Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 14:30:14 -0230 (NDT)
From: David Pike 
To: pike-dna-l@rootsweb.com
Subject: A new result for Massachusetts



Hi everybody.

Let me start this message with an update on the fund-raising challenge 
that was announced last month.  Our goal was to raise at least $250 by 
Father's Day for our project's Sponsorship Fund.  I have the pleasure of 
being able to report that this goal has been surpassed:  with still two 
days to go, we have raised $365.  I can't tell who some of the donors are, 
so I'll extend a generic thank-you here to everybody who made a 
contribution.

Combined with the $250 in matching funds that were pledged by the 
anonymous donor who had the idea to launch this fund-raiser, plus a small 
sum that we had before-hand, our Sponsorship Fund now has a healthy 
balance.  Already Stuart and I are making arrangements to put these funds 
to good use by encouraging new participants to join our project, 
especially those from Pike lines that currently remain untested.



In other news, Ralph (kit 197443) has received the results of his 
37-marker test.  They are a perfect 25-marker match with John (kit 48882) 
for whom only 25 markers have been tested.  Details for John's pedigree 
are not available, but Ralph has been able to trace his Pike ancestry back 
to Hugh Pike who was born about 1655 and was living at Newbury, 
Massachusetts by 1676.

We have mentioned Hugh before, in relation to the DNA results for Greg 
(kit 47429) and an anonymous participant with kit number 183692.  Greg 
also descends from Hugh PIKE, but his DNA results are substantially 
different from Ralph's.  The past two email bulletins that I've sent out 
have focussed on puzzles that were caused by genetic mismatches, but this 
time there is no such mystery.  Indeed, we had been anticipating a genetic 
mismatch in this case.  To explain why, note that Greg's great great 
grandfather was Rufus PIKE.  Rufus was born about 1812 at Franklin, New 
Hampshire, with his parents having been reported as James PIKE and his 
wife Alice GEORGE.  However, Alice was born in 1756 and so would have been 
56 years old at the time of Rufus' birth.

It has been suspected that Rufus was actually the illegitimate son of one 
of James and Alice's daughters, which is consistent with the genetic 
mismatch that we are now able to see between Greg and Ralph (whose results 
are now shown within "Group 18" on our website).

As for the origins of their forefather Hugh, as yet we do not have many 
clues.  Ralph's DNA profile does not match that of any of the other Pike 
clans that we have in our project, and in particular it does not match 
that of the family of John PIKE who arrived in Masschusetts in 1635 and 
shortly thereafter settled at Newbury.  When Hugh took an oath of 
allegiance there in 1676 he was described as being a foreigner, but 
whether this meant that he was not British (as opposed to merely meaning 
that he wasn't from Massachusetts) is not clear.  But now that we have a 
better picture of his genetic profile, we can hope to make some progress 
in tracing Hugh's ancestry by finding some genetic matches with Pikes 
elsewhere.



One last item that I want to mention is that a few days ago Family Tree 
DNA announced that it was putting several of the upgrade options for 
existing customers on sale.  This applies to Y-DNA upgrades to 25, 37 or 
67 markers, as well as to some other DNA tests.  For more details, you can 
login to your personal webpage at FTDNA and then click on the "Special 
Offers" link in the left-side menu of the webpage.  This promotion expires 
at midnight (Houston time) on Wednesday June 22nd.

Thanks,

- David.