Update #10,February 18, 2005
Dickason and Spelling Variants Surname project
Table of Contents
I.Summary,Pages 1 and 2
II.Detail,Pages 3 through 9
III. Commentary, glossary and technical notes
Pages 10 through 12
Significant progress has been made since the last update in June 2004.A number of new Dickason/Dickenson/Dickinson lines, or portions of lines have been added.Great headway has been made in determining groupings of various lines.
Two important new "features" occur in this report for the first time.
What started as a DNA Dickason (and variant) Surname Project has morphed into a Surname Project about Dickasons (and variants) with or without DNA testing.
This report has - for the first time - significant citations of different surnamed lines whose DNAs match Dickason (and variant spelling) lines.Also there are a number of related discussions to the possibility, indeed the probability of "non-paternal events."See the discussions within the reportand in the end commentaries below.
As of this report the following have been identified:
5 Groups of Dickasons, each distinctly different from each other, which include
19 participants and 17 DNA testers.
8 Stray or otherwise isolated participant lines, of which 3 are DNA testers.
A total of 26 participants and 20 testes.
I. Groups- The various groups and stray lines are:
Group A: 4 participants, 4 DNA testers, leading back to James Dickason, b. 1792 in Fayette, Co., Pennsylvania.
Group B: 4 participants, 4 DNA testers, leading back to Jacob Dickason, b. 1740-50 in Virginia.
Group C: 4 participants, 2 Dickason, 1 Bennett and 1 Hatcher.3 are DNA testers and the 4th is in progress.The Bennett and Hatcher lines match with the Dickason group line.The earliest known ancestor is Alexander Dickason, b. 1752 in Hampshire Co., Massachusetts, his father allegedly having come from England.
Group D: 4 participants, 2 DNA tested, leading back to Jorge Dickason, b. est. 1635 in Necton, Norfolk, England.
Group E: 3 participants, 3 DNA tested, leading back to Richard Dickinson, b. about 1564 in London, England (baptized in St. James, Clerkenwell, London).
Group X: 8 stray or unconnected lines.
4 of these stray lines dead end in the United States: Tennessee in the early 1800s; West Augusta, Virginia (Washington County, PA) in 1777; and Indiana County, PA in 1745 backward, and 1850 forward.
2 of these stray lines dead end in England.One in Litlington, Cambridgeshire, line extant from about 1700 to 1850; and one in "The West Country" which dead ends in the early 1800s.
1 stray line is a Dixon line from Ireland 1625 to America that has DNA results suspiciously close to some of the Dickasons.
1 stray line is an author by the name of Dickerson, for whom no matches are apparent within these data.
Details of these groups, lines and strays are laid out below.
For the details of the DNA tests themselves, see:
WHAT IS NEXT?
It has been about seventy years since my Uncle David Howard Dickason did the groundwork on our Dickason heritage, that of James Dickason, born 1792.Since 1996 I have tried to further that work and cross connect to other Dickason lines.Beginning in 2002 the use DNA gave us new opportunities for extending the knowledge of our ancestors, whether the surnames are spelled the same or not.Please let me know if you have questions.
Donald Garrett Dickason Princeton, New Jersey, USA 08540
I. The various groups and stray lines are:
Leads back to James Dickason b. 1792, Uniontown, Fayette Co., PA, and to his unknown father's brother, i.e., his Uncle, Samuel b. about 1740 - 1750 in Delaware.
Participants in this line include:
Donald Garrett Dickason, Line 1a, (DNA tested) GG Grandson of James b. 1792
David Allen Dickason, Line 1a. (DNA tested) GGGG Grandson of Jamesb. 1792
William Charles Dickason, Line 1b, (DNA tested) GGGG Grandson of Samuel b. ca 1740 - 1750
Jerry DiXon, Line 1c (DNA tested within Dixon Surname Project), 5G Grandson of Thomas Dixon b. ca 1700.
