DNA Breakthrough on Adam Rogers' Genetic Ancestry!

The following is an announcement that was posted to the Rootsweb Mailing List for those interested in the descendant families of James Rogers of New London.   The list moderator is Eric Little, a Rogers descendant living in Canada.  This mailing list will be of interest to the descendants of James Rogers and Elizabeth Rowland. James, born c1615, arrived in Connecticut from London in 1635 and married Elizabeth Rowland.  He and his descendants were the basis for James Swift Rogers' 1902 genealogy, "James Rogers of New London, Connecticut and his Descendants,1637-1902"

The URL to follow if you might want to join that particular Rootsweb mailing list is:
<http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/r/rogers.html> 
Then choose [ROGERS-JAMES-CT] and decide whether you want the List mode or Digest mode.

"Hello Eric and list members,

I wish to announce and put into the Archive record a recent development regarding DNA evidence for another line of descendants from James Rogers of New London.  DNA testing was done through the firm "Family Tree DNA," at their group rate due to the presence of an associated Rogers surname study.  Mailing List host Eric Little had alluded to the probability of this announcement in a previous post.

On 22 Sept 2005 I was notified of a 12 point and a 25 point Y-marker match between my DNA sample and that of Dwight Rogers, a direct male descendant of James Rogers of New London.  Mailing list host Eric Little has documented Dwight's line. 

The DNA results indicate a 99.9% probability of us sharing a common Rogers ancestor.  For the descendants of Adam Rogers of New London, CT, we now have a combination of genetic and documentary evidence that a member of the family of James Rogers of New London,  was the father of Adam the mulatto. 

Eric Little provided Dwight's lineage as follows:
Dwight Leroy Rogers10, Joseph 'Jay' Albert Rogers9, Joseph Henry Rogers8, James Moore Rogers7, James Rogers6, Lemuel Rogers5, Stephen Rogers4, Jonathan Rogers3, Joseph Rogers2, James Rogers1 of New London, CT.

My lineage has been documented as follows:
James Allen Rogers, b 1949, at Denver, CO
Will Alden Rogers, b 1918, Davenport, IA
Clarence Alden Rogers, b 1888, Burlington, IA
Roswell Noyes Rogers, b 1848, Geauga County, OH
Joseph Noyes L. Rogers, b 1811, East Haddam, CT
Roswell Rogers, b 1764, of East Haddam CT
John Rogers, b 1734, of East Haddam CT
John Rogers, the cooper, b 1704 at New London, CT, and of Middletown, CT
Adam Rogers, the mulatto, b ca 1670, of New London, CT

Adam was initially a slave in the household of James Rogers of New London and his son John Rogers, the Rogerene.  John was born 1648.

Dr. Benjamin Trumbull, in his 1898 "Complete History of Connecticut, Civil and Ecclesiastical ...," disparaged John Rogers the Rogerene for having in his early days (before John's religious conversion) bedded with at least one of  the family's slaves.  "When he had occasion, he took to his bed a maid whom he had purchased, and after she had borne him two children, he put her away."  (Page 20) 

This possibility regarding Adam's parentage was echoed in George Waller's monograph, "Connecticut Genealogies; 1: Adam and Katherine Rogers of New London, Ct...," available in the RootsWeb Archives for New London, CT.

For more than 300 years suspicions have been that John Rogers the Rogerene fathered Adam Rogers the mulatto.  John was divorced in 1676 by his wife for an unspecified act that John did BEFORE his marriage.  Adam is believed to have been born ca 1670.  The DNA results appear to lend strong circumstantial evidence to substantiate those rumors.

The other possible fathers of Adam would be James' sons Samuel (b ca 1640), Joseph (b 1646), James (b 1652), or Jonathan (b 1655).  Children of these brothers would have been too young to have fathered Adam around 1670.  Additionally, Jonathan(2) would have only been about 15 at the estimated date of Adam's birth.  He would be the weakest alternative for parentage among the four brothers of John.

These test results do not mean with 100% certainty that John Rogers the Rogerene was Adam's father.  Dwight and I definitely descend from a common Rogers ancestor, and James Rogers of New London is the common point of connection on our two lines.  The DNA test alone does not determine exactly WHICH Rogers was Adam's father.

This conclusion blends the DNA results with our documentary research.  As more researchers submit DNA to be tested, and as the technology improves, it is possible that we may at a later date be able to pinpoint Adam's father with more certainty.

Thank you, Eric Little, for connecting me with Dwight Rogers, whose lineage you documented back to James Rogers of New London.  Thank you and cousin Sandy Johnson, too, for sharing the cost of Dwight's DNA test.  Thank you, Dwight Rogers, for helping us by serving as the benchmark in this by sharing your lineage. And thanks too to my good cousins who have helped so much in documenting the Adam Rogers line."