|
|
Group Administrator: Kenneth Kingsbury ken.kingsbury@verizon.net
Project Surnames:
| Bracebridge | Bracebrigg | Kingsberry | Kingsbery | | Kingsborough | Kingsburg | Kingsbury | Koingsberg | | Kyngesbury |
Project Background:
We started this project in September 2003 and it is still growing. It is anticipated that the results of this project will aid in the research of all Kingsbury researchers and has been incorporated in the new book on the family published January 2005. The book is titled KINGSBURY HALL: THE GENEALOGY OF A FAMILY.
Free Web Counter |
Project Goals:
There are several goals for this project:
1) Establish the link with the Bracebridge family of Kingsbury Hall.
2) Define the major lines in the USA between the Henry line and the Joseph line.
3) Analyze the connection of the Irish, the Scottish, the Dorset, the Suffolk, and the Somerset branches of the UK.
4) Assist in placing the Canadian branch of the family.
5) Help other researchers narrow down their search parameters. |
Project News:
11 March 2008
With the results now in on a more diverse base of Kingsbury, Kingsborough, and Bracebridge participants, the specific ancestral lines are really beginning to take shape. And with each new test result, more of the mysteries and research questions are being answered. However, as with any quest of this nature, new questions are also being raised by these same results and the more participation we have the better. Our heartfelt thanks go to all that have already participated and made this study possible. And if anyone else would like to join the group, please let me know. We also invite your comments and observations on the test results and evaluations.
When we first initiated this DNA project, we had two strong theories that we wanted to test. The first theory is that there is only one Kingsbury family and that regardless of the spelling of our surname, we all have one common ancestor. The second personal theory is that our family has a biological connection to the Bracebridge family that for centuries were the lords of Kingsbury Hall in Warwickshire, England. The possible conclusions will be discussed as we examine the specific results of our DNA study.
Some historical information needs to be given here so everyone will be aware of our goals. Early in 2006 we broke the information on the Bracebridge participants out into a separate web site and everyone is welcome to study the results there. What can be said of the Bracebridge DNA project thus far is that there is definitely more that one family group with this surname currently in or from England. Recognizing the political power emanating from the village of Bracebridge in Lincolnshire around the 10th century, this does not seem all that surprising. People during this period did not have what we would recognize as standard surnames and one of the most common practices for this period was to use the village name as your surname. Surnames really did not become significant or fixed until after the Reformation in the 16th century. So when we read about Ralf of Bracebridge in 975 we know that we are reading about an important family in the village of Bracebridge just to the south of Lincoln. Then, in the year 1130, the prominent Sir Peter de Bracebridge (meaning from Bracebridge) married the equally prominent Lady Amecia de Arden, Great Granddaughter of the Lady Godiva, and they made their home in Kingsbury Hall, the great three storied manor of Kingsbury in Warwickshire. The Bracebridge family would go on to serve as the lords of Kingsbury Hall for over 450 years and as members of this great family moved to other locations they would change their surname to de Kingsbury. Thus is born the theory of a biological relationship between the present families of Bracebridge and Kingsbury. It is our opinion at this point that this theory has been neither proven nor disproved. So our quest continues!
Next we note the appearance of two prominent individuals in our family history. The first is John de Kyngesbury who appears as a prominent landowner in Kentelesworth, Dorset, England in the year 1312. Where did he come from and what is the meaning of his surname? Is there a tie between this individual and Kingsbury Hall, or could it possibly be another prominent family perhaps from Kingsbury Episcopi, Somerset, England nearby? We currently suspect it is the latter and this became a distinct Kingsbury family that may have spread to Ireland, Scotland, Australia, New Zealand, and other parts of the world. The next individual of note to our family history is William de Kyngesbury who appears as the lord of Waldycroft Manor in Little Cornard, Suffolk, England in the year 1369. Once again we are not sure where this individual came from, but there does seem to be some evidence that he had a connection to the Bracebridge family of Kingsbury Hall. We do know that he became the patriarch of a large family in Suffolk County that would eventually have emigrants by the name of Henry and Joseph Kingsbury that sailed to America in the 1630s. It is our conclusion today that we do in fact have more that one Kingsbury family because this is what the DNA study seems to be telling us. Our task now is to try and define the diverse family groups. However, it can also be said (and I would concur with this thought) that regardless of origin, we are one Kingsbury family.