Documentation of the relationship of Donald G. and David Allen is in hand, and we match on 23 out of 25 DNA markers.
William Charles' documentation to his GGGG Grandfather Samuel, b. ca 1740, is in hand, but the relationship between Samuel and James b. 1792, his purported nephew is still circumstantial, because we cannot "find" James father. The Donald G. and David Allen line match the William Charles to Samuel line on 24 out of 25 markers.
This Group A has some roots in Delaware, then both lines 1a and 1b were found in Fayette County, Pa, and later in Armstrong County, PA, before dispersing to other midwestern locations.(See also Group C, below.)
It is likely that our ancestors are English, but we have had no success in documenting that.
An important note,Arthur C. Gannett in his undated work "Descendants of James and Mary (White) Dickason,"has hypothesized that the parents of James Dickason, b. 1792 were a certain John Dickason, and his wife Ruth and/or Jones.I have proven this information to be wrong.Since Gannett's work appears in many libraries and other citations, the listing of John and Ruth and/or Jones exists in many places.
Gannett's undated work is first referred to about 1940.Prior to that in 1936 David H. Dickason (Donald G. Dickason's Uncle) issued his "Notes on the History Dickason Family, and Branches" assembledfrom various letters, notes, etc."Much of Gannett's material came from the work of David H. Dickason, but Gannett added to it considerably.
Thomas Dixon, b. ca 1700, fourth participant, is documented in Dinwiddie, VA - Southeastern VA near North Carolina.This family traversed from Virginia to North Carolina to Kentucky to Arkansas to Texas.There are no geographical overlaps of the line 1a or 1b Dickasons and this Dixon.However, the location of early Dickasons in the southern portion of the Delaware Maryland peninsula/" Eastern Shore " is not too far from Southeastern Virginia.There might have been a geographic overlap there some how, especially at generations of Dickason or Dixon prior to those for which we now have records.
This group leads back to 3 different ancestors, all of whom are in the same geographic area at about the same time, although the documented cross connections are still circumstantial. But there is a circumstantial and logical father of all three of these ancestors.
4 Participants in this line include:
Donald Wayne Dickason, Line 4, (DNA tested), GG Grandson of Isaac, b. 1776
Michael L. Dickason, Line #12, (DNA tested), GGGG Grandson of John b. ca 1760, Rockingham, MD (some say VA)
Jerry Grove Dickason, Line #12, (DNA tested), GGGG Grandson of John b. ca 1760, Rockingham, MD (some say VA)
James R. Dickason, Line #16, (DNA tested), GGG Grandson of, Jacob Dickason, b. 1779, Virginia.
The common denominator of all of these ancestors is the circumstantial father of all four of them, namely Jacob Dickason, b. 1750-1760.
Each is documented to the "interim' ancestor listed above, none are documented on paper to Jacob.
DNA results are very conclusive;all four of these individuals match perfectly on the 12 marker test, and the two who took the 25 marker test match perfectly on that test.Based on this there is no doubt that Jacob, b. 1750-1760 is the father of these four interim ancestors.
Another point of interest is the "Haplotype" pattern for this Group B.Haplotype means simply "pattern" A particular haplotype group is traced to ancient anthropological migrations, covering many thousands of years.This Group B is Haplotype R1a;all the other Dickasons and variants in this Surname Study are R1b.Close, yes, but clearly different in deep backgrounds. See the Commentary at the end
in Section II for more detail about these important issues.
This group consists of two Dickason participants, as well as Barrett and Hatcher lines which match the DNA of the Dickason lien.
The two Dickasons lead back to Alexander (1) Dickason, born 1752 in Hampshire County Massachusetts (generally north of Springfield).Alexander(1)'s son, Alexander (2) has three birth places "documented,"Massachusetts, Eastern Shore Maryland (note the Delaware roots in Group A), and Baltimore.Interestingly there is Baltimore, MD as we know it today, but in the time that Alexander's son could have been theresince there was a "Baltimore 100" in the southern tip of Delaware.
