DISCUSSION OF BROKEN LINEAGE DNA MARKERS

Return to opening DNA Page                         Return to DNA Testing Results Page

Return to the Broken Lineages Chart

UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2012

These eight lineages have the Mangum/Mangrum surname, but they are unrelated to the MML. We suspect that all were the result of broken lineages, that is, children were raised with the Mangum surname, but their biological fathers were not Mangum.

GREENBERRY MANGUM/MANGRUM OF TN

The Greenbery Mangum/Mangrum descendents are not part of the Main Mangum Lineage (MML). They are in an entirely different Haplogroup, that is, “I” instead of the MML’s “R1b1”. They cannot be related to the MML in any genealogical time frame. They appear to be identical to the “Dukes” of Orange Co., N.C., at least the ones we have DNA results for. We have included the markers of a descendent of Henry Dukes in our charts above. The two descendents of Greenbery Mangum/Mangrum match the numbers for Henry Dukes in 36 out of 37 markers. See the article on Greenbery in issue 55 of the Mangum-Mangham-Mangrum Journal. No traditional genealogical tie between the Dukes and Greenbery Mangum has been found.

ELLISON G MANGUM OF NC

We also have the DNA results of a descendent of Ellison G. Mangum of Orange Co., N.C. Family traditions tell us that Ellison G. Mangum was a son of Chaney Mangum, unmarried daughter of Arthur Mangum Sr., and Taylor Duke. Unfortunately, DNA results do not show a match with any available DNA results from Duke or Dukes descendants. The Ellison G. Mangum is “R1b1c” Haplogroup, not “I” Haplogroup like the Dukes we have test results for. There are two major possibilities for explaining these results. One, Ellison might not have been fathered by Taylor Duke. Two, Taylor Duke might not have the “Dukes” DNA, meaning that he might have been the product of a lineage break himself. My impression is that the Dukes’ lineage at this time in Orange Co., NC is still somewhat unclear.

Although he has no very close matches with any other MML, including the Dukes, he does have a 4 marker mismatch (in 25 Markers) with our English Maugham participant. The lab’s calculator shows a 73% chance of a common ancestor since 1400 AD (600 years ago). We suspect this is an accidental match via random mutations over the centuries and may not indicate an actual relationship. Even if the relationship is real, we do not know the true lineage of Ellison, so the question is moot at this point.

JAMES/JESSE MANGUM OF NC

We have another line Mangums who descend from James & Jesse Mangum of Orange Co., N.C. They also are unrelated to the MML. The parentages of James & Jesse have always been obscure and it is possibly they represent the generation in which the lineage break occurred. We have found a descendent of Joel Chambless (1756 N.C.) who is a perfect 37 marker match with the descendants of Jesse & James Mangum. We are still evaluating that situation, but we need additional Chambless DNA tests to determine whether the lineage break was in the Chambless line or in the Mangum line. If future tests on individuals with the Chambless surname match our Joel Chambless participant (with whom our Jesse & James Mangum participants match), we would consider these Mangums to be genetically part of the Chambless lineage, solving (in general but not in specifics) the origin of the James/Jesse lineage. If our Joel Chambless descendent participant does not match the other Chambless participants, we would tend to believe that the Joel Chambless lineage is genetically Mangum, but of course Mangum by the Jesse/James line, not the Main Mangum Lineage. The latter situation would have the disadvantage of providing little or no information on the question of the origin of the James/Jesse Mangum line.

WILLIAM MANGUM OF S.C.

This family descends from John Mangum, b. 1732 in Virginia. John Mangum (b. 1732) is the father of the Revolutionary patriot John Mangum, born 1763. He is also the father of William Mangum, born 1756 in the Albemarle Parish, Surry Co., VA., who in turn is the father of Edna Mangum. This 1732 John moved with his family from Surry Co., VA to Lunenburg, VA, now called Mecklenburg County, then to Craven Co., SC and finally to Newberry County, SC.

