THANKSGIVING SALE: SAVE UP TO 40% ON ANCESTRY TESTS — FAMILY FINDERY-DNA, & mtDNA  •   ENDS 11/28

B(a)(o)ugh(a)n

  • 98 members

About us

Last updated August 11, 2009. We have forty-two members, forty kits have been returned to the lab and thirty-nine sets of results for the Baughan family DNA study. We have invited into our project several men with surnames other than Baughan, Baughn, Boughan and Baughen. We currently have several Farris/Ferris/Faris men, a few Stones, a few Vaughans/Vaughns, a Pike and a Baugh. The study results so far clearly show three distinct Baughan male lineages. The earliest proven ancestral line is that of James and Thomasin Boughan of Essex County, Virginia. Descendents of James and Thomasin Boughan of Essex County, Virginia Ten of our forty members with tested results have received their y-chromosome DNA through the Essex County Boughan lineage. You can take a look at a graphic representation of our Essex County Boughan results by clicking "Essex_County_Boughan_dna_results". You can view the pedigrees of our James Boughan descendents by clicking on "james_boughan_pedigree.pdf".  Of these ten Boughan descendents, their place in the James and Thomasin Boughan lineage is fairly well documented for three of them. We recently had a new member transfer into our study from the Genographic Project sponsored by National Geographic.  He is part of the same branch of the family as Lorene Barker. His family can be seen as persons 324, 3248 and 32481 in Lorene Barker's book, which can be viewed here. We now have another descendent of the Henry Baughn branch of the Aristipus Boughan family. He can be viewed in Lorene Barker's book as person number 3217515. A descendent of Mordecai Baughan of Culpepper County, Virginia has received his results. Both Lorene Barker and Thomas Moore have determined that Mordecai is a descendent of James and Thomasin Boughan through their son, Henry. Our Mordecai Baughan descendent believes that this is his ancestry as well, with the caveat that the paper trail is not established after Mordecai. The actual test results show a 36 of 37-marker match between our Mordecai Baughn descendent and our original two Essex County Boughan descendents. This proves Mordecai's descent from the Essex County Boughan family. Recently, we gained a new member whose paper trail leads him back to Mordecai, as well. Our Richard and Juriah Baughan of Hanover County, Virginia descendent matches 34 out of 37 markers with our two Essex County Boughan members. His place in the Essex County Boughan family lineage has not yet been determined. Future new member test results may allow this member to identify his exact line of descent. We have a member whose ancestry traces back to Ben Baughan of Caroline County. The DNA results definitely establish this line’s descent from the common ancestor of the Essex County Boughans. We have also recently had a Vaughn man join our project. He traces his ancestry to Hundley Vaughn of Halifax County, Virginia.Descendents of Tucker Baughan of Cumberland County, Virginia You can take a look at a graphic representation of our Tucker Baughan results by clicking "Tucker_Baughan_family_dna_results". You can view the pedigrees of our Tucker Baughan descendents by clicking on "tucker_baughan_pedigrees". Three of our members have documentation that indicates their descent from Tucker Baughan of Cumberland County, although the records do not provide conclusive evidence of which son of Tucker Baughan is their true ancestor. One is a descendent of Silas Baughn of Haw Ridge, NC and the other is a descendent of Peyton Baughn of South Carolina/Georgia/Alabama. Our Peyton Baughn descendent and our Silas Baughn descendent have matched exactly on all 37 markers except a micro-allele on marker 458. This indicates that they absolutely share a recent common ancestor. It is universally agreed that Tucker Baughan of Cumberland County, Virginia is their common ancestor. None of our Tucker Baughan descendents, however, match our Essex County, VA members. Two of Tucker's sons moved to Georgia in the 1790s -- Joseph and Edmund. Joseph moved to Oglethorpe County. Peyton was the son of Joseph and moved to northern Alabama. John Baughan remained in Oglethorpe and his family was there into the 1900s. Edmund passed through Oglethorpe and ended up in Meriwether County. We have a test of a fully documented Tucker Baughan descendent through a descendent of Edmund Baughan, son of Tucker Baughan which proves the common ancestry of these men through Tucker Baughan. The results of the 37 for 37 marker exact match indicate that the Peyton Baughn of Alabama descendent very possibly was the great grandson of Tucker Baughn. We are eagerly awaiting any paper trail connections that these two men are able to make. Most recently, our two Tucker Baughan descendents have learned of a 36 of 37 marker match with a descendent of Joseph (1740-1750 - ?) and Ann (Payne) Vaughan of Goochland, Bedford and Franklin Counties. Joseph and Ann Vaughan had a daughter born 1772 they named Ann Tucker Vaughan. This match is significant and interesting because this is the first