An extended American family that found out about its existence through DNA.

While working on family number one in the Lancaster project, the following clusters of extremely close matches were found with different surnames, and correspondence began about getting more tests done and trying to work out what the link is. As it turns out, some work had already been done and the story is very interesting and likely to lead to more. After some additional tests it became clear that the connections were extraordinarily close. So by now putting the results on the webpage we have a reference point for further study and correspondence.

From my own point of view, the 37 markers unfortunately proved that I was not a relative, but as a volunteer coordinator for several DNA projects for my own family, I also found this a good example of what can realistically be done with DNA in genealogy. And so I am very happy to put this page up and help pass correspondence around.

Last Name	Origin	3	3	1	3	3	3	4	3	4	3	3	3	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	4	H	Y	Y	4	6	5	5	C	C	4	4
		9	9	9	9	8	8	2	8	3	8	9	8	5	5	5	5	5	4	3	4	4	6	6	6	6	6	4	C	C	5	0	7	7	D	D	4	3
		3	0		1	5	5	6	8	9	9	2	9	8	9	9	5	4	7	7	8	9	4	4	4	4	0		A	A	6	7	6	0	Y	Y	2	8
						a	b				|		|		a	b							a	b	c	d			I	I					a	b
											1		2																I	I
																													a	b
Carter	Unknown	13	24	13	11	16	18	11	12	12	13	11	30	16	9	9	11	11	26	14	20	32	14	16	17	18	9	11	19	21	14	12	17	21	31	35	11	10
McWhorter	Greene County, GA, USA	13	24	13	11	16	18	11	12	12	13	11	30	16	9	9	11	11	26	14	20	32	14	16	17	18
Matlock	Unknown	13	24	13	11	16	18	11	12	12	13	11	30	16	9	9	11	11	26	14	20	32	14	16	17	18	9	11	19	21	14	12	17	21	31	35	11	10
Matlock	Unknown	13	24	13	11	16	18	11	12	12	13	11	30	16	9	9	11	11	26	14	20	32	14	16	17	18	9	11	19	21	14	12	17	21	31	35	11	10

The first quite normal sort of DNA breakthrough this involves is that the 2 Matlocks knew of no connection, but now have each other’s paper trails to help each other as they are clearly related to each other, but not to most other Matlocks. One of them descends from a William C Matlock, born about 1837, while the other descends from an Isaac Matlock, born about 1794. No connection has been found yet, and their records stop about one generation apart, but here’s something they can work with…

The Carter result traces back to John Carter, one of the founding fathers of Watauga Settlement in Washington County, in what became Tennessee. Carter County, which split from Washington County in 1796, was named after his son Landon, and its capital Elizabethton was named after his wife. John Carter had been there since at least 1769/70. These are the oldest and easternmost European settlements in Tennessee.

Many genealogists and historians believe John Carter was related to a famous Corotoman family in Virginia to the east, but the DNA test seem to show that either he was not, or that others claiming this link were not. In fact, records were scarce, and no exact birth date is known either way. And so far, within the Carter DNA project, this DNA is unique. See http://www.carter-cousins.org/kits/19789.htm http://bridgett.maddoc.net/tennhist.htm and http://members.aol.com/smokyjoepayne/carter/pafn06.htm .

On the other hand, John Carter of Watauga gave the unusual name Landon to one of his sons, which was a name used by the Corotoman Carters, and he seems to have had business dealings with them. If it is true that John does not have the Corotoman DNA signature then maybe he was related non-paternally. Indeed there was a John of the right age in Virginia, a son of the Secretary of the Virginia colony (another John Carter), and he is referred to in the will of his seeming grandfather, Robert “King” Carter, as his son’s son, rather than his grandson, as he did for others in that position. Could there have been an adoption or illegitimacy known in the Virginia family?

After DNA matching suggested a connection between Carters and Matlocks it was ascertained that John Carter lived near the family of one David Matlock, even witnessing a deed of sale for them. In fact it seems one William Matlock may have built one of the first houses in Elizabethton, with the first court of the area meeting in his house (a court which included John Carter). And most importantly for us, in 1789 one John Carter was asked to pay child support money to Sarah Medlock (apparently the daughter of David) for the base begotten son also named John. See http://ba044ancestry.com/MatlockMedlock/Josie.html .

The exact connection between John Carter, Sarah Matlock/Medlock and the two separate modern Matlock families above is not yet determined, but coincidence seems to be ruled out.

Isaac (born about 1794, or perhaps earlier) may have been another son of John and Sarah, and is the forefather of one groups of Matlocks above. He seems to appear first in records as an adult who was probably resident in Roane and/or Rhea counties in Tennessee, to the west (where else?) of Carter and Washington counties. He later moved to Arkansas.

It might be another son (possibly John mentioned in the court records, if that is not the same person as Isaac) who fathered William C Matlock before dying. William and Josie, William’s mother, appear in records only later after a presumed second marriage – first in Franklin County Alabama, and later in Independence, Arkansas.

There are also a few theories about the connection to the Alabama McWhorter, but at this stage quite speculative.

First, John Carter might have been a McWhorter whose name had been heavily Anglicized. This is more believable than it might seem at first when you look at variants of the Scottish name McWhorter, which seems to have in fact developed from something like MAC CURTER (and originally from something like MAC CHRUTER, where the first component means son and the second component refers to a type of harpist). Dropping the Gaelic word MAC (meaning son) from a name was once quite common.

One problem with this theory is that, like all the other members of this group except the 2 Matlocks, the McWhorter result is not like anyone else so far found with the same surname. Could both the Carters and McWhorters have adapted their names from some other name not yet discovered? The name McCarter obviously comes to mind, but perhaps we should even consider the possibility that a non-British name underlies these connections. (This type of DNA signature though certainly found in native Britons, is much more common in inland Europe.)

There are records of McCarters having been in Greene County Alabama. For example one James McCarter born about 1764 had been in the SC militia and appears in pensioner censuses.

It would be very interesting to see how our MacWhorter’s 37 marker result would look. All my thinking so far is that it should be a little different from the others, and with a family connection further back in time – perhaps even in Britain.

---

If you have questions or comments, please pass them to me at Andrew dot Lancaster at Skynet dot be.