Alexander(1)'s father supposedly came from England in 1716, with Andrew being one of three brothers, the others possibly John and David.
In any case about 1822 Alexander (2) had moved to Armstrong County, PA and had many of his children there, before moving on to Hannibal, MO.This line then went west every other generation or so and ended up in California and is the namesake of the "Major Dickason Coffee Blend," produced and sold by Peet Coffee Company, itself the precursor to Starbucks.
Participants in this group include 4:
Eugene Lee Dickason, Line #5 (DNA tested),GG Grandson of Alexander (1). Major Dickason coffee was named after his now-deceased brother, Oliver Key Dickason.
David Dickason Line #5 (DNA test in progress), GGGG Grandson of Alexander (1).
Barrett family members, Line ? (DNA tested)
Hatcher family members, Line ? (DNA tested)
Eugene Lee, participant #1, and David Dickason, participant #2, share David Henry Dickason as the Most Recent Common Ancestor.David Henry was born in 1845 in Armstrong County, PA, son of Alexander (2)
Given the common residency of Groups A and C in Armstrong County, and possible common residence in Eastern Shore Delaware of Groups A and C, we have long puzzled over whether there was a familial relationship.
However, DNA test results for Eugene Lee, as tested representative of LIne #5, are very different than those in Group A,only 8 markers different out of 25.From a statistical definition, the probability of Group A and Eugene Lee's markers being from the same ancestral line is less than 1%.
Recently, however, other DNA test results - not Dickason - have arisen which do closely match those of Eugene Lee, namely a group of Barretts with a match of 24 out of 25, and a group of Hatchers, with matches of 23 our of 25.The DNA evidence strongly suggests that somewhere in the lineage back to Alexander (1) that there could have been what is known as a non-paternal event. (NPE is becoming the common abbreviation.)
When general genealogical DNA testing began a scant 3 years ago, a Ònon-paternal eventÓ (NPE) was considered almost synonymous with illegitimacy.Considerable study since that time clearly indicates that Ònon-paternalÓ status has occurred for many reasons.There could be illegitimacy. But, there also could be other causes.The natural mother could die in child birth and the child would go to live with an aunt or uncle or cousin with a different surname. The childÕs father died, and the mother remarried, with the child taking on the new husbandÕs surname. Or the child was raised by other family members with different surnames. Or, indeed, the reason simply may be indeterminate.
Correspondence with representative of the Hatchers has been unproductive in producing a link between any two of these three families, Dickason, Hatcher and Barrett.
Correspondence with the Group Administrator for the Barretts has revealed that there were neighboring Dickason and Barrett families in 1920 in California based on the 1920 census.
Ifthe 2nd tester for this Group C, David Dickason, should turn out to match another Dickason, and not Eugene Lee, that would be evidence of a non-paternal event somewhere, probably in Eugene Lee's ancestry.If that were to be the case, then we might conjecture once again that Group A and Group C were related, especially given the geographical overlap in Fayette and Armstrong Counties, PA, previously noted.
Should there be a NPE in Eugene Lee's line, this would in no way deny the familial relationship of Eugene Lee to this line of Dickasons.The different DNA strain might have been introduced, but he is still a Dickason.
Group D. 4 participants
This group of four participants, all leadi back to Jorge Dickason. b. about 1635 in Necton, Norfolk, England.These four lines today are found in England, South Africa, Argentina, and Australia.Two of the four have done the DNA testing.The other two are tightly enough bound by documentation to assure that they are part of the Necton Dickasons.
Participants in this line include (2 DNA tested) :
Graham Dickason Line #6 (DNA tested), 7th Great Grandson of Jorge (George) Dickason,b. est 1635, Necton, Norfolk, England. Graham currently resides in South Africa.
