project-news-8-Duplin-now-Delaware

Who says DNA is not helpful?

Over the past few months several new members have joined the Garrisons' Compass project. Their
markers have placed them in the Duplin County, NC sub-group.

However, new Kits 144252 (T) and 162067 (K) are identical to earlier Kits 53211 (E) and 62157 (J). Those
last two have been considered the "standard" for this sub-group so using that logic we can say that we now
have 4 kits that are the standard. K, E & J match on all 67 markers. T has tested only 37 markers (see last
item on this screen) and matches all of them.

The donors of Kits E & J have proven lines from Jedediah Garrison, born c1748 (other estimates exist but
1748 or earlier is more reasonable) in Carteret Co, NC. He moved from there to Duplin Co, then to Orange
(now Alamance) Co in NC before settling in Greenville Co, SC. In 1804 he moved on to Franklin (now
Banks) Co, GA.

The donors of Kits T & K have lines proven back to the Garrisons/Garretsons of New Castle Co, Delaware.
Their common ancestor, John, died in 1755 in New Castle Co. He was a grandson of the immigrant Hendrik
Garretson who arrived in Delaware by the 1680s. For additional info on this line see the news page titled "A
Garrison Line Back to the Netherlands" being posted at this same time.

This writer's line is from Ebenezer Garrason (c1746-1801) who lived neighbor to Jedediah in Duplin Co and
his DNA markers have a distance of 2 from the "standard". However, neither he nor any of Jedediah's
descendants has yet been successful in connecting those two to the proven descendants of Hendrik. But
be sure we are working feverishly on it.

So, we have decided to change the name of the Duplin sub-group to "Garr*son Delaware Lines". The
star [*] makes the spelling generic - a nod to those of us who spell the name Garrason, which (even if a
mistake when it was first used) can be found in Delaware records as early as Hendrik's 1721 will.

C Calder Garrason
Webmaster
6 Jan 2010

There are presently nine members of the Garr*son Delaware Lines sub-group. Six of us have had a
67-marker test. Of those, only one (Kit 86219) has had any varying value in markers 38-67 and he had only
one. For that reason, it has been decided to strongly recommend that prospective members have a
37-marker test (as opposed to our present policy to suggest going for 67 from the start), with the additional
markers being completely optional - sort of a double check to see that the person's DNA mutations are
consistent with the rest of the members. We believe it will be more valuable to our search for cousins to
have two with 37's than one 67. - C Calder Garrason, 12 Dec 2009