The profile for Thomas Dewey The Settler (Dewey-54) needs some serious revising.

Question

The WikiTree profile for Thomas Dewey The Settler (Dewey-54) needs some serious revising, especially so as some famous Americans are descended from him, such as James Dewey Watson (b1928), co-winner (1962, with Francis Crick) of Nobel Prize for work on DNA. I have carried out a lot of research on Dewey history, a significant part relating to The Settler’s roots in England. I have had several discussions with Brad Stauf regarding the evidence I have found and he suggested I use G2G to propose possible changes to The Settler’s profile to the PGM team for review, the main changes are outlined below. I am seeking guidance regarding the possible implementation of these changes; I would be happy to submit possible edits to the profile managers for their consideration and/or be allowed to make the changes myself.

One of the first things I would like to see changed is the removal of the 4 screens worth of text under the 'Research Notes' heading as it is just a cut and paste from Mark Dewey's website (https://www.thomasdewey.org/); The Settler is Mark’s 10th great-grandfather. Mark created his blog about the history of the research which led to the conclusion that The Settler was baptised at Hinton Martel, Dorset in 1606. The blog contains some nice images as well as a number of submitted comments on the history, and the conclusions, of the research. My wife and I met Mark and his family when they came over from the USA to England on a short holiday, taking in a day-trip to Hinton Martel, and we met up for dinner in the evening. I feel certain that Mark would strongly object to the whole of the body text from his blog being cut and pasted. The images were not copied, even though the copied text still refers to the images! And, without any acknowledgement at all! His blog is an interactive website, not just information frozen at some point in time.

I suggest to replace this extensive and unnecessary plagiarism with a link to Mark’s website plus a summary, something like this:-

Mark Dewey has created a website (https://www.thomasdewey.org/) as a blog about the history of the research which led to the conclusion that The Settler was baptised at Hinton Martel, Dorset in 1606. The history begins with the serendipitous find in June 2010 at the Maritime Museum, Buckler's Hard, Hampshire, England (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckler's_Hard), of an old sea chart showing that the town in Dorset now known as Swanage was known as Sandwich in 1781. This research has continued to the present day when DNA evidence is being made use of.

The second change I propose will require an update to the 'Son of' and 'Siblings' fields, and a rewrite of the 'Disputed Origins' section to reflect the research that shows The Settler’s origin is now no longer “unknown”. I have created a profile (my ‘candidate profile’) for Thomas Dewye Senior (Dewye-4) (and one for his wife Mary Moore) which contains evidence, with reliable sources, showing that they are the parents of The Settler. The evidence covers 3 ‘layers’:-

i) parish records going back to the baptism of The Settler’s grandparents

ii) other formal documents such as the will of John Russell, for example; there is evidence that John’s father Robert and Thomas Dewye were both church wardens in 1625 at Hinton Martel

iii) DNA evidence, which is quite extensive and so I would seek some guidance on how best to present it. From Ancestry DNA testing, my paternal uncle, my son, my paternal 3^rd cousin and I (all descended from Wiltshire, England Dewey ancestors) between us share Dewey or Moore genes with at least 40 individuals in the USA, who are descended from early settlers.

There are also a number of minor changes that should be actioned, for example:-

reliable sources for data stated in the ‘Children’ section; rationalise the ‘Sources’ section; add links to items of evidence fully described in Thomas Dewye profile.

a.western:visited { so-language: en-GB }a.cjk:link { so-language: zxx }a.ctl:link { so-language: zxx }

Comments

Hi Terry,

There's a lot of valuable information in here, and I'd suggest breaking it into parts.  The first issue at hand is getting consensus on the proposed new parents.  From what I've seen done in the PGM project, there's usually a g2g post that just allows people to consider that. (Something like: "Proposed parents and origins for PGM immigrant Thomas Dewey" (without getting into the specifics of the edits).

I think the DNA is also a separate question.  As I'm sure you know, there are limits to what autosomal DNA can tell us so many generations back.  I'm not familiar with presenting DNA evidence in the way you're suggesting, and I think it needs a separate discussion.

