Y-DNA for Goyen
I bit the bullet and paid to have my Y-DNA tested with Family Tree DNA. The following are the results:
The following are the YDNA markers – there are 3 different test groups for my level of testing (a 37 marker test) – 12 marker group, 25 marker group, and 37 marker group. I tested with 37 markers – there are higher marker groups, but this is the one that was recommended. Some people tested with only 12 or 25 markers, so that is why there are 3 different groupings below.
To simplify the three result groups I entered the names of those tested, how many markers they tested, and the genetic distance in a chart below. What this chart shows are the people who have tested through Family Tree DNA who are a “match” to me according to Family Tree DNA.
The results are 15 different Goin-type names, 6 different Hollis names, 3 different Keith names, 2-3 different Cook names, and 2 different Gibbs names.
The fact that the highest number are Goin/Goins/Goen/Goyne type names – for me – confirms my genetic line goes through this particular Goyen-Goin line. The Hollis, Keith, and Cook names also help out – John Going born about 1704 was married to a Mary Keith – it appears the Going and Keith families moved near the same times from Stafford County, Virginia, to the Virginia/North Carolina border – and then several Keith’s and Goings moved to South Carolina near the same time. Similarly, with the Hollis family, John Hollis posted bond on Catherine Going Patterson’s probate in 1739 (she was mother of John Going born 1704 – she remarried to a Patterson after her husband William Going died in 1725). John Hollis’ children, Moses Hollis and Notley Hollis had several land transactions with Alexander Going, John Going, and William Going in Orange County, North Carolina (these were the children and grandchild of Catherine Going Patterson). Several of the Going and Hollis families moved to Fairfield County, SC about the same time, and they are listed on eachother’s paperwork found in that county – including probate papers. This likely means that the Hollis and Keith members listed are descended from a Going male who either died while their children were young, and so a Keith or Hollis adopted and raised that child as their own, or some other non-paternal event.
The fact that there are multiple Hollis and Keith members listed – for me – confirms that our line goes through John Going born about 1704 and Mary Keith. Which is what I suspected based on the documents anyway – but I wasn’t as sure previously.
Matches for my line of Goyen, Goin, Gowan, Goyne families above shows we are related to the following ancestors of those listed above:
MATCHES (YDNA shows related):
1) Thomas Goins c. 1729-1797 Va to NC
This is the Thomas Goins that wrote his will in 1797 in NC, naming son Bungee Going, son Burton Going, daughter Hali Going, daughter Elizabeth Going, daughter Vini Hardester). I think this may be the same Thomas Going who was in Lunenburg Co, Va tithe lists in 1751 (in same household as John Going and his wife Mary Keith Going). I am not certain he is the son of John Going . . . he could be.
Thomas Goins could be the same Thomas Going who was bound out to Ralph Jackson in 1736 in Brunswick County, Va (along with a John Going on same date). Additionally, a Cave Gowen was bound out to a James Vaughan in 1734 in Brunswick County, Va. In 1740 a Drury Going and Elsonor Going were bound out to Ralph Jackson in Brunswick County, Va. Finally, in 1737 a William Gowen was bound out to a John Straughan in Truro Parish (Fairfax County, Virginia – where the family moved from or was moving from about this time). John Going and Mary Keith Going were still living in Fairfax County, Va until 1742-1744 when they sold their land (it appears).
It looks like Catherine Padderson (mother of John Going) may have been living or in the process of moving to Brunswick County, Va by 1738 when she and Cornelius Keith witnessed a will by Thomas Stroud. She may have moved there even earlier – as Cave Gowen was bound out in 1734.
If Thomas Goins is the same Thomas who was bound out to Ralph Jackson, then he could have been the child of Ambrose Going (who appears to be the oldest Going child of William Going b. 1680 and Catherine Patterson). Ambrose disappears from records after 1727 in Stafford County, Va. Another Ambrose appears in 1776 in Henry Co, Va – almost 50 years later – but no record for 50 years. I suspect the Ambrose in 1776 is a different person. Ambrose Going who was the child of William Going and Catherine Patterson was not listed in Catherine Patterson’s will or probate papers in 1739. This leads me to think Ambrose Going may have died after 1727, but before 1739.
If this is the case, then Ambrose likely died some time between 1727 to 1734 (when Cave Gowen was bound out).
Catherine Padderson appears to have been going back and forth between Prince William County (Fairfax Co in future) and Brunswick County, Va. Some of her children remained in the Fairfax area, and many had traveled down to Brunswick County, Va.
All the other known potential fathers of Thomas Goins are still alive, or dead too long when he is bound out in 1740 to Ralph Jackson. John Going b. 1704 is alive in Fairfax, Co in 1740. William Going b. 1712 is alive likely in Fairfax or Brunswick Co, Va. Alexander Going is alive, also likely in Fairfax or Brunswick Co, Va. James Going b. 1680 is probably too old to be the parent of Thomas Goins b. 1729 – but he could be the father – but James is possibly still alive until 1739 when he is noted as being adjacent to Gabriel Adams in a land transaction in Prince William Co, Va – meaning that Cave Gowen is likely not his son – as he was bound out in 1734.
