The chart below represents a generation by generation break down of two of our DNA lineages - Lineage 1
and Lineage 2.
Lineage 1 is shaded ORANGE and represents the TWO PAYNE family groups identified within it. The first
PAYNE family group within Lineage 1 is the “MIDDLESEX COUNTY, VIRGINIA,” group, represented
by the brothers Ralph and Thomas PAYNE of Lancaster and Middlesex County, Virginia- as found in “The
PAYNES of Virginia”, p. 5, where Col. Payne calls them “group 5”. The second group is the “ST. MARY’S
COUNTY, MARYLAND,” group, represented by Thomas PAYNE (d. 1673) and Jane SMALLPEICE (d.
1675).
Lineage 2 is shaded GREEN and represents the “WESTMORELAND COUNTY, VIRGINIA,” group of
that lineage, represented by John PAYNE (d. 1668/9) of Cople Parish, Westmoreland County, Virginia.
Under the name of each ancestor on the chart appears the DNA participant number(s) associated with that
ancestor (I didn’t include them all due to space limitations). We have two “crossovers” in these two lineages
between generations 5 and 8. Between these generations, where we expected we would find matches with
Lineage 1, instead, we found matches with Lineage 2. If these “crossovers” had occurred only one time- we
might chalk it up to bad genealogical research and jump right into resolving the issue by simply rethinking
and researching the parents of John Carrol PAYNE. But the crossovers occur twice. Not only do they occur
twice- but they occur in two different family lines within Lineage 1- each time pointing to Lineage 2. While
this fact in and of itself does not shut the door on the possibility of genealogical research errors within the
two family lines of Lineage 1, I believe that these two crossover problems, when taken into consideration
with the haplogroup C3 issue with Lineage 2, that another explanation appears to be more readily available.
At generation 4 on the chart under Lineage 1 from Middlesex County, Va., we have two participants (20981
and 945J). Participant 20981 claims descent from John PAYNE (1720/1-1780) that married Mildred
GREENWOOD, while 945J claims descent from this John’s brother, Philemon PAYNE. Participant 945J’s
DNA sequence results came back showing a very close relationship with descendants of the St. Mary’s,
Maryland, group in Lineage 1. For this reason, Lineage 1 was formed of two separate family lines- the one
from Middlesex County, Virginia, and the other from St. Mary’s, Maryland. Participant 20981, however,
who claims a good genealogical paper trail up to John Carrol PAYNE (1795-1865) who married Jane Walls,
received DNA sequence results indicating that his ancestors were closely related to descendants of the
Westmoreland County, Virginia, group in Lineage 2.
The most noticeable characteristic in the genealogy of 20981 is that the parents of this participant’s earliest
confirmed ancestor, John Carrol PAYNE, belong to both Lineages. John Carrol PAYNE’s father, John
PAYNE (1754-1831) has been put forward as belonging to Lineage 1as a grandson of Thomas PAYNE
(1686-1761/2) and Catherine LYDFORD. Since 945J’s ancestor, Philemon PAYNE, was a son of Thomas
PAYNE and Catherine LYDFORD, we consequently expected participant 20981’s DNA sequence to be a
match with 945J. Surprisingly, it was not. However, the mother of John Carrol PAYNE was Nancy PAYNE
of Lineage 2, being a daughter of Thomas PAYNE (sometimes referred to as “Trader” PAYNE). Nancy
PAYNE of Lineage 2 appears to have been Thomas’ daughter by a 1st wife- of whom we know nothing
about beyond some traditions that she had been a Native American. This, I believe is significant though
because we find that Lineage 2, which is comprised of 11 participants- 10 of these participant display in
their DNA sequences traits that indicate Native American ancestry. Before getting into this though, let’s
look at the other crossover we have in Lineage 1 within the St. Mary’s, Maryland, group.
