The average is 42cm with Albert and the average is 37cm without Albert.
(Last updated 5 March 2024)
Andrew Mannon (1842) descendants have a strong DNA connection to Elizabeth
[Clark] descendants. The WATO prediction places Andrew Mannon as a HALF
sibling of Elizabeth [Clark]. Andrew Mannon's Y-DNA resolves to
Eldridge and his descendants also have extensive autosomal Eldridge DNA matches.
Given that Elizabeth [Clark] descendants do NOT share these extensive
autosomal Eldridge DNA matches this tells us Andrew Mannon and Elizabeth [Clark]
shared a mother but had different fathers..
The WATO (What Are The Odds) tool at
DNAPainter
The
average is 42cm with Albert and the average is 37cm without Albert.
The two largest DNA clusters found so far are matches to William Manning (1809)
and Elizabeth [Clark]. This writer could find no record that indicates
Elizabeth was also called Matilda so that name will not be used.
Given that Elizabeth
[Clark] and Andrew Mannon were both
living with Sarah Mannon (assumed mother) in 1850 it's reasonable to assume they were siblings
but this has yet to be proven definitively. The fact that the William
Manning matches are STILL stronger and more numerous than the Elizabeth [Clark]
suggests either Elizabeth was a half sibling/cousin to Andrew Mannon and/or William Manning was a
full uncle or father. This disparity kind of rules out Elizabeth being a
FULL sister of Andrew Mannon at least with the matches we have.
When it was discovered that Andrew Mannon Sr (1780) was married to Mary
FOSTER it became obvious to study many people's DNA matches to see if there was
Foster connection. It was quickly determined there was indeed a consistent
large DNA match cluster to the Foster, Mullins, Osborne, Caudill, Tackett, Poe, Wadkins lines in Floyd/Pike County, Kentucky. The largest portion belonged
to descendants of William Mullins and wife Rutha (supposed Foster).
Rutha's surname has yet to be verified in any record though. Rutha (1780)
would have been about the same generation as Mary Foster Mannon (1781-90).
Mannon descendants have DNA matches to most of the likely children of
William Mullins and Rutha Foster.
We have access to the DNA matches of
Shirley H who is a descendant of Elizabeth [Clark]. Her Autosomal DNA
matches reveals the same cluster of DNA matches to the Foster, Mullins, Osborne,
Caudill, Tackett, Poe, Wadkins lines in Floyd/Pike County, Kentucky that Andrew
Mannon descendants have. This indicates Elizabeth [Clark] and Andrew
Mannon at least share some maternal ancestry if the Foster connection is
legitimate.
We also somewhat have access to the DNA matches of Cynthia P
who is a descendant of William Manning (1809). This is possible by looking
at the shared DNA matches with multiple Mannon DNA kits. This
reveals that Cynthia ALSO has the same cluster of DNA matches to the Foster,
Mullins, Osborne, Caudill, Tackett, Poe, Wadkins lines in Floyd/Pike County,
Kentucky that Andrew Mannon descendants have. This indicates that the
mother of William Mannon (1809) mother was also Mary Foster Mannon if the Foster
connection is legitimate.
Claiborne County, TN Court Notes -
Sept 1805 – "Henry Fugate allowed the
following hands to work on road on the North side of Wallen’s ridge in Charles Baker’s company"
Many local names are
listed including James Poe, James Claxton, Mark Foster, Isaac Fauster.
This has yet to be proven. The problem is that even though Andrew
Mannon was living with Sarah Mannon (1810) and his assumed sisters Mary "Polly"
and Elizabeth in 1850 we can't locate Sarah Mannon on the 1840 Census. We
DO have Sarah Manning aged 20-29 on the 1830 census as a single woman living
next to George Hatfield. In 1840 we then have a Sally [Sarah] Grimes aged 20-29
living next to George Hatfield. Are Sarah Mannon and Sally [Sarah] Grimes
the same person. The age ranges in both census are 20-29 but if Sarah was
indeed born 1810 (per 1850 Census) this just means whenever the census taker
arrived in 1830 she was just over 20 and in 1840 she was just less than 30 so
the ages groups work fine.
If Sarah was not the mother of Elizabeth
[Clark] and Andrew Mannon then she may have been an aunt who adopted them.
Note that in the 1840 census Sally Grimes had no children while Sarah Mannon
would have had 2 daughters in 1840.
Since Nancy Claxton (c. 1817) is
certainly excluded as an alternative mother of Elizabeth [Clark] and Andrew
Mannon this leaves Rebecca Mannon (c. 1815). Unfortunately there are no
DNA matches to Rebecca's assumed other children Mary and Peyton and that family
moved to Hancock County by 1850 with the William Manning family.
The
current assumption by this writer is that Sarah Mannon simply never officially
married. Her assumed parents Andrew Mannon and Mary Foster separated right
after their marriage and had children by other consorts. Her own assumed
daughter Elizabeth never officially married John Clark and all her children went
by her surname not his.
This writer could find no DNA evidence from
descendants that she was a Grimes, Lee or Daniel. Some direct and shared
matches do indicate a possible Napier connection. This is interesting
because on the 1840 Federal Census (KY, Harlan) we have Moses Eldridge, Stephen
Lee (1800) and Pearson Daniel (1801/1805) all on the same page. Stephen Lee
married Joicy Napier and Pearson Daniel married Frances Napier. On the 1850
Census (TN, Claiborne) we have Sarah Mannon living next to Andrew and Margaret
Lee (Daniel) Lee and Margaret appears to have been an older sister of Pearson
Daniel. If Sarah was related to the Napiers then simply visiting relatives in
Harlan County would put her in proximity to Moses Eldridge (or his nephews).
Wanda's DNA matches to Lee descendants are mainly from Stephen Lee and Joicy Napier.
Sarah's Mitochondrial
haplogroup is X2b per a female-line descendant's DNA test at 23andMe.
We must get a Y-DNA test on a male-line descendant of William Manning (1809). This should prove the father of William Manning whether it was a Mannon, Claxton, Vaughn, Eldridge or other.