Son William, who was in Newberry Co., SC by 1779, married Anna Goggins and had possibly 11 children, including the Rev. Daniel Mangum and Edna Mangum born about 1800. The traditional genealogy of this family shows that Edna married John Redrick Glenn and had several children including Hillary Richmond Glenn. The lineage also shows that her brother William Mangum Jr. had son Hillary Richard Mangum and he was the ancestor of our DNA participant, to which this discussion applies. Recent research by a family historian indicates that Hillary Richard Mangum, son of William Jr. did not exist. Instead, there are indications that Edna Mangum had a son by Christopher Griffin before her marriage to John Glenn. That son was probably Hillary Richmond Mangum and not Hillary Richmond Glenn as shown in the printed lineage. We believe the descendants of the non-existent Hillary Richard Mangum are actually those of Hillary Richmond Mangum, son of Edna Mangum and Christopher Griffin. If so, then our DNA participant descends from Christopher Griffin and Edna Mangum.

We should therefore find that our DNA participant has the genetic signature of a Griffin lineage, not Mangum. The tests did show that the Hillary Richmond Mangum descendent was totally unrelated to the Main Mangum Lineage (MML). Inquiries to the administrator of the Griffin-Griffith-etc Surname Group showed that there were indeed two matches between this participant and two individuals in one of their Griffin lines. One was to the line of a John Griffin who was born 1745 in Virginia and died in 1780 at the battle of Fishing Creek, SC. He matches 24 out of 25 markers with our participant. Another match was from the David Griffin line. He matched 12 for 12 markers with our participant. David Griffin was born 1765 in South Carolina and died 2 Dec 1833 in Limestone Co., AL.

Although this cannot be considered proof, it is very convincing circumstantial evidence that Hillary Richmond Mangum, ancestor of our DNA participant, was the child of Christopher Griffin and Edna Mangum, probably before her marriage to John Glenn.

This participant also had a 25 marker exact match with another surname; a Crow. Initially we discounted this match as insignificant. Exact 25 marker matches between individuals with different surname are rather uncommon, but they do occur on occasion. We discounted this match because we knew of no real connections between the Mangum/Griffins and the Crows. When we got the 37 marker tests we found that our participant matched the Crow in all 37 markers. This was difficult to discount. Further inquiries showed some tenuous connections between the Griffins and the Crows. Both families were in S. C. when the Mangum/Griffin lineage break occurred. One member of the Crow family later married a Griffin in Georgia. This was about 30 years after the birth of Christopher Griffin’s son Hillary Richmond Mangum, so the marriage has no direct bearing on the Griffin/Mangum lineage break. It is, of course, possible that it represents a prior family, friendship or neighborly relationship between the SC Griffins and Crows, but that is purely speculation at this point. We have found no other traditional genealogical connection between the Griffins and Crows, nor have we found any connection whatsoever between the Mangums and Crows.

We now have 67 markers of three participants in this group; our descendent of Edna Mangum, a descendent of William Crow and a descendent of a Griffin who provided no information as to his origin. Out of the 67 markers, there are only three differences among the three individuals. The "unknown origin" Griffin has two of those and the Crow has one. Obviously, the three are very closely related, which means that this particular Griffin line and this particular Crow line must be genetically the same. One or both must be the product of a broken lineage. But, in this case, we don’t know which line broke away from which, that is, are the Griffins really genetically Crows, or vice versa. We thought we might get an indication of this if we looked at the matches within the Crows and Griffins. If one of these lines is a product of a broken lineage, their descendants should match few if any of the other lines with the same surname. Matches could occur only in those lineages that developed from the same line after the lineage break. Looking at the websites of each is very interesting if not totally enlightening. The Griffin lineage (that matched our Mangum) only has two members out of about 13 different Griffins. If you include the Griffiths, etc, there are dozens of participants, and with one Griffith that matches our Mangum in 12 out of 12 markers. So, at first look, the Griffins that match our Mangum seem to be somewhat isolated from the other Griffins/Griffiths. The Crows (that match our Mangum) seem to be even more isolated, having 4 members matching our Mangum participant out of 145 total members in the Crow database. It should be noted that these individuals (our Mangum and the Griffin/Crows) are in the “G2” Haplogroup, which appears to be of Pakistani origin. All the other lines in both the Crow and Griffin families are R1b1, E3, I or II. This means that the Crows and Griffins that match our Mangum have no common ancestor with the other Crows and Griffins within the last few thousand years. Still, there are many routes to developing a surname, and there is no real evidence that either the Griffins or Crows are themselves products of a broken lineage. These particular lines of Griffins & Crows may have developed by a different route than the other lines of Griffins & Crows. Of course, our Mangum participant is almost certainly a product of a broken lineage, most likely from the Griffins.