Similar to Lineage 2 with 11 participants, Lineage 1 is also comprised of multiple participants. In fact, it is
our largest Lineage and we have defined two major family groups within it. The first, from Middlesex
County, Virginia, we just addressed. The other family group descends from Thomas PAYNE (d. 1673) and
Jane SMALLPEICE (d. 1675) of St. Mary’s, Maryland.
Within this Lineage, we had 3 participants (4662/945O, 4666 and 16206) with good paper trails back to
Thomas (d. 1673). The DNA results confirm these three participants to be closely related. Of the other
participants within this Lineage, we had two participants (945B and 4664) claiming descent from John
PAYNE and Philadelphia AYERS. This John PAYNE has been claimed to have been a brother of Isaac
PAYNE, Jr. (1790-1849)- from whom 4662/945O and 4666 descend. Therefore, the common ancestor of all
4 of these participant would have been said John and Isaac’s father, Isaac PAYNE, Sr. (1760-1827). While
participants 4662/945O and 4666 clearly indicate a close relationship in Lineage 1 by their DNA, and also
match closely with 16206 that descends from Isaac, Jr.’s uncle, Thomas Jefferson PAYNE (1732-1797),
participants 945B and 4664 have a DNA sequence that closely matches with Lineage 2.
The most obvious characteristic between participants 945B and 4664 is that the mother of their earliest
known ancestor was Philadelphia AYERS- and this is also the surname of the wife of Thomas PAYNE of
Lineage 2, who married Yanaka AYERS- and it was at THIS PRECISE MOMENT IN TIME (with the
children of Thomas and Yanaka) that the crossovers between our two lineages began within Lineage 2. It is
also THE PRECISE MOMENT IN TIME when traditions of Native American contact in the family began.
For this reason, I feel that we should consider the Native American question as a possible explanation for
the crossovers we see in both families of Lineage 1 that link them to Lineage 2. I strongly believe that until
we can explain this issue, we will never figure out these crossovers between the two lineages.
Now this isn’t to say that I somehow feel that the AYERS family is somehow responsible for all of this. I
am simply pointing out that that fact that this surname appears in conjunction with BOTH of our crossover
issues, that it should raise some red flags, ring some alarms or set off some lightbulbs…
In trying to formulate some ideas on how these crossovers could happen (without raising the potential of
genealogical errors), by this chart it would appear that we had members of Lineage 2, who had Native
American ancestry, JOIN the Lineage 1 family in two instances. The first is with the son of John PAYNE of
Lineage 1 and his wife Nancy PAYNE of Lineage 2. The second, that occurred one generation later, was
with John PAYNE and Philadelphia AYERS. Is it possible, somehow, that Philadelphia (AYERS) PAYNE
was a close relation of Yanaka (AYERS) PAYNE and took in one or more of her children that were born to
a Native American man and adopted the PAYNE surname? After all, their stepfathers would have been
PAYNES. Not a big jump to assuming the surname instead of being known by a Native American name...
We know by the records that these two lineages are often found in the same areas as they moved south. I’ve
even found unequivocal support that shows that Archibald MCMAHAN (who married Ann PAYNE, a sister
of participant 16206’s ancestor, Thomas Jefferson PAYNE), had applied for his Revolutionary War pension
through “James MCDANIEL, Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas and General Sessions for Greenville
District,” and this James MCDANIEL was almost certainly the father of Charity MCDANIEL (1794-1887)
whose daughter, Susannah HUMPHRYS (1820-1904) married John PAYNE (1820-1906), the ancestors of
participant 945B of Lineage 2. All that is needed to confirm this is to verify that Charity MCDANIELS
father, James MCDANIEL, was, in fact, the same man as “the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas and
General Sessions for Greenville District.” Charity’s family was from Orange County, NC., but they
evidently ended up in Greenville District for some period of time. In the Revolutionary War records of both
Archibald MCMAHAN and Nehemiah PAYNE (both of Lineage 1), we find that they had been called
(drafted) to “Hillsborough, NC.” which is in Orange County. In his pension application, MCMAHAN states
in his own words that he had lived in Orange County before removing to Greenville District. Nehemiah
PAYNE, on the other hand, ended up settling in Hart County, Georgia- which was formed out of Franklin
County in 1818. These are just a small number of the instance where our lineages 1 and 2 came into
geographical contact with one another as they moved south from Virginia and Maryland into North
Carolina, Tennessee and Georgia. Finally, I would also like to mention that 945B’s family of Lineage 2
lived and died in the same area of Polk County, TN and Fannin County, Ga. as my Lineage 1 family. I asked
my father (who grew up there in the 1930s- along with his 9 brothers and sisters) if he had any knowledge
or memories of these families (such as MCDANIELS and HUMPHRYS) from his youth. He said that there
are still HUMPHRYS living around the Copper Basin that are kin to his PAYNE cousins. When I asked
how he was related to them, he had no idea, saying “it was just always known that they were.” I guess what
was once “always known” has now been lost to us- but DNA is now trying to revive those lost memories.