---

Hi Terry, 

Thank you for your tremendous effort on this man and his family. It is a worthy cause.

Hoping to be helpful, I have a few questions, as below. Will continue to plug away. 

My apologies in advance for material I am sure to have overlooked.--Gene 

(1) Sandwich vs Swanage. Various early genealogists surmised that Thomas Dewey emigrated from Sandwich, Kent. What was their historical rationale? If we are not sure, how would we go about this discovery? From another angle, Sandwich in Kent seems to be over 200 miles from Swanage in Dorset--is there any reason to assume the early historians confused those two places? What historical evidence do we have noticing dissidents in or about Swanage in the early 1630s? Do the documents call out the names of those dissidents? How would we go about finding that information? 

(2) Proposed family group. May we have links to the relevant parish register entries, assuming they are accessible online? What evidence was used to suggest that the bride/mother (Mary Moore) was the same woman baptized Dorchester 1586 (see https://www.thomasdewey.org/). Likewise, why would we assume or propose she was the widow, surname Moore, buried 1637 in another place.

Strikes me as unusual for a woman to marry at age 15, bear her first child at 20, and her last, at 23. Do I have my math right?

(3) Burial, 1636. Is there anything in the 1636 Hinton Martel Thomas Dewey burial to confirm he was the father, as opposed to then 20 year old Thomas? For example, does that record provide an age or refer to him as "senr"? Was there a will or any kind of estate record about the man buried in 1636? (See Ann's helpful offer to render a transcription.)

---

Thanks for your kind words; one of the downsides of doing years of research is there is a lot of ‘material’ as a result, some of which can be easily ‘overlooked, so I am happy to help-out by responding to questions:-

1. Sandwich vs Swanage: I have no idea where the authors of ‘Life of George Dewey rear admiral, U.S.N.’ found a  reference to Sandwich, but when they were writing their book around 1890 the maps of the time would only show 1 Sandwich, the one in Kent.  The town of Swanage in Dorset was known as Sandwich prior to 1781 (as shown on a Pilot’s Chart), but by 1806 it was shown on the Shoreham map (and other subsequent maps) only as Swanage.  The book ‘THE DORSET PROTESTATION RETURNS PRESERVED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 1641/2. EDITED BY EDWARD ALEXANDER FRY’ has on page 18, about 100 surnames for “SANWCH IN PURBECK”; Sanwch is another variant of Sandwich and Purbeck is the region of Dorset that (Sandwich) Swanage is in.

2. I have put a lot of links into the profile for Thomas Dewye Snr (Dewye-4) and I intend adding links to my new text for The Settler’s profile.  I think it is likely that Thomas may have moved his family from Dorchester to Sturminster Marshall based on the baptism record of John Moore on 4 Oct 1607. Sturminster is just 7 miles SW of Hinton Martell, and about the same from Poole harbour where I believe Thomas was active in the New England fishing industry. John is highly likely to be Mary's younger brother born just 7 miles from where Mary lived, but 1 year after Thomas Dewey The Settler was born; Mary died in 1637 and was buried on 24 Nov 1637 at Sturminster.  Thomas Snr was a tenant farmer and after he died Mary was evicted from the cottage; it is probably not a coincidence that Mary then moved to the nearby village where her brother was baptised, perhaps to stay with people she knew.

Following the marriage entry in the records there is one of the burial of “Edeth Moore buryed ye 22 of January”.  It would seem likely that Edith is Mary’s mother, which possible left Mary all on her own and so a marriage to Thomas (having just lost his young wife, Agnes, aged 22) would be understandable within a small community of Puritans.

  3. I do not believe that Thomas had enough of an estate to warrant having a will.  His burial is corroborated as being that of Thomas Dewey senior by research carried out by Richard Samways (commissioned by Michael Dewey and myself) on the Shaftesbury Archives. This research shows Thomas Dewye as renting a cottage with his wife Mary and son John in 1624 and also Thomas Dewey dying in 1636, with his widow Marie becoming the tenant.  From the research it seems she was evicted in October 1636, “wee desire that shee may be ridden upon payne of 40s”.  