2) William Goyne b. 1733 from VA – NC – SC – GA (This is the William Goyne who was the son of John Going and Mary Keith Going).
3) Drury Going b. 1749 – 1797 SC (my direct ancestor)
4) John Gowen b. abt 1750/55 – Marion Co, SC and Robeson Co, NC
5) Thomas Goin b. 1750/55 line – Va to TN (land grant in 1779 in Washington Co, TN)
6) James Goyne b. 1755 line SC to MS/LA (descendants include Wiley W. Goyne – went to Miss and La).
7) William Henry Gowan b. 1792 in Goochland Co, VA
8) Jessie Goin b. 1794 line – Buckingham Co, VA
9) Edward Goins b. 1799 – d. 1860 in Bradley Co, TN
10) John Waller Goen b. 1804 line Hawkins Co, TN
11) Joseph Edward Goins b. April 17, 1895 – Bridgeport, TX
Our haplogroup is E-M2 – According to Wikipedia: “The E-M2 branches are the predominant lineage in Western Africa, Central Africa, Southern Africa, and the southern parts of Eastern Africa.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E-V38
Not sure about all the Goin/Going families listed on Family Tree DNA, but ours has always been considered “white” as far as I know from family history. In fact, my father insists the Goyen name descends from Dutch lineage, which may be true – others think it comes from Scotland, England, or Wales. So where did this E-M2 haplogroup for our line come from?
There are a couple theories I have seen of how we are in the E-M2 haplogroup:
1) Original Immigrant was black or mulattoe: Some Goin lines in the USA were considered “mulattoe” in early US Census. Some have thought that a Mihil Gowen, or Philip Gowen who were indentured servants in the 1600’s (before slavery was an institution), and who served out their indenture and were later freed, according to court cases in Virginia, are the men who these lines go through. In my research, I haven’t found any documents that connect these men to the Stafford County, Virginia Going group that my line goes through. It appears to be just a guess – with no confirmation – so I’ll leave it open as a possibility, but its no better than a guess.
(Note – Edit: I looked up the entry about Thomas Going and Maryland – it actually says that he posted bond for Chapman Dark to go to Maryland to prove that Chapman Dark was a free man (no longer an indentured servant). The following are the entries:
1703 May 26: Chapman Dark by the peticon to this court shewing that some tyme agoe by assignemt from John Harper of Stafford County his late Master, hee was assigned to Joseph Tayler of this County for the remaining part of his tyme of service not then expired, that his sd tyme of service is some tyme past expired as by the sd assignment if produced would appeare, but the sd Joseph Tayler wrongfully detaines him and refuses to produce the assignment by wch hee pretends to claime a right to his service to the peticoners great detriment and praying to bee discharged from his said master Tayler. Therefore it is ordered that the sheriff of this County do summon the sd Joseph Tayler that hee appeare at the next Court to bee held for this County to answer the sd complt and shew cause if any hee can why hee detaines the said Chapman Dark and because the sd Chapman Dark hath offered to this Court that hee can produce testimony from Maryland that hee is realy free praying liberty to go over to Maryland to procure the same. Thomas Goen haveing assumed to the Court in the summe of two thousand pounds of tobo that the sd Chapman Dark shall appeare before her Majesties justices here at the next Court to bee held for the County to prosecute his said complaint and that in case hee bee not found to bee free hee shall serve his sd master ratably(sp?) after his first tyme expired according to Law for the tme of his absence. It is ordered that hee the sd Chapman Dark have liberty to go for Maryland in order to prosecute his sd pretence. Westmoreland County Court orders 1698 to 1705 pg. 190a.
1703 June 30: Upon a full heareing of all matters debated and argued between Chapman Dark and Joseph Tayler his late master concerning his freedom, it is the oppinion of this Court that the sd Chapman hath served his full tyme of service due to his said late master and doe therefore discharge him from any further service pretendedly due to the said Tayler and order that the sd Joseph Tayler doe forthwith pay him his corn and cloaths due to him according to the custom of this Colony together with his costs in the behalf also etc.
From which judgment the sd Joseph Tayler appeals to the second day of the next Genl Court.
John Spencer Gent assuming with the appellant for his prosecucon of his sd appeale, and
Thomas Goen with the appellee for his appeareance and ordered they enter into bond according to Law for performance of the same. Westmoreland County Court orders 1698 to 1705 pg. 194a-195.
These entries above indicate where Chapman Dark came from, not where Thomas Going came from.
There are a couple other entries that appear to connect Thomas Going to Maryland. See:
A Thomas Going was recorded as being brought to Maryland in 1671. 1671 May 13: Frances Stannton, recd 500 acres for transp Roger Pate, James Barber, Francis Lloyd, Richard Thompson, John Vincent, Thomas Going, William Ashby, Bartholmew Hayes, Richard Taylour and Elizabeth Miles. Bryan O’Malley of Talbot County, Planter paid Frances Stannton to assign O’Malley the rights title and interest for the 500 acres. Wit. Richard May and Robert Ridgely. Talbot Co, MD.