time that a definite connection has been established between Baughans and Vaughans. In early Virginia records, especially in Henrico and Goochland Counties, the Baughans were frequently recorded as Vaughans. Apparently, the opposite was true. I have had a long term dialog going with the cousin of our Vaughan descendent trying to determine if our families were really Vaughans or if her family was really Baughans. I'm not sure that we have resolved the question, but we have certainly established that a common ancestor relationship existed. You can view a graphic representation of the probability of a common ancestor between this Vaughan descendent and our Tucker Baughan descendents by clicking here. Our most recent Baughan member, whose DNA proves common ancestry with the other Tucker Baughan descendents, has ancestry that traces back to Granville County, NC in the years just prior to the Civil War. From just after the end of the Civil War, this Baughan family lived in southwest Lunenburg County and eastern Charlotte County. The DNA proves that they are a distinct family from the descendent of Joseph Baughan of Lunenburg County, whose line of descent is from Littleberry Baughan. Another interesting story is developing about our Tucker Baughan of Cumberland County, Virginia descendents. Based on 25 markers tested, two of our study participants match exactly a man identified as Houston no. 8, are a genetic distance of 1 from Houston no. 12. Only Houston no. 12 has been tested for all 37 markers and he is a genetic distance of 3 from our two Tucker Baughn descendents based on those 37 markers. By my count, our two Baughn members can trace back 7 generations, including themselves, to Tucker Baughn of Cumberland County, Virginia. While our Tucker Baughan family historians have not identified his parents, they believe that the 8th generation Baughn probably lived in Virginia. Early migratory patterns seem to indicate the possibility of a Gloucester County or New Kent County connection for Tucker Baughn. The probability of a common ancestor after 8 generations between Houston no. 12 and our two Tucker Baughn descendents is 47%; less than a coin toss. The probabilities are represented in this chart. The probability of a common ancestor within 12 generations is 75% and 16 generations is 90%. If Tucker Baughan was the 7th generation from our two Baughn descendents and he was born around 1741, then 12 generations, with a 75% probability of a common ancestor, is about 125 years earlier, or around 1615. Counting back 16 generations, or 90% probability, would put a common ancestor roughly in the timeframe of 1515. It is possible, but not likely, that a common ancestor between the Baughns and the Houstons lived in America. It is more likely that he was in Great Britain. So, it is unlikely that we will learn who the common ancestor was between the Houstons and the Tucker Baughan descendents.Descendents of Littleberry Baughan of Henrico County, Virginia You can take a look at a graphic representation of our Littleberry Baughan results by clicking "Littleberry_Baughan_dna_results". You can view the pedigrees of our Littleberry Baughan descendents by clicking on "littleberry_baughan_pedigrees". Five of our 40 members with tested y-DNA results are descended from Littleberry Baughan of Henrico County, Virginia. Three of these men are descendents of Littleberry Tucker Baughan, one from Joseph Baughan and one from William Baughan. The results of our Littleberry Tucker Baughan descendents are a genetic distance of 43-45 from our Peyton and Tucker Baughn descendents based on 37 markers and 50-52 from our Essex County Boughan descendents. This proves that our Littleberry Tucker Baughan descendents clearly do not share y-chromosome DNA with our Tucker Baughan descendents. The Littleberry Baughan descendents’ projected haplogroup is "I". Our Tucker Baughn descendents' projected haplogroups are "R1b1", which is the most common haplogroup of men of western European descent. DNA testing has proven to be one of the most useful tools yet found for those of us who have been looking for the ancestry of Littleberry Baughan of Henrico County. For years, the research of Lorene Barker and Mary Baughn Cope had suggested that Tucker Baughan and Littleberry Baughan were brothers. The results of our project prove that they did not receive their y-chromosome DNA from a common ancestor. In an excellent analytical paper of the Henrico County Baughans done by A. Sharp, which he shared with me, offers what I consider to be the most likely explanation for this outcome. In A. Sharp’s paper, he talked about the August 1768 court orders for the churchwardens to bind out orphans. In those orders, Littleberry Baughan was identified as the son of Susannah Baughan. In adjacent orders, other children were identified as the orphan children of such and such a man, deceased. He raises the possibility that Littleberry Baughan was the result of some form of non-paternity event. Possibly Littleberry was the bastard son of Susannah Baughan. In my opinion, based on the huge genetic distance between our Littleberry Tucker Baughan descendent and everyone else in the study, this "possibility" is looking very likely. He further raises the possibility that Susannah was actually the daughter of Thomas Baughan of Henrico who may have been a son of James and Sarah (Edmondson) Boughan of the Essex County Boughan line. In order to confirm that any DNA differences were present in Littleberry Baughan and not more recent descendents, we needed to find a descendent of another son of Littleberry Baughan, a brother of Littleberry Tucker Baughan. I began to document the lineage of Mary Baughn Cope as presented in Linda Rawlins’ book on the Baughn Family. I identified male Baughn cousins of Mary Baughn Cope who currently live in upstate New York. Mary Cope claims descent from William and Frances Shaw Sheppard Baughan, probable brother of Littleberry Tucker Baughan. One of the New York cousins of Mary Baughn Cope agreed to be tested and his results have been received confirming his descendancy from Littleberry Baughan, which supports Mrs. Cope’s research findings and conclusions that William Baughan was a son of Littleberry Baughan and brother of Littleberry Tucker Baughan. The DNA results of which we have learned so far have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the father of Littleberry Baughan was an, as yet, unidentified man name Farris/Ferris. In addition, the DNA results have also proven that Gary Stone and his great uncle also share common ancestry with the Farris family. What I used to refer to as the Littleberry Baughan modal haplotype, I now refer to as the Richard Ferres modal haplotype, as he appears to be the common ancestor of all of us in this group. Richard Ferres is listed in a 1636 land patent for Robert Hollom as one of the servants whom Mr. Hollom transported to Henrico County who were the basis for his request for the patent. The following is an earlier analysis for a possible explanation of Littleberry's match to both the Ferris family and the Stone family, which I no longer believe to be true. by clicking here DNA results for one particular marker have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Littleberry Baughan was not the son of James Ferris of Lunenburg County. The fact the DNA evidence proves that Littleberry Baughan did not inherit his y-chromosome DNA from either a descendent of Tucker Baughan of Cumberland County or James Boughan of Essex County does not affect the possibility that Susannah may have been related to one of those to lines of descent. In order to prove that through DNA, we would have to design a mitochondrial DNA test to try to tie Susannah Baughan into either of those two Boughan/Baughan lines. I have not focused on mitochondrial DNA tests and am therefore less familiar with that technology and how to coordinate such a test. Also, mitochondrial DNA will do nothing to determine the paternity of Littleberry Baughan. What it could conceivably do is prove that Littleberry’s mother, Susannah was related to the Essex County Boughans. We would have to identify a present day descendent of any daughters, granddaughters, etc. of Susannah and a present day descendent of daughters, granddaughters, etc. of Susannah's mother to be able to prove a relationship to the Essex County Boughans. I am not hopeful that such a test can be successfully designed. The following are some of the lineages that have been shared with us so far. Member no. 44091 Our Richard and Juriah Baughn descendent 1. Richard Baughn. Richard died ca Oct 1808 in Bullitt Co., Kentucky. Richard married Juriah. Born ca 1773 in Virginia. Juriah died in Clark Co., Indiana bef Sep 1852, she was 79. 2. Joseph Baughn. Born on 8 Apr 1796 in Hanover Co., Virginia. Joseph died in Jessamine Co., Kentucky on 16 May 1852, he was 56. Buried in Dawson/Baughn cem. , Jessamine Co., Kentucky. On 16 Apr 1818 when Joseph was 22, he married Martha (Patsey) Overstreet, in Jessamine Co., Kentucky. Born on 2 Oct 1797 in Kentucky. Martha (Patsey) died in Jessamine Co., Kentucky on 7 Jul 1864, she was 66. 3. James Henry Baughn. Born on 22 Feb 1834 in Jessamine Co., Kentucky. James Henry died in Jessamine Co., Kentucky on 2 Feb 1898, he was 63. On 20 Nov 1857 when James Henry was 23, he married Elizabeth Ann Walker, in Jessamine Co., Kentucky. Born on 19 Jun 1837 in Jessamine Co., Kentucky. Elizabeth Ann died in Fayette Co., Kentucky on 16 Nov 1913, she was 76. 4. Otis James Baughn. Born on 23 Apr 1877 in Hanly, Jessamine Co., Kentucky. Otis James died in Wittmann, Arizona on 11 Feb 1948, he was 70. On 27 Jun 1906 when Otis James was 29, he married Mary Holman Fairhurst, in Lexington, Kentucky. Born on 29 Jan 1880 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Mary Holman died in Wittmann, Arizona on 11 Feb 1948, she was 68. 5. Alfred Fairhurst Baughn. Born on 1 May 1912 in Florence, Pinal Co., Arizona. Alfred Fairhurst died in Scottsdale, Maricopa Co., Arizona on 8 Feb 2000, he was 87. On 17 Jun 1935 when Alfred Fairhurst was 23, he married Barbara Doris Hobbs, in Los Angeles, California. Born on 5 May 1909 in Detroit, Michigan. Barbara Doris died in Phoenix, Maricopa Co., Arizona on 19 Jul 1989, she was 80.

Member No. 58767 Our paperwork proved lineage is as follows: Christopher James & Sally Irene Tweed; Howard Ivan & Jeannette Lee Kuhn; William Lester Susan Mary Long; Elisha Harmon Malissa Jane Rakestraw; Joseph Henry & Elizabeth Fultz; Lystra & Margaret "Peggy" Hitt; Mordecai & Eve Baumgardner; Henry & Jael Brown; Henry & Unknown; James & Thomasin (Harper) Contact: cbaughn@aol.com

Member No. 51051. Haplogroup: Ia1 (tested). Contact: gstone1@jam.rr.com

1. ROBERT STONE, b. Oct. 1881, MS; d. Oct. 24, 1958. Rhoda Rushing (wife), b. Nov. 1884, Pike Co., MS; d. abt. March 14, 1952. Children: 2. MARY STONE, b. May 19, 1903, MS; m. Albert Tindell. *2.* ERNEST CHARLES STONE, b. Feb. 19, 1905, MS; m. Rosetta Roberts. 2. RUBY STONE, b. July 10, 1906, MS; m. Ernest Wilson. 2. WESSIE STONE, b. March 4, 1910, Amite Co., MS; m. Everett Jolly. 2. IDA STONE, b. May 14, 1913, Pike Co., MS; m. Ivan Slaughter. 2. BILL STONE, b. abt. 1915, MS; m. Ruby Williamson. 2. WAYNE STONE, b. April 14, 1919, LA; m. Helen Unknown. 2. NELL STONE, b. Oct. 14, 1921, LA; m. Thomas Robertson. 2. HAROLD STONE, b. July 4, 1924, LA; m.Geneva Roberts. *2* Ernest Charles Stone is the grandfather of our Stone member. VAUGHAN Joseph Vaughan/n Sr. was born about 1740-1750. He married Ann Payne before 1770 in Goochland Co., VA. He lived in Bedford Co., VA in the 1780’s and 90’s and in Botetourt Co. in early 1800’s. His son, Joseph Vaughan, was born in 1784, Bedford Co. VA. He married Nancy Via in Franklin Co., VA, Sept. 7, 1808. His son, Joshua A. Vaughan was born March 27, 1826 in Patrick Co., VA. He died in 1911 in Henry Co., VA. He married Caroline Matilda Hollandsworth in Patrick Co., VA Sept. 26, 1848. His son, George Washington Vaughan was born April 20, 1857 in Henry Co., VA and died Dec. 25, 1883 in Henry Co., VA. He married Mary Clark Turner May 18, 1879 in Henry Co., VA. His son, Taylor George Vaughan was born 1890 in Henry Co., VA. His son was the person tested. FARRIS William A Farris, b ?, d 6 May 1831, Campbell County, Virginia John A Farris, b. ca 1795, d. aft 1850 James A. Farris, b. 1825, Campbell Co., VA, d. 4 Jun 1862, Charlottesville, Hospital, Charlottesville, VA Robert William Farris, b. 8 Jun 1855, Campbell Co., VA, d. bet 1891-1899 William Albert Farris, b. 15 Aug 1875, Campbell Co., VA, d. 15 Nov 1958, Lynchburg, VA Luttrell Albert Farris, Sr., b. 5 Jun 1889, Campbell Co., VA, d. 24 Jan 1975, Lynchburg, VA Luttrell Albert Farris, Jr., b. 24 May 1931, Campbell Co., VA, d. 22 May 1991, Virginia Baptist Hospital, Lynchburg, VA Farris person tested As promised, here is my index of copies of deeds, wills and other documents of which I have an image in my possession: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~baughandna/DNA_Results/baughan-vaughan-farris_documents_index.pdf