Please let me know if you want more information.  There are a lot more details (!) on my website:- http://www.deweywiltshireroots.org.uk.

Regards, Terry

---

Hi M Cole, thanks for your response.

On your 1st point I feel you are trying to put the cart before the horse; the "specific edits" are the evidence that the parents of The Settler are now known.  If that evidence is accepted, then, and only then, can I ask for the 'new' parents to be added.

On your second point, I have started a discussion on DNA presentation, please see https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1529101/has-anyone-else-used-the-endogamy-dna-effect.  The answers were very long and interesting, but they did not answer my basic question of "How should such evidence be presented on a profile?"  So, I have taken the advice of another member and used my own judgement as to how best to present my evidence.

Regards, Terry

---

Swanage is spelled Sandwyche in various sources

http://epns.nottingham.ac.uk/browse/id/532852f9b47fc4099d002ba5

Edit. Other comments

The name Dewey appears to have been relatively common in 17th C Dorset. It appears in many parishes. There was a cluster in Wool and another in Wimborne; both relatively near to Poole. (Lots of wills from the Wimborne Cluster) A Thomas Dewey was buried at Holy Trinity Dorchester in 1625.

 Rev. John White was a member of the C of E. It was  not a  small sect. (Otherwise there wouldn't have been a civil war) Dorchester is sometimes known the most Protestant town in England but  other Dorset towns including the ports were predominantly Parliamentary during the civil war. (Charles I was desperate to secure a SW  Port but failed)https://www.wilcuma.org.uk/the-history-of-dorset-after-1066/the-civil-war-in-dorset/

There are some records at the Dorset History Centre  from the Crichel Estate dating from 1594 referring to a Thomas Dewey of  Hemsworth (was a hamlet in Witchampton and adjacent to Hinton Martell) e.g. https://archive-catalogue.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/records/D-CRI/A/37/1/4  I'd definitely check out these records( if you haven't already done so) plus  considering that Wimborne is fairly close, the  Wimborne Dewey  wills.

---

Thanks for your information, John White's name came up in a context of PGM so I had assumed he was a Protestant.  The reference you supplied to a Thomas Dewey was a 'conveyance' in 1594; Thomas Dewye Snr died in 1636, The Settler died in 1648.  So your reference is interesting, but not relevant to my specific research, thanks anyway.

Regards, Terry

---

RE Mary 'Moore's' burial at Sturminster Marshall. (although the http://www.deweywiltshireroots.org.uk/america.html)  actually says Stratton.

As someone( Gene?) remarked Moore would be the married name. In any case I don't think that the entry reads Moore. (in spite of Ancestrys indexing)  I believe that it is Mary Moorecocke widdow. The poor lady appears to have died of 'anus paralytica' and she was 'sepulta ven die' buried on Friday.

 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/1007010?mark=86e9ab4a20b676df3b3516b0cb1541837acc473bcc673a2e0ca8efd0a7bf9c57

---

Thank you Helen ... had been praying someone with your talents might better decipher that record for us.

And yes, poor thing. --Gene

---

Thanks Helen for using your expertise in deciphering this record, when I read it I got as far as ‘Moore’, but did not know what the ‘squiggle’ was after it; having now searched through Fry’s ‘Dorset Records’ for Sturminster Marshall, there are quite a few hits on Moorecocke in the 1600’s, but the name Moore does not appear until the 1700’s! Hey ho, older and wiser! It is interesting that the 4^th entry after Mary Moorecocke’s burial is the burial of a Robert Dewy!

I originally had ‘Stratton’ on my website as the place of burial, but dismissed it as I thought SM was less unlikely. I obviously now need to go back over my research notes to re-evaluate Stratton.

I have searched again for the burial of a Mary Dewey in Dorset and neighbour counties, but still have not found anything. Mary & John were effectively homeless after they were evicted, so their situation was dire; I am not very hopeful that a record exists as to the fate of Mary, who I believe is my 10*G Grandmother.

Some time ago I created a spreadsheet from the Hinton Martell records for the period 1566 to 1665 with date, event and name(s); a search of it reveals a few Moores, in particular Ellis Moore as a church warden in 1602, the year after Thomas and Mary Moore were married; however, there are no hits for ‘Moone’.

Regards, Terry

a.western:visited { so-language: en-GB }a.cjk:link { so-language: zxx }a.ctl:link { so-language: zxx }

---

Moone is the possible transcrption for Mary Moo[r/n]e baptised at HT in Dorchester. It could be either. I have no evidence but I'm attracted to this being  a cadet line of the Moone family. This family  eventually settled on the 'posher' spelling of Mohun but at this time still used Moone and was a family interconnected  with the Churchills of Dorchester.The reason I'm attracted to this family is that there is a 1611 baptism  entry for a Troilus son of John Moo[r/n]e. This is a very unusual name and suggests a classical education. The  Moone (Mohun) family used names  including  Maximillian and Cornelius.

Re Stratton, I live east of Stratton. It would take me about 30 minutes to walk over the hill to the village.  This is within  'courting distance'  It would take me 7-8 hours to walk to the west to Hinton Martell. Thats not feasible for a poor person without a horse and time.

Answer 1

Have the wills been transcribed? If not I am happy to do them and put them on a FSP.

Regards,

Ann

Answer 2

Looks like father left a will hereEdited to add, Ive looked at the profile now and it appears this is not the father searching again

https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/988592:5111?tid=&pid=&queryId=68adbe09e48ea523fe50abd87ca3345f&_phsrc=ZHP20213&_phstart=successSource

Ann

Comments

Hi Ann, thanks for your answers, but I am a bit confused.  The only will I refer to is that of John Russell, and that can be found here:-

https://archive.org/details/recordsofgoverno01mass/page/152/mode/2up?view=theater&q=John+Russell

Regards, Terry

---

A will would be helpful. It might confirm that the man left heirs. It might mention family members, including whether he had a son at New England, etc. --Gene

Answer 3

Thank you for posting this and for doing so much research on the Deweys. It was no small undertaking I am sure.

Have you and/or Mark submitted this information to a genealogical publication such as NEHGR or The American Genealogist, The Genealogist, etc? I would be very interested in seeing this information vetted through formal peer reviews, as is done by scholarly publications such as those mentioned.

It would also be great to tie up some of the loose ends that are currently assumptions.

In the meantime I suggest you create a Free Space Page which can emulate a profile, and in which you can document the research, findings, as well as the assumptions behind them. It could also include a section on the DNA evidence. The FSP could be used to solicit more feedback, and should be linked to the Dewey-54 profile (and vice versa).

Thank you for helping improve WT profiles.

Comments

Thanks for your response.

Yes, but an informal review; about 6 years ago I contacted NYGBR, with a link to my website and asked if R C Anderson might be interested in my research.  I had a reply which said they were very busy with reviewing articles, but they would get back to me.  I did not hear from them, but about a year later I found a 2nd cousin 1 removed (2C1R) via DNA.  I made email contact with him and he told me he was the (now retired) President & Fellow of the American Society of Genealogists!  He said, “Your study of the English origins of the Dewey family looks terrific. One of my dearest friends is Bob Anderson…. He was very interested, and asked me to forward your email on to him”.  My 2C1R told me that RCA is very busy writing more books and it might be some time before he can get back to me.  I am still hopefully that RCA will reply sometime soon, but thought that it would be good idea anyway to put my research results on WikiTree to attract a wider audience.

Thanks for your suggestion, I will investigate the FSP option, but as I’m sure you will appreciate, my website (http://www.deweywiltshireroots.org.uk) contains a lot of information.  Trans-scribing most of it into WikiTree style would be a huge undertaking.

Regards, Terry 

Answer 4

Terry, I think S Willson's suggestion to start with a Free Space Page is a good one as far as resolving the issue of substance v edits.

I saw the g2g post.  I guess the issue is that I'm not sure the evidence you're presenting supports your conclusions.  

It sounds like you have at least two potential male Deweys from different lines descending from Thomas Snr. (Which is very unusual).  A matching Y-DNA test could really boost your case here using a standard genetic genealogy approach.

Comments

Terry has some extensive DNA research. So hope that will be the basis of one or more space pages so that those who can collaborate on that topic will contribute. --Gene

---

I do not understand what you mean by "two potential male Deweys from different lines".  If you are referring to Thomas Snr's sons (Thomas & John) then obviously they are 2 male Dewey, with different lines??

Regards, Terry

---

Yes.  If you want to confirm that you and the descendants of Thomas Dewey the Settler share a common male ancestor, then a Y-DNA test could do it.  Most DNA projects have only participants descending from immigrants to America, so they can only tell if two U.S. lines are related or not, and can’t help narrow down the origins. And of course, there's the problem of a line "daughtering out," with there being no more male paternal line descendants available to test.  But in this case, there's you and it seems that the author of ThomasDewey.org that could be a potential match.

If the tests match, it won't prove the exact relationship you are proposing, but it would prove a common Dewey ancestor.

---

Hi Marina,

Thanks for the info on the presentation by RCA; there are also a lot of other interesting presentations to look over when I have time.

A problem with Y-DNA testing is that it can be difficult to get 2 individuals with the same surname to agree to do a test with the same company at about the same time. I know of a father & son whose Y-DNA results are different but their autosomal tests have a cM of over 3400, so they clearly are father & son. The problem seems to have been that their tests were made about a year apart, one was on the v4 chip, the other was on the V5 version, see here for details:- https://isogg.org/wiki/23andMe. My Ancestry DNA evidence shows matches between 3 Dewey individuals in England (me, my uncle and my son) and 20-40 (and growing) individuals in the USA. This number and spread of independent results cannot be due to a failure of testing, and certainly not due to “luck of DNA”. So my conclusion is that my (here and now) results are more robust than a, yet to be arranged, one-off Y-DNA test. I am now thinking that I should submit my evidence as a ‘endogamy case study’ to ISOGG and see if I can get any response from their experts.

Regards, Terry

a.western:visited { so-language: en-GB }a.cjk:link { so-language: zxx }a.ctl:link { so-language: zxx }

---

Terry,

Just some quick comments here as I didn’t want to leave this too long.  23andme doesn’t do the type of YDNA testing I’m suggesting.  They only do high-level SNP testing which helps to group ancient ancestral populations (not determine relationships). I believe what happened there with the chip version was a fairly isolated event (and I’m curious to know how 23andme was sampling that they could have haplogroup errors in the first place.  Although it's not too surprising because Y/mt dna testing has never been a core feature of their product. But with that first impression, I’m not surprised that you’re skeptical). I was referring to a Y-DNA STR test. Family Tree DNA is the only company that does it, that I’m aware of.  They have hundreds (probably more) studies ongoing (surprisingly they don’t currently have a Dewey study, but you could start one).  More on Y-DNA later….

I also wanted to clarify that we’re not trying to dismiss your atDNA results.  When Barry Smith referred to “luck of DNA,” (in the other g2g post), I don’t think he was trying to say that your matches were IBC (identical by chance) rather than IBD (identical by descent).  I think he was just saying that sometimes statistically rare things happen and a segment of DNA survives longer than expected. Which is also to say, you probably don’t need to argue that the early population of Windsor was an endogamous group to explain your results.  I think using one set of Ancestry DNA matches to draw a conclusion about a population is a hard sell, and probably not necessary.   Without realizing it, you’re trying to resolve one contentious idea (the large genealogical distance between matches) with an even more contentious idea (endogamy at Windsor).   It's like releasing a bear to catch a mouse. You’re going to end up wrestling with the bear and the mouse will never be seen again. (Maybe not the best analogy…but I’m sticking with it!)  I think we just need to work out the best way to present your data on WikiTree in enough detail so that people can better evaluate it for themselves.  And I don’t ask that you agree with me about the endogamy, but just respectfully request that we table it so we can focus on the basic data presentation first?

Anyway….sorry, I don’t have more time right now (and I’ve probably said plenty anyway). I will circle back on both the Y-DNA and DNA on WikiTree/PGM profiles.