There may be other explanation for these crossover problems that I have not thought of yet. But I think I’ve
offered a possibility that is worth investigating. Even if it turns out not to be the case, one thing that I feel
confident about that I am willing to stick my neck out on is that I believe that if we could locate a PAYNE
descendant of an ANCESTOR of Thomas “Trader” PAYNE, we would find a completely different DNA
sequence for lineage 2 and I would be willing to bet that this DNA sequence would match Lineage 1. For
that reason, I have shaded the ancestors of William, Thomas “Trader”, and Nancy PAYNE in both Green
and Orange, indicating that at some point in this ancestry there MUST BE a break from the C3 haplogroup
found in their descendants. Logic (and history) dictates that the ANCESTORS of William, Thomas “Trader”
and Nancy PAYNE of Lineage 2 could not have been Native American (not to say that they themselves
could not have been). As one of our Lineage 2 members pointed out, the father of William and Thomas
“Trader” PAYNE was William PAYNE and he had married Elizabeth POINDEXTER, a granddaughter of
an old family from the Isle of Jersey in the Channel Islands where they had been politically and socially
prominent. It is not likely that Elizabeth would have been allowed to marry a Native American. But I don’t
think that her background would have prevented her from showing compassion to them- read into that what
you will.
Beyond William PAYNE, we are moving back into the mid 17th-century, when relations with the Native
Americans was anything but friendly. Troubles between the colonists and Native Americans led to Bacons
Rebellion in 1676. I can point to several reasons to doubt that there would have been any possibility of an
introduction of Native American blood into Lineage 2 before the time of William and Thomas “Trader”
PAYNE- and it just so happens that it was in their time that the DNA record shows it.
But let’s back up a second, because we just passed over another good reason for suspecting a genealogical
link between Lineage 1 and 2. I just mentioned the POINDEXTER family of Jersey. Folks, if you have not
spent a little time reading up on the history of Jersey (and I don’t guess that you’ve had much reason to), it
is a tiny island off the coast of France. While it may be considered as a part of England, its inhabitants are
more French than English. The speak a dialect of Norman French that is found nowhere else and their laws
and governmental structure are unique to England. I can’t imagine that there was any large scale migration
from the island to the colonies during the 17th-century- but it is evident that there was some- and among
them were PAYNS and POINDEXTERS (the name is found as POINDESTRE in Jersey by the way).