HENRY KINGSBURY OF IPSWICH, MASSACHUSETTS LINE:
We now have a very strong representation of this line with the test results for #59517, #19917, #48279, #23518, #51241, #51242, #13950, #48239, #17855, and #25724. Before we begin our comments of this line we should mention an obvious, but often overlooked historical fact. Henry Kingsbury of Ipswich and Haverhill, Massachusetts is the nephew of Joseph Kingsbury of Dedham, Massachusetts and thus one generation after Joseph. We need to be mindful of this and not push to give more emphasis to either the Henry or the Joseph line as we try to establish our Modal Allele Values.
One of the first things we look for in this group is the markers that seem to distinguish the Henry line from all the other Kingsbury lines in our DNA Group. Our attention is drawn to DYS#449 with the allele value of 26 and DYS#464a with the allele value of 15 as the two markers that seem to define the Henry line. It is fantastic for future researchers that this group seems to be so consistent. Henry Kingsbury had a total of six sons and thus far we have representation from 3 of the 6 sons, namely Samuel Kingsbury his 3rd son, James Kingsbury his 5th son, and Joseph Kingsbury his 6th son. Signature #19917 does have one mutation of note in that he is the only individual thus far with the allele value of 10 in marker 439. This branch of the Henry line settled very early in Lower Michigan.
Signature #25724 expanded his test to the 37 marker results and the one significant mutation in this signature is the value of 40 in CDYb. We are measuring these mutations from our modal signature which could change as more participants use the 37 marker test.
Kingsbury #16881 deserves a special discussion here. He is not listed with the Henry Group. When this person joined the group we had very credible historical documentation that he was a member of the Henry line (Henry Kingsbury who came to America in 1630 as part of the Winthrop Fleet and settled in Ipswich, Massachusetts). The DNA test proves however that this individual has no biological connection to the others in the Kingsbury group and in fact appears to be of Scandinavian descent. With this in mind we must conclude that there can only be one of the following three possibilities. The current descendants of this branch of the Henry line must have either had 1) an adoption of a male child in this branch which may or may not be supported by the proper legal documentation, or 2) a male child with a biological father other than the Kingsbury father that raised him and gave him the Kingsbury surname, or 3) a child born where the mother never made any indication of who the biological father may have been. In the case of this Kingsbury the situation is complicated by the fact that over several generations there was only a single male child born to each family. Thus we can not have another member of this branch of the family participate in the testing to determine when this split occurred. The person involved and I have agreed that the most logical conclusion is option two and we have reasons to believe that we know when this occurred. Now the serious search is on to locate the historical evidence.
JOSEPH KINGSBURY OF DEDHAM, MASSACHUSETTS LINE:
As we begin to look at the Joseph Kingsbury of Dedham, Massachusetts line we need to again mention the fact that Joseph is the uncle to Henry and thus we will give a little more weight to this group as we determine the modal allele values. Joseph Kingsbury is the 5th of 5 sons born to James and Ann (Francis) Kingsbury in Boxford, England. Thomas Kingsbury was the first son and thus far we are not aware of his descendants. Henry the Elder was the father of our Henry Kingsbury of Ipswich, Massachusetts and apparently did not have any other surviving children. The third son, James Kingsbury is another child that we know very little about at this time and John, the fourth son, came to America with his brother Joseph, but did not produce any heirs. So for the present we have only the Henry line and the Joseph line in our DNA study.
At this point, our Joseph Kingsbury group seems to break up into three special segments. Joseph and Millicent (Ames) Kingsbury had four sons and three of these continued to produce male heirs. The second son, John Kingsbury died very young leaving only one daughter. We do not have any signatures from the eldest son, Joseph Kingsbury Jr. at this time, but the third son, Eleazar Kingsbury, and the fourth son, Nathaniel Kingsbury, and well represented.