Philip Dickason, Line #11 (DNA tested), 9th Great Grandson of Jorge (George) Dickason,b. est 1635, Necton, Norfolk, England. Philip currently resides in England.
Graeme Dickason, Line #7, (not DNA tested), 8th Great Grandson of Jorge (George) Dickason,b. est 1635, Necton, Norfolk, England.Currently resides in Austrailia.
Unknown Dickason, Line #8 (not DNA tested).A documented branch from the South Africa line, but I do not have the information.
Graeme and Unknown have not tested, but their lines' documented information clearly supports inclusion in the Necton Dickason group.
Group E. 3 participants.
This group leads back to Richard DickINson, b. about 1564 in London, England (baptized 7 Jul 1564, St. James - Clerkenwell, London)
Bradford Steward DickAson, Line #10a (DNA tested),4th G Grandson of John Dickason, b. abt 1764, VA. Currently lives in California, USA.This John is circumstantially the son of William DickENson, Sr., b. 1725, VA, and Grandson of Nathaniel Dickenson, Jr., b. 1700, see below.
Donald R. DickENson, Line #10b, (DNA tested), 11th G Grandson of Richard Dickinson, b. abt 1564. Currently resides in California, USA.
Patricia DickERson Mitchell and H. Ashby DickERson Line 17 (DNA tested) ??th G Grandchildren of Richard Dickinson, b. abt 1564.
The DNA tests for Bradford and Donald are 25 out of 25, indicating a 94% probability that they are related within the past 300 years, and 98% probability that they are related within the past 400 years.They are most likely 7th cousins, joining at their probable most recent common ancestor, 6 Great Grandfather Nathaniel DickINson, Jr., b. about 1700, New Kent County, VA.
Ashby's 12 marker test is identical to the first 12 markers of Bradford Steward and Donald R.We are seeking to upgrade Ashby's test to the 25 marker level.
This Group E. is very well developed and starts downward from England in the form of Dickinson, but then spreads to Dickenson (the most common in the United States today), Dickason, as well as some remaining Dickinsons. For a long time Line 10a, Bradford Stewart Dickason, line was considered to be an isolated or "stray" line.But with the emergence of Line 10b and the Line 17 matches, we are reminded one more time not to be too literal when search for specific name spellings.Note that the three testers all spell their names differently today.
Addendum, this line also has DNA matches that are very close to the name Spencer.Since the Dickason/Dickerson/Dickinson group line is so well established, the hypothesis is that the Spencer line has Dickason DNA, rather than vice versa.
Further addendum: this Line #10 is similar to that represented in "A History Of My DICKASON Family, by Dr. E. E. DICKASON Compiled by Addie Lou DICKASON, Wife."Listed in my files as the "E.E.Dickason line."The E.E. Dickason line NOT TESTED
Group X-1 and Group X-2 included isolated or "stray" lines.
X-1 includes those who have done the DNA testing but for whom I can find no other lines that seem to match.
X-2 Includes those that I know about from other sources that have not tested and for whom I can find no other lines that seem to match.
Group X-1.3 participans, 3 DNA tested.
1 - John Melvin DickersonLine 15 (DNA tested)Dead ends in Tennessee in the early 1800s. The DNA results do not come close to matching any other member in this Surname Group study.In fact, there are many DNA "perfect" matches with Lawson.
2 - Glenn Dixon (Ireland), Line #14 (DNA tested)
Line #14 - Ireland to America Dixons.This Dixon line is well documented from 1603, Segoe Parish, County Armagh, Ireland to the present.The test results did not match any of the others in this Surname Group.This person was transferred to the Dixon Surname Group.
Recently, however, a new puzzle has arisen.Glen Dixon does not match other Dixons, but does have other matches which are quite close.At the 23/25 level of matches are a number of Hatchers, who in turn are 23/25 matches with Eugene Lee Dickason in Group C above.I have not been able to work out a scenario which would document a relationship of this trio of lines.
