Project News
20 October 2009
With the results now in on a more diverse base of Kingsbury, Kingsborough, Kingsbery, 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. First let us discuss the possible Bracebridge connection. 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. Thus 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. We did keep the one Bracebridge signature that seems to confirm a link to the Kingsbury family in both groups
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. Actually we would suggest the DNA evidence indicates there are multiple Kingsbury families. However, relying upon the notion that our surname is a place name, I would propose that we all descend from families in the three locations of England that bear our name (Warwickshire, Somerset, and Herts). 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 currently have a total of 11 signatures in this group and the consistency gives us a strong indication of the DNA signature for this line. Only 2 of these participants limited themselves to the 12 marker basic test and they have a unique mutation in allele DYS#389II (30). This gives them a 11/12 match to the others in this group. Of all those in the 25 marker set the majority have a 25/25 match and only one is a 24/25 match. Three participants are in the 37 marker group and they have either a 34/37 or 35/37 match which is very strong considering the number of generations for many before there is a common ancestor.
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.
In the three 37 marker signatures, each has a subtle difference in the 26-37 marker range that seem to define the branches in the Henry line that begin with his grandchildren. This is to be expected and is a wonderful help to us in confirming lines that may be questionable. This has in fact confirmed at least one line that we were originally in question about..
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. This could mean only one of three possibilities occurred in this line:
1. There was an adoption of a male child in this branch which may or may not be supported by the proper legal documentation
2. A male child had a biological father other than the Kingsbury father that raised him and gave him the Kingsbury surname
3. A male child born was 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. Of the three sons born to James and Ann (Francis) Kingsbury in Boxford, England (Henry the Elder, Joseph, and John), only Joseph and his Nephew Henry Kingsbury jr. had any heirs. Thus it is common for us to speak of the majority of Kingsburys in America today as belonging to either the Joseph or the Henry lines..
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.
We currently have a total of 10 signatures in this group and half are 37 marker participants. This is wonderful because it tells us so much about this group. Notice the unique mutations for the descendants of Nathaniel Kingsbury (23042, 40105, and 22413) with DYS#389I (14) and DYS#389II (30). This seems to be a clear distinction from the descendants of Eleazar Kingsbury.
DESCENDANTS OF ABIJAH KINGSBURY - b. abt 1731
The next group is also descendants of Eleazar Kingsbury, but this group demonstrates several mutations, all of which seem to have occurred with Abijah Kingsbury, the Great Grandson of Eleazar. The historical evidence is strong that these participants are part of the Joseph line, but are only a 22/37 match to that line. Yet the group itself has a very strong 37/37 match amongst the group itself. Even signature #17127 (the Canadian branch) is a 37/37 match which means we all relate back to Abijah in one way or another. We have not made the specific connection for this Canadian branch yet, but we can be reasonably assured from the DNA evidence that they are closely related.
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!
IRISH KINGSBOROUGH-KINGSBURY GROUP:
We are really excited about our Irish Group as we now have a total of 5 signatures within this group and it appears that only one or two mutations separate the various participants in this group. Notice first of all that signature #45546 is a descendant of a Dorset branch of the Kingsbury family. It has long been our theory that the Irish Kingsborough – Kingsbury family originated in Dorset with three brothers immigrated to Ireland in 1690. This group seems to prove our theory and we can now speak definitively of the Irish Kingsbury Family. And the fact that these signatures are only a 26/37 match to the Henry and Joseph lines indicates that it is indeed a distinct family group. Our task now will be to find the historical records that show the common Irish ancestor.
INTERNATIONAL KINGSBURY GROUP:
We have grouped the next 8 signatures under the caption of International Kingsbury Group because we are still working to try and sort them out. About the only two that we can say are related are signatures 44386 & 44727 and they both descend from the Captain Horatio Kingsbury branch. The records indicate that Horatio was born to parents from Scotland, but we have been unable to confirm this at this point. Our theory is that before Scotland, this ancestor originated once again from one of the three Kingsbury locations in England. We say this because we all share the R1b1b2 Haplotype. The other 6 in this group may represent 6 totally different family groups and our theory would be they each will trace back to either Somerset-Dorset or Herts.
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