Signatures 49025, 40517, 14307, 47764, 24598, 40671, and 44129 are of the Eleazar line and the majority show a 24/25 match to our modal allele values. Signatures 49025, 40517, and 47764 in this group are 37 marker tests and help use to establish the modal values. From all this it appears that marker CDYb is the defining marker for future testing.
The next group are also descendants of Eleazar Kingsbury, but this group show several mutations, all of which seem to occur in Abijah Kingsbury, the Great Grandson of Eleazar. We include in this group 40977, 13524, 13480, and 17127. As we look at this group the first observation that needs to be made is that all the mutations seems to have occurred with Abijah, the son of Theodore Kingsbury who is represented with signature #44129. In comparison to our modal values, there is a mutation in marker 439 (value of 12), marker 447 (value of 25), marker 449 (value of 30), and marker 464a (value of 15). These four mutations are all shared by all the descendants of Abijah Kingsbury. We also detect some interesting things happening with markers 464b and 464c, but according to our lab since we already have a mutation in 464a these additional mutations do not count. Signatures 13480 and 17127 participated in the 37 marker test as well and demonstrate additional mutations in marker GATA H4 (12), marker 607 (15), marker 576 (19), and marker CDYa (35). But what is interesting to us here is that 13480 and 17127 are a 37/37 match to one another and #17127 is our Canadian branch of the family. We have not made the specific connection yet, but we can be reasonably assured from the DNA evidence that this Canadian branch of the family will connect to the descendants of Abijah Kingsbury. Because of the mutations in this group we can now affirm that Abijah Kingsbury, the first child of Theodore and Mary (Towne) Kingsbury is not the biological son of Theodore. We are conducting further research to determine the exact parentage of Abijah, but for now we do not really know for sure. All that we can say is that Theodore Kingsbury raised him as a son and gave him the Kingsbury surname, so a Kingsbury he is!
The last section within the Joseph group is all descendants of Nathaniel Kingsbury, the fourth son of Joseph Kingsbury of Dedham, Massachusetts. This group is represented by signatures 23042, 40105, and 22413. The first thing that strikes us about this group is the consistency of the mutations in markers 389I (14) and 389II (30). Our lab tends to treat these two markers as a single mutation, but the fact that all of them share this mutation gives us a means to identify future participants in our DNA study. Next our attention is drawn to #40105 and the mutations in markers 464b (14) and 464d (16) because these mutations are unique with this subgroup and participant #40105 and #22413 are first cousins (they share the same grandfather). Two participants in this group have now taken the 37 marker test and whereas #23042 does not have any mutations in STR 26-37, signature #40105does have the mutation of 16 in marker 456.
IRISH KINGSBOROUGH-KINGSBURY GROUP:
We begin our discussion of the remaining groups with a general comment. It has become evident that we do indeed have more that one distinct branch of the Kingsbury family, but since our primary focus has been on the emigrants from Boxford in the 1630s we will use the James Kingsbury of 1562 as the modal signature. At this point in our Kingsbury DNA group I would say that we have a minimum of three very distinct Kingsbury families, and possibly even more. These others are beginning to take shape and will continue to distinguish themselves as more people participate.