3 - Robert Bradford Dickerson line 18 (DNA tested) is an author with one of the surnames in which we are interested. His test results do not come close to matching in our Surname Project, nor in the broader Family Tree database.
Group X-2 4 participants, O DNA tested.
1 - John W. Dickerson/Dickason Line #9 (Not DNA Tested) and son John G.Dickason/erson/esonBoth were in Washington & Allegheny Counties, PA.John W. died about 1785, Washington Co., PA.John G. was born ca 1740-50, location not known, died 1832, Moon Twp. Allegheny County, PA. John G. probably served in the Revolutionary War. John G's name at death was DickEson.
John W's will was dated 1777, in West Augusta, VA, probated 1785 in Washington Co., PA. (West Augusta was a piece of Virginia that was in what is now SW Pennsylvania for a short time, 1777 to about 1780.)
Important note:It is this John G. that Arthur C. Gannett posited as the father O James, b. 1792 (Group A).Extensive research has proven that this John is NOT the father of James, b. 1792.
2- Samuel Dickason Line #3 (Not DNA tested) from Indiana Co., PA.
This Samuel, known for ready identification as "Indiana (County) Samuel," b. est 1745-55, location? died 1813, Indiana Co., PA.He was long confused with the other. Armstrong Samuel in Line #2, but has in the last few years been proven not to be that Samuel.BUT, note that Indiana Samuel lived in Armstrong TOWNSHIP, Indiana County, PA, which is right next to Armstrong County where so many other Dickasons transited, so there may be some ancestral commonality.
This line is a "STRAY" because we have not been able to find descendants of this line after about 1850, and therefore, obviously this line could not be tested.
3 -Unknown Dickason, Line #13, (DNA not tested) Litlington, Cambridgeshire, England.This additional English Dickason line appeared for 3 or 4 generations in the late 1700s up until about 1850 in Cambridgeshire. In April, 2003 I was in correspondence with an English contact who may be a representative of this Cambridgeshire line (though not a "Dickason" male descendant).This has not been a fruitful lead for any additional downstream Dickasons as of February 2005.
4.John Dickason, "West Country," and Bristol, England.August 2004,new inquiry from a line of Thomas Dickasons.The inquirer is was born in "Bristol" in the "West Country" as was his grandfather.More information is being sought.
II. Added commentary, glossary and technical notes about geographic groups, and various DNA technical issues.
1- Ohio Dickasons
IMPORTANT NOTE:There are (at least) four Dickason lines have been situated in Ohio over the years and have been very confused!Line #1 (James Dickason) settled in a part of Wayne County that later became Medina County. Some of his descendants moved on to Wayne County.Line #2 (Samuel Dickason) descendants were in Brown County.Line #4 (Isaac Dickason) descendants were present in Marion County.Line #12 (Jacob Dickason) descendants were in Jackson County. So for a Dickason to say that their line is from Ohio is only a starting point.
2. Armstrong County, Pennsylvania Dickasons
IMPORTANT NOTE:Armstrong County, Pennsylvania, has been particularly intriguing, and frustrating.Representatives of lines #1, #2 and #5 all passed through Armstrong County.Line #3 was in Armstrong Township, Indiana County which is immediately adjacent to Armstrong County.
3. Dickasons of Southwest Virginia
See -1 : DICKENSONS OF SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA(In my data files and online.)
By Mary Jane Knisely
See -2: Dickin/en/ason,Griffith,VA4.06(In my data files and online.)
See-3: Dickason, E.E.hist 8.0128expaÇ (In my data files)
Note: "Griffith" and "Nathaniel" appear in all three of these citations.
Note:Ann Sharp, wife of the listed progenitor of this line #10 appears in the 3rd citation.
