioned our claim of a tie to the Robert Leeson/Susan Stotesbury (1) family. The Hon. William A. L. Stotesbury-Leeson (16) is a well-documented descendant of Robert Leeson and Susan Stotesbury (1). He indicated that there was no reference to Thomas (Leeson) Gleason (4) in his family genealogy records.
A Possible Solution
With the advances in DNA research and its potential use to genealogists, it was proposed that it would be beneficial to investigate, via Y-chromosomal, DNA the relationship between the two family lines. The challenge would be that living descendents could establish a common relationship to an individual born over four hundred years ago.
The Project
A DNA project document was drafted, edited and approved by all the potential DNA donors from the Gleason and Stotesbury- Leeson families. Lineages of all parties involved were furnished as one outline genealogy database. During 2001, The Center for Molecular Genealogy at Brigham Young University was contacted and generously accepted to undertake the project. DNA blood donors living throughout the United States and Canada were contacted and submitted blood samples using kits furnished by Brigham Young University.
The Project Genealogical/DNA Question
Was Thomas (Leeson) Gleason (4) a natural descendant of Thomas Leeson (3) or perhaps a close common ancestor?
The Project Results
(Note: the actual DNA report has been modified for clarity and simplicity to be consistent with the overall project documentation)
The Center for Molecular Genealogy at Brigham Young University
Case Number SC2001-36 dated October 5, 2001
Objectives:
Genealogical records indicate Thomas Leeson (3) fathered 1 son, William (4). It is also suspected that this same Thomas Leeson could have fathered another son, Thomas Gleason or Leeson (4).
Direct male descendents (varying generations 14-16) of these two sons submitted biological blood samples to determine if common Y-chromosome markers could determine whether they share a common paternal ancestor in Thomas Leeson (3). In total, six individuals submitted blood samples to test these relationships.
The Principle:
Y-chromosome (Ycs) markers are inherited from father to son and remain mostly unaltered from generation to generation. This property makes the Ycs an ideal focus for genealogical studies because, barring adoption or illegitimacy, the route of the Ycs through time in a pedigree exactly parallels the surname in many western cultures. By determining a Ycs fingerprint, or haplotype, of several related male individuals, a Ycs haplotype can be created that is associated with a specific surname. This information can be used for further genealogical pursuits by allowing males with the same or similar last name to compare Ycs haplotypes and determine descent from a common paternal ancestor.
Summary of Findings:
The data indicate the likelihood that the Gleason (four DNA donors - two sibling) do share a common paternal ancestor [possibly Thomas Leeson (3)] with the Stotesbury-Leesons (two sibling DNA donors) with a high 95% Confidence probability value of 0.788.
The Path Forward
Most of the participants are still absorbing the fact that the DNA project actually established a true kinship between the two families. As far as the DNA project goes, it would have been a success even if the results revealed that there was no family connection.
The DNA project has cemented a family connection that was already blossoming on the internet. The matriarch of the Stotesbury-Leeson family seemed to know what the results would be long before the project results were known. She related that she had seen a photo of a Gleason ancestor that had been posted at the Gleason WEB site. She noted that it bore a striking resemblance to her late father-in-law. Had the project revealed that there was no family connection, the two families probably would have e-adopted one another anyway.
The DNA project sets forth a now known genealogical fact for future Leeson-Stotesbury and Gleason generations. In other words, folks, your very shakey assumptions are probably true - you don't have to delete the top end of your Gleason genealogy!
A side issue was also resolved by the DNA project: One of the Gleason participants had a very weak generation link supported only by a Sunday school record. It was the only clue that one of his ancestors even existed. A professional genealogist supposed that this
individual was probable, and also an important link to his Thomas Gleason (4) family line. In proving the continuity of this lineage, the DNA results validated the genealogist's supposition. Any break in a paternal line through adoption or other non-paternal event is not supported by DNA evidence. Even though the family name may continue through such discontinuity, the genetic line does not.
The DNA project suggests that Thomas Leeson (3) may be the father of Thomas Leeson (Gleason) (4) but it also remains that there may be another unknown Leeson that may be the actual father. What is important, is that the DNA project places the Gleason family firmly with roots across the big Pond and is truly related to the Leeson-Stotesbury family. This will give family historians solid ground to further investigate and document the missing pieces of how the two families are connected.
Acknowledgements:
Diahan L. Southard:
Diahan, formerly a microbiology major from Washington state, performed numerous technical tasks for the Molecular Biology Program at Brigham Young University (BYU). Eventually she became the contact person for the Special Cases unit of the laboratory and therefore administrator for our project. When BYU released all of it Special Cases to newly formed Relative Genetics < http://www.relativegenetics.com/ > a subsidiary company of Sorenson Companies, Diahan moved with them and continued serving our project and answering our many many questions.
Scott R. Woodward, PhD
Dr. Woodward is currently a Professor of Microbiology and faculty member of the Molecular Biology Program at Brigham Young University. He received his Ph.D. degree in genetics from Utah State University in 1984. He did postdoctoral work in molecular genetics at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute at the University of Utah. While at the University of Utah he discovered a genetic marker used for the identification of carriers and the eventual discovery of the gene for cystic fibrosis. He was also involved with the identification of other gene markers for colon cancer and neurofibromatiosis. He joined the faculty at BYU in 1989. While at BYU he has been involved with the Seila, Egypt excavation team, directing the genetic and molecular analysis of Egyptian mummies, both from a commoners' cemetery and of the Egyptian Royal mummies. His research interests include the reconstruction of ancient and modern genealogies using DNA techniques with samples from all over the world, the tracing of human population movements by following gene migrations (including both Old and New World populations) and the DNA analysis of ancient manuscripts including the Dead Sea Scrolls. He has been the Scholar in Residence at the BYU Center for Near Eastern Studies in Jerusalem and a visiting professor at Hebrew University. His work has been featured both nationally and internationally on numerous programs including Good Morning America, Discovery and the Learning Channels.
Our project has been very fortunate to have such quality technical oversight.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment