Jeremiah Osborne, II - OSBORNE CHART

It shifted

Jeremiah III married Mary Newman
George m. Ann. Hannah Westfall
John m. Elizabeth Claypool
Abigale m. Joseph Claypool
Pheobe Osborn

Tagging the Geni profiles.

Jeremiah Osborne, Sr. & Abigail Osborne

Jeremiah Osborne, of the South Fork & Phebe Osborne parents of

Jeremiah Osborne, Jr. married Mary Osborne

George Osborne, Sr. married Annatje Osborne

Rev. John Osborn Married Rev. John Osborn

Abigail Claypool Married Joseph Claypool, I

Phebe Harris Married Henry Harris

SOURCES: "Claypool" and "Claypools in America"
by Professor Evelyn Claypool Bracken

You will find all you need to know with additional sources in the "Claypools in America" book. Preferably VOLUME 6.

Thomas Osborne 1594/5
Mary Goatley
migrated from Ashford, Kent, England
|
Children: Thomas Jr. Jeremiah, John 1631, Richard died 6 months old, Stephen 1634, Joseph (all born in Ashford). Increase (d. 7 years old), Rebecca, and Benjamin, the last three children born in the USA.

Stephen Osborne
Sarah Stansborough
|
Jeremiah Osborne
Abigail Ogden
|
Jeremiah Osborne
Phoebe Higgens
|
CHILDREN: George 1725, Jeremiah 1729, John 1735, Abigail, Phoebe.

After a few generations Stephen's descendant George Osborne 1729 has a descendant, George Jackson Osborne that married a descendant of John Osborne b. 1634 and Mariam Rebecca Hand, by the name of Mary Polly Robinette 1703-1869 the daughter of Ann Osborne.This Ann Osborne desends from John Osborne 1631 the brother of Stephen 1634. Now here is the thing, MALE DNA is carried from the male ancestor to the grandfather- to the Paternal Father- to the son. SO, by marrying her own distant cousin, Mary Polly Robbinette threw a MONKEY WRENCH, into the Y-DNA geerbox! Meaning that even though she was a descendant of John Osborne 1634, by marrying George Jackson Osborne the descendant of Stephen Osborne 1634 she NOW CHANGED THE DNA RESULT for all the male descendants of her children, grandchildren, and so on and so forth! BUT if you back up a generation or two, the other male Osbornes in the line of John don't have that problem! And their DNA result will be off by 1 number.

NOW, if you read the book, "Early Osbornes and Alleys", by Rita Kennedy Sutton, within 30 minutes of reading that book, I found 6 marriages of Osborn/es marrying Osborn/s. And Each and every marriage in that family NEEDS TO HAVE THEIR DNA LOOKED AT VERY CLOSELY ALSO!

I wonder how many Genealogist and researcher turned out to be drunks after studying the genealogy of the line of John Osborne 1634 and Mariam Rebecca Hand?!!! Funny? Couldn't they grab a horse and get out of the neighborhood to find a husband or wife? Well, as I said, that was 6 of those marriages in 30 minutes! But I believe there are more of them on that line!

Then as I look at the other trees of the Children of Thomas Osborne 1594/5 and Mary Goatley's children, in their son Thomas Jr. line one of the marriages was to the line of John Osborne 1631.

Above I see Erica has a note- Jeremiah Osborne, Jr. is not the same person as Jeremiah Osborne of the Sourth Fork. Your answer to that is in Volume 5 or 6 of the "Claypool" and "Claypools in America"!

No mutation Erica. What has happened is that George Osborne 1729 is from the line of Stephen Osborne b. 1634.

George Osborne 1729
Annatjnet Hannah Westfall
|
Solomon Osborne 1766
Margaret Denton
|
Rev. George Jackson Osborne 170-
Mary Polly Robinette 1793
|
Enoch Osborn/e 1812-1870
Annie Alder 1814-1871
|
James Knox Polk Osborn 1844-1923
Elizabeth Robinette 1847
|
Dr. Andrew Jackson Osborne 1869-1937
1. Mary Fisher 1870
2. Ollie J. Stacy 1870
(15 children)

You have 2 Robinette marriages there. That is part of the monkey wrech!

Then if you go from John Osborne 1631 who is the brother of Stephen Osborne 1634 , you will keep going down the male side and several generations later a female from John's side married a male from Stephen's side of the family. (Involving the Robinette also). As if that isn't bad enough!!! There are several Osborne/Robinette marriages on the line of John. NOW with the DNA...."YOU always follow the male Y-DNA). Which you believe you were doing from the side of John 1631. BUT that female from John married the male from Stephen, and that is what is messing with your mind! Once she bridge the two families together, that is when you have to go with only the MALE LINE that she married into! I discussed this issue with a PROFESSOR! lol I recognized John's line 1631 and traced it from there. BUT the Professor was ONLY following the male line on Stephen's 1634 line. Technically speaking he was right. DNA doesn't lie, but it is "not a mutation", it is a cousin marring a cousin and confusing lay people! I knew about 3 of those marriages that descended from George Osborne 1729 and Annatjnet Hannah Westfall, but there are more than just 3 of them. Shirley Baker-Osborne has 4 that she knows about. But Wesley Noe has found 6 of them. In the book, "Early Osbornes and Alleys', by Rita Kennedy Sutton, I was reading the book and marked in color marker every time I found an Osborn/e marrying another Osborn/e. Within 30 minutes of reading I found 6. So who knows how many more of those marriages are out there like this~! Scott Osborne his brother Michael Osborne, Kay AXIVIER Harworth, Sarah Baker all come from this line of the family. IT is a down right dirty trick their ancestors have played on their relatives! Just remember, when you hit a female in genealogy you have to follow the male's DNA when tracing the genealogy.

Erica Horton- I absolutely love your reply about the way DNA works and is not suppose to work.

Y-DNA always follows the MALE. And when your are tracing it, you might have begun with a relative on the female's line...tracing from one Osborne to the next male---BUT when you come to the female---the DNA will change and then follow her husband's line. Some people call this a mutation. I renamed it and call it the BRIDGE. Meaning that they HAD to cross over to the other side! That is like me following the Osborn Y-DNA on my side of the family- descending from Thomas Osborne 1594 and Mary Goatley- to Stephen Osborne 1634 and Sarah Stansborough - to Jeremiah Osborne and Abigail Ogden- to Jeremiah Osborne and Phoebe Higgens- to John Osborn 1735 and Elizabeth Claypool 1739. the DNA stays with what we know is GROUP 4 DNA for Thomas Osborne 1594. But when I married my husband, my own son's DNA will switch to his father's DNA. Now in the thing above- the lady was an Osborne, BUT she married another Osborn and both sides shares the DNA from Thomas Osborne 1594 and Mary Goatley. But it will show up in the markers as a mutation! Meaning that there is a bridge to cross to connect both sides. And the DNA will show the switch by seeing the mutation. My cousin"s daughter actually works in this field! She is a geneticist. She came for a family reunion this year, and was fascinated that I was also into genealogy.