We have added #89509 to our Irish participants, #13688, #23575, and #85159 even though this individual does not have a clear ancestral history making the connection to Ireland. Out of the four participants in this group we only have 2 that have participated in the 37 marker test at this point, 1 that limited their test to a 25 marker test, and #13688, which was one of the original participants in our Kingsbury group, at this time only has a 12 marker test result. However, I am excited that #13688 has decided to expand his test to the 37 marker test and we eagerly anticipate his results soon. Until these results come back we are still in a quandary as to what the modal values should be for this group. Participant #85159 poses some very interesting insights. The fact that the early ancestor here is John Brown Kingsborough (b abt 1780) from Ireland, he only has a 10/12 match to #13688 and a 21/25 match to #23575. Interestingly enough this signature is a perfect match to signature 45546 from Hampshire, England and an 11/12 match to our Bracebridge signature in 13518. With Hampshire being on the southern coast of England, this could give us a possible tie to Kingsbury Episcopi in Somerset as this is next to Hampshire and both have an affinity to Dorset. Many have tried to determine where these Irish ancestors may have originated from and this could confirm our theory that they may have come from one of the branches already established in England with our best educated guess at this time pointing us to Dorset County. Our newest participant (#89509) seems to give us another view of the Irish connection if his ancestry is in fact originally from Ireland. We are excited about the fact that this individual is a 12/12 match to #13688 which means the expansion of this participant to the 37 marker could have profound influence on this group. We shall see. #89509 is also a 22/25 match to #23575 which means there is a strong family tie here also
INTERNATIONAL KINGSBURY GROUP:
Much the same can be said about the signatures representing Scotland, #44727 and #44386. We are very excited to have these individuals join our group because this confirms that the Maryland branch of the family is tied to the total Kingsbury family and demonstrates a very ancient common ancestor. It would be great if we had more in this group. However, they do all fit nicely into the R1b1 haplotype.
Signatures 13946, 45546, and 35136 are all part of the specifically English branch of our Kingsbury family. Most of the Kingsburys of America feel their kinship to the Suffolk branch represented in 13946 because of William de Kyngesbury who appears as the lord of Waldycroft Manor in Little Cornard, Suffolk in 1369. That being said we need to reckon with the fact that this signature has a 9 step mutation from our modal signature at this time. This would seem to indicate that we are dealing with a different Kingsbury family here, but we definitely need more participation before any serious conclusions can be established here. To really point to the diversity within the family we need to look at signature 46618 listed elsewhere because this individual most definitely represents the Kingsbury family currently living in Boxford. We would expect something close, but this individual has a signature radically different from anyone else in our entire group. There is absolutely no remote possibility of a biological connection here.
BRACEBRIDGE LINK:
We have included Bracebridge test #13518 in this International Group primarily so everyone can see the possible DNA connections. We will not go into further detail here other than to once again mention that the results are inconclusive at this time. Again we desperately need more individuals to participate in the program. Those that wish to see more on the Bracebridge Project are directed to the Bracebridge Surname Group web site.
FINAL COMMENTS:
Anyone desiring the Analysis Chart for this group with the MODAL values should contact the Group Administrator directly (Ken Kingsbury).
If you have any comments on this summary I would really appreciate hearing from you. Also if you know of someone else that might like to be included in our mailing list, please let me know. If you would like to receive the invitation form to enable you to join this DNA study group by participation in the DNA testing, simply send me an email message indicating your desire and I will see that you receive an invitation. You may contact me at:
Ken.kingsbury@verizon.net |
Project Results:
| We have established the possibility of a tie between the Bracebridge family of Kingsbury Hall and the William de Kyngesburye that appeared in Little Cornard, Suffolk, England in 1368. The signatures for the Dorset, Hampshire, Ireland, and Scotland participants imply a distinct Kingsbury family. However, this is by no means definite at this time. The theory we propose here is that the Kingsbury family reaches back to about 1000 AD in Lincolnshire prior to the connection at Kingsbury Hall in 1130. |
DNA Test Results (Alleles) for Project Members
* Haplogroups in green have been
confirmed by SNP testing. Haplogroups in red have
been predicted by Family Tree DNA based on unambiguous results in the
individual's personal page. This has been placed on this GAP page for your ease
and convenience. Please note that for any predicted results we see no reason for
ordering a SNP test to confirm the Haplogroup. if a – is in the HAPLO field then
we feel that the comparative results are not clear and unambiguous and if the
kit holder wants to know their SNP with 100% confidence they may consider
ordering a SNP confirmation test.
DNA Test Results (mtDNA) for Project Members
Family Tree DNA - Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
World Headquarters
1445 North Loop West, Suite 820 Houston, Texas 77008, USA
Phone: (713) 868-1438 | Fax: (832) 201-7147
Contact Us
All Contents Copyright 2001-2004 Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
Project Background, Goals, Results and News are copyright of the specific Surname Project
|
|