Compare this to:
1672 Esau Goeing and his wife Ann Goeing are noted in service in Maryland. Source: 17:376 Film No: Husband of Ann, service by 1672; MSA SC 4341- 1672 Goeing, Ann17:376 Film No: Wife of Esau Goeing, service by 1672; Anne, the wife of Esau Goeing proved rights to land for service provided in Talbot County, Maryland. Esau Goeing assigned his wife’s rights for her service to John Pitt in Talbot County, Maryland.
Note: This transaction tells us a few things a) Anne Goeing was owed for her service – likely this was an indenture, meaning she started her indenture at least 4 years earlier (1668 or before). Since she was married, and selling her rights to her service, she was now free. b) Esau Goeing married Anne Goeing, and as her husband, he was selling her rights due to her for her service. Since he was contracting and married, he obviously was not under any indenture either – no documents have indicated Esau ever was a servant, nor have any documents indicated when Esau Goeing arrived in the Americas. He may have been born in the Americas.
Relationship to Thomas Going – it appears this may be Thomas Going who is later found in Westmoreland Co, Va. Both Thomas and Esau appear in records in Talbot County, Maryland about 1671/72. Both then appear in records in Westmoreland County, Virginia in 1693. This “suggests” they may be related in some fashion, but it is unknown how.
April 7, 1693, Westmoreland County. At Court: Abraham Smith vs. Thomas Goen. Defamation. 1693 May 31, In “Abraham Smith vs. Thomas Goen,” Smith appears in court and “withdrew in person” the charge against the defendant May 31, 1693. [John Frederick Dorman, Westmoreland County Virginia Order Book 1690-1698, Part 2, 1962, p. 34]
Gawen Corbin Gent attachd an attachmt against the estate of Eashaw Goeing for eight hundred and fifty pounds and the sheriff under return that he had it attached one gray horse branded on both buttocks with obscure H brands which a horse has had in custody and a bridle and saddle in the hands of Abraham Smith as being the proper estate of the sd Eashaw Goeing. (Note: Prior researchers had Eashaw Goeing as “Jashen Goeing” – which appears to have been a misreading of the entry below).
Easaw Goeing late of this county being indebted to Mr. Gawen Corbin in the summ of eight hundred and fifteen pounds of tobo by cask as it was said and having absented himself out of the county the sd Corbin obtained an attachment agst the sd Goeings estate by Corbin of which the Sheriff attached one gray horse branded on both buttocks with an obscure brand being the proper estate of the sd Easaw Goeing as by the estate of the sd attachmt doth appeare. And for that it appeared to this court by the oath of Mr James Ellis that the sd Easaw Goeing stood justly indebted to the sd Gawen Corbin in that sum of amt of tobo by ammt for good judgment is granted him for his sd debt and (sp?) and the sd horse being appraised at Eight hundred pounds of tobo and undemaned awarding (sp?). It is ordered the sheriff orer over him to the sd Mr Corbin in part of satisfaction of his sd debt and such.
Its possible that there was some other black or mulattoe Going who was in Maryland that this line goes through, but its also possible that the line goes through a white Going from Maryland (or Virginia).
If we did arrive in the Americas considered “white” by appearance, then what?
2) Some theorize that the E-M2 haplogroup that has been found in some English families that have always been considered “white” are descendants of the Moorish invasions of Europe, or even as far back as the Roman occupation of England.
The Roman emperor Severus was born in Libya and ruled Rome while he fought his campaigns in Africa. Towards the end of his life, in the year 208, he reportedly took 40,000 men, including Moors from Africa, to England to strengthen Hadrian’s Wall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus
England has immigrants from all over Europe. The Moors conquered Spain and Portugal in 711 and later Italy, and ruled for several hundred years in those areas. The following Wikipedia article discusses the history of blacks in England: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_British
It is possible that the E-M2 haplogroup we belong to came through England and then to the Americas.
3) Finally … another possibility is that the numbers in our Y-DNA results are an anomoly of some sort that aren’t truly E-M2 (showing descent from an African paternal ancestor) – but possibly belonging to another haplogroup. I am not a scientist, and I have not been able to determine how they decide which numbers belong in which haplogroup … but I haven’t found much in the way of people who appear to be of African descent who descend from our Y-DNA (I have found one in the USA, but that may be from a white male who had a child with a black female here in the Americas). So that begs the question … why aren’t there African males in Africa that match us? Or more black men in the US who match our Y-DNA? Is the grouping correct? Seems like there should be groups of men with close Y-DNA results that are African in appearance here and in other parts of the world. (I am not a scientist, and don’t know for sure if this is a possibility (that they miscategorized our number results), but I think it may be possible … let me know if I am wrong).
The above are just theories, assuming the haplogroup is correct (which I have no reason to believe it is not correct based on the numbers and considering the other Going and Goin type names also found with our same or similar numbers).