4. Ð HAPLOTYPES:Anthropologists break down the Y-chromosome into branches called Haplogroups or clades. In simple English, Haplotypes are patterns of markers which give some clues to the really ancient derivation of the peoples from which these DNA patterns come. FamilyTreeDNA compares our samples against their entire Haplogroup database which currently contains 6749 samples from all around the world.The following summarizes various common Dickason Haplotypes.
Note that different groups ofDickason lines have different haplotypes.This helps confirm that persons within groups have a common heritage, and that differences between groups help confirm that the lines truly are not related.The differences between haplotypes [r1b], [r1a], and [j] are quite profound.Below are the haplotypes of those tested.
Haplotype [r1b]Groups A, C, E, plus stray line #18
Haplotype [r1a]Group B
Haplotype [j2]Group D
Haplogroup [R1b] is the most common haplogroup in European populations. It is believed to have expanded throughout Europe as humans re-colonized after the last glacial maximum 10-12 thousand years ago. This lineage is also the haplogroup containing the Atlantic modal haplotype.
The [R1a] lineage is believed to have originated in the Eurasian Steppes north of the Black and Caspian Seas. This lineage is believed to have originated in a population of the Kurgan culture, known for the domestication of the horse (approximately 3000 B.C.E.). These people were also believed to be the first speakers of the Indo-European language group. This lineage is commonly found in central and western Asia, India, and in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe.
The [J2] lineage originated in the northern portion of the Fertile Crescent where it later spread throughout central Asia, the Mediterranean, and south into India. As with other populations with Mediterranean ancestry this lineage is found within Jewish populations.
5.Ð WHAT DO DNA MATCHES MEASURE?
For the DNA testing there are two levels available using the Y-chromosome test, a 12 marker set and a 25 marker set.Of the tests completed about 2/3rds are the more extensive 25 marker set, about 1/3rd had done the less extensive 12 marker set.The desired match or near match for a 25 marker set should be 25 out of 25 (25/25), 24/25 or perhaps 23/25.For the 12 marker set, anything less good than 12/12 is considered to be very iffy.
"What do DNA matches measure" is answered by probabilistic statements.
- For a 25/25 match there is a 50/50 probability that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is at the 4th to the 7th generation, based on high or standard mutation rates, respectively.
- For a 24/25 match there is a 50/50 probability that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is at the 9th to the 17th generation, based on high or standard mutation rates, respectively.
- For a 23/25 match there is a 50/50 probability that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is at the 14th to the 28th generation, based on high or standard mutation rates, respectively.
- For a 12/12 match there is a 50/50 probability that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is at the 7th to the 14th generation, based on high or standard mutation rates, respectively.
- For a 11/12 match there is a 50/50 probability that the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is at the 18th to the 37th generation, based on high or standard mutation rates, respectively.
To put these "generation" numbers in context:I and James Dickason, b. 1792, my Great Great Grandfather, encompass five generations.
6.Non-Paternal Events and FALSE NEGATIVES
But, there is one more consideration. In statistical terms could there be a "false negative" in DNA test results?A "false negative" is a measurement that says two lines do not appear to relate, when by documentation it might be proven that they are linked.Here enters the genealogical concept of"non paternal events."There are several possible types of non-paternal event besides a pregnancy gained outside a marriage.
For example, a child could be adopted and given the Dickason name; a man could take the Dickason name when he marries a Dickason daughter; a Dickason man may marry a pregnant woman whose husband has died; a couple where the wife is the Dickason may choose to give their children the Dickason name for various reasons; clerical error in recording administrative data may assign a Dickason name to the wrong person, and so on.ÊIt should be stressed that adoptions, although most were quite "unofficial" and had no documentation, were quite common in every age (i.e., parents died by disease or war and a relative took in the children and raised them with their name; or young daughters had a child out of wedlock and the parents raised it as their own).Ê
In early America there were many cases of non paternal events.Some historians have estimated that as many as 5 - 10% of pre-colonialand early 19th century children might have such a condition.
FINAL END OF MESSAGE