---

Hi Marina, thanks for your update. Some comments on the issues you raise:-

1. Y-DNA is all about the paternal line; 2 individuals with matching Y-DNA could have a common relative that goes back 5, or even 105, generations. My interest is in more recent (10 generations or so) specific family history connections. I am more interested in finding the MRCA couple from DNA matches so that I can determine if a specific match is an 8^th cousin, twice removed, or whatever. My targeted searches on Ancestry for both Dewey and Moore produced a number of matches to individuals in the USA. From these matches, and other research, I believe the MRCA for Wiltshire England Dewey families and USA settler descendant families is almost certainly Thomas Dewye Snr and Mary Moore.

2. My DNA results and endogamy are absolutely and completely tied together; the results show that endogamy was active to at least some degree at Windsor, and the other nearby communities of Westfield and Springfield. And, if we just ignore endogamy then all of my many results have to be considered as invalid, just “luck of DNA”!

3. I do not understand your rather dismissive statement of “using one set of Ancestry DNA matches to draw a conclusion”. I have used the DNA results of myself, my paternal uncle, my son and my 3^rd cousin (her Great-Grandma was born a Dewey, this provides a non-paternal line of results) so that is 4 sets of matches for a start; I have also searched for Dewey & Moore matches on Windsor, Westfield & Springfield. I have not yet covered all of the combinations, but I am up to about 10 independent sets of results, so far!!

4. I do not know what you mean by “even more contentious idea (endogamy at Windsor)” ISOGG is a prestigious organisation and are experts in DNA, they do not think endogamy is “contentious”; their website (https://isogg.org/wiki/Endogamy) has a lot of facts, backed up by evidence, regarding endogamy. So who at wikitree thinks it is contentious? From the 1640 plan of Windsor there were over 100 settlements; assuming about half were families, some with children, gives a population of around 200; assuming a doubling of the population every generation would give a population in 1790 of about 6400. However, the records (Wikipedia) state a population of only 2714 in 1790. Therefore there would not seem to be a large influx of new blood; there was however, a significant amount of movement of people back and forth between Windsor, Westfield and Springfield, but that is all part of an endogamous ‘local region’. For example, see the to and fro of The Settlers’ son Israel (Dewey-80) and his children.

Regards, Terry

a.western:visited { so-language: en-GB }a.cjk:link { so-language: zxx }a.ctl:link { so-language: zxx }

---

Terry, I think we've gone about as far we can on these subjects here in this thread.  I have some additional information I wanted to share with you. I hope you find at least some of it helpful. Do with it what you will.  If any of it interests you, I suggest starting new g2gs to bring a wider audience.  As far as discussing the question of endogamy further, why don't you continue the conversation on the thread you already started? (It sounds like to me what you are describing is pedigree collapse rather than endogamy).  Barry Smith and Edison Williams are both knowledgeable and thoughtful, and better versed on the subject.

• As far as how to present your data...Have you looked at Leeds charts?  They seem to be a good, concise way to display Clustering. Personally, I find the ones that include longest segment/total cms as well to be especially informative. (The best place for this on WikiTree would be a FreeSpace page linked from the profile page.).  Also, you might want to provide information on how many generations in the matching line were male-to-male.  I heard a speaker at RootsTech who mentioned that more distant cousins were more likely to occur along the y-Line.  I did a quick googlesearch and came up empty, but there must be a study somewhere (or ask on g2g). 
• I'm sure you've read through the WikiTree DNA Confirmation policy/process.  This is the only guideline we have for using DNA on WikiTree.  It's only for confirming proven genealogical connections, and requires either Y-DNA Test or atDNA segment triangulation. So, outside of this, we are in a grey area. Unfortunately, there isn't an option for Clustering or for using DNA to prove a distant relationship without a paper trail.  But if you're able to triangulate a segment, it might be worth bringing that forward for discussion.  I could imagine the project considering including a standard DNA statement that uses language like "is consistent with" rather than  "confirms."  (The same would apply to Y-DNA).  

That's about all I have to offer. I wish you luck in your research!