SOLOMON MANGUM OF MS

This participant (#73153) descended through Wiley P. Mangum & Nancy Matilda Bass. Wiley was the son of Solomon Mangum & Zilla Chapman of Mississippi. This participant has 37 markers which show quite strongly that he is not part of the MML. He does not match anyone in the Mangum surname group. The Family Tree DNA lab shows the chance of a common ancestor with the MML is about 1.86% in the last 20 generation (about 500 years). Additionally, he has very few matches to the entire Family Tree DNA database which has over 81 thousand participants and over 57 thousand unique surnames. At 37 markers he does have an exact match with a Roberts, but so far we have found no relationship between Solomon Mangum & the Roberts.

DEWITT MANGUM OF NC

This participant was descended from Dewitt C. Mangum of Granville County, North Carolina. The family ran into a brick wall trying to determine the father of Dewitt, and the DNA tests (Kit Number 146002 with 37 markers) gives us a possible reason for the problem. The participant’s DNA shows a Harris surname signature. Most of the DNA matches that showed up in the FTDNA database for this individual are Harris surnames. Of course, the lineage break was not necessarily at Dewitt Mangum, but that is the most likely theory at present. The family has not found any traditional genealogical information that links their Mangums with the Harris family.

HARVEY MANGUM (AFRICAN AMERICAN) OF NC_AR

The earliest known ancestor of this participant, Harvey Mangum, was born a slave. He has the Haplogroup E3a, which is an African lineage. It is currently hypothesized that this haplogroup dispersed south from northern Africa within the last 3,000 years, by the Bantu agricultural expansion. E3a is also the most common lineage among African Americans.

Harvey Mangum of Brassville District, (Granville County?), NC born c1840. He had two wives, Martha, and Patsy. The first marriage is listed in the Slave Co-habitation Records. He registered to vote in 1867. His children were Douglass, Cassandra, Wyatt, Leroy & Major as listed in the 1870 and 1880 census.

Harvey relocated to Arkansas in the 1880's or 1890's. He transformed in certain records to Hardy Mangrum. The last record 1920 census he is listed with Elias Byrd, Jefferson County, Arkansas. Harvey Mangum and some offspring were listed in City directories in 1900's of Pine Bluff, Arkansas.

It has been established that Jerry Mangum was Harvey’s brother. Jerry was listed in the co-hab. "marriage" records and listed with Harvey as voters in 1867. Jerry Mangum evolved into Jerry Mangrum and his family remained in Arkansas.

Harvey's son Douglass probably died in Arkansas, his widow Mary returned to her family in Wake County, NC and raised her family.

BENJAMIN MANGUM OF NC

This participant has Kit number 236496. This participant is descended from a Benjamin Mangum of Orange Co., NC. Ben’s son, Adolphus D. Mangum, was born Oct. 1862, so Ben may have been born around 1840. This line appears to be related to the Ellis surname. There is no relationship to the Mangum line through John Mangum the immigrant, at least through the Y-chromosome (direct male line).

Benjamin Mangum married Elizabeth “Betsy” Mangum, daughter of Jesse Mangum & Mary “Polly” Parish. The Jessie Mangum line is a broken lineage and appears to be related to the Chambless line. Ben’s father (name unknown) appears to be about the same generation as Jesse Mangum. Since both Jesse’s line and Ben’s line are products of broken lineages (Mangum surname but not Mangum genes), and are from the same part of North Carolina, and they are related by marriage as noted above, then it must mean something. Unfortunately, we do not know just what.

It is almost as if a Mangum family (about 1800 time frame) in Orange Co., NC took in some orphans and gave them the Mangum surname. Jesse, his brother James, and the unrelated Benjamin may have been those orphans. This is pure speculation as there is no proof at all. Hopefully this mystery will eventually be solved.

Top of page