The brothers Ralph and Thomas PAYNE mentioned in “The PAYNES of Virginia” on p. 5 were thought to
have been members of the PAYN Jersey family that had fled the island for England and then the Leeward
Islands in the Caribbean during the mid 17th-century. Brooke also suggests that these brothers were relatives
of the immigrant John PAYNE (ca. 1615-1689/90) of Westmoreland County and also of Robert PAYNE,
alias DAVIES (d. 1675) of Rappahannock County. While Brooke couldn’t have known it, I think he would
be surprised to find that these brothers were so closely related to the St. Mary’s, Maryland family as we now
know from our DNA testing. We also had a descendant of the Jersey family participate in our testing and he
also falls within Lineage 1- although not closely enough to make the brothers Ralph and Thomas, or the
Maryland PAYNES, close kinsmen to them. Still, Brooke was partially right nevertheless…
Anyway, the PAYNS and the POINDEXTERS of Jersey shared many common relations and friends- as you
might imagine on a small island. But you also find that Elizabeth (POINDEXTER) PAYNES uncle, George
POINDEXTER (d. 1738) of New Kent County, Virginia, had married Mary OVERTON. "The Virginia
Magazine of History & Biography," vol. XIX, No. 3, p. 326, also states that George POINDEXTER had
been involved with the THOMPSON family. So it comes as no surprise when we find in “The PAYNES of
Virginia” that Thomas PAYNE’s (d. 1664) widow had married Roger OVERTON "of Virginia & Shadwell,
Stepney, London." Thomas, of course, was the brother of Ralph and uncle of Thomas PAYNE that had
married Mary MONTAGUE- all of Lineage 1 to which the PAYN family of Jersey also belongs. Nor is it
surprising to know that Thomas’ son, Nicholas PAYNE, returned to England (with his uncle Ralph?) where
he resided in Shadwell, Stepney- just as Roger OVERTON. The Will of Nicholas Paine, Mariner, of St.
Pauls, Shadwell, Middlesex, dated 13 Sept. 1693, names wife Agnes [as opposed to Brooke Paynes Mabel
Hackney who may have been a first wife], and daughters Hannah, Elizabeth (wife of one Rowling or
Bowling) and Anne Paine. Also mentions Hannah Lewger<?>, Tho. ___ and John King.
The point here is that, again, we find cause to believe that there was a relationship between Lineage 1 and 2.
Now we have another participant joining our DNA testing. His name is Ronald PAYNE and he has been
assigned participant number 24225 [not on the chart yet]. Ron descends from Thomas PAYNE, a brother of
John Carrol PAYNE, whose descendant participated in our testing as 20981. Ron, like participant 20981,
has a genealogy indicating descent through Lineage 1.
Should Ron’s test results come back and also indicate descent from Lineage 2 instead of Lineage 1 (and
even if it doesn’t), I’m not quite sure what we will learn from it. Whatever the results are, I’m afraid that it
will only be an addition to the current problem we have (as you can glean from the chart below). I don’t
think his results, whatever they may be, will resolve the problem. If he falls into Lineage 1, then 20981 is
still a big question. If he falls into Lineage 2, then he and 20981 become questions. And it does nothing to
answer the same problems we have with 945B and 4664 of the Maryland branch of Lineage 1. Ideally, what
we really need is a descendant further up the line in Lineage 2- such as a descendant of William and Thomas
“Trader” PAYNES uncle, John (who appears to be questionable) or perhaps further up- such as a
descendant of John and Millicent PAYNES son, James. As remote as these chances are, they would
certainly be the best chances we have of resolving the issue.
Maybe the DNA will turn up something useful. I’m sure it will. But to solve these problems, I think it is
going to take good old-fashioned genealogical leg work.
Common Ancestor
Lineage 2
Westmoreland County, Va.
Lineage 1
Middlesex County, Va.
Lineage 1
St. Mary’s, Md.
Gen. 1
John Payne (1669)
4663 & 4658
Ralph Payne (1660)
945J
Tho Payne (1673)
4662, 16206, 4666
Gen. 2
John Payne (1698)
4663 & 4658
Tho Payne (1698)
945J
Isaac Payne (1713)
4662, 16206, 4666
Gen. 3
Wm Payne (1735)
4663 & 4658
Tho Payne (1761)
945J
Tho Payne (1748)
4662, 16206, 4666
Wm Payne (1771)
4658
Tho Payne (1811)
4663
Dan Payne (1833)
4658
Wm Payne (1851)
4663
Gen. 6
John Payne (1780)
20981
Nancy Payne
20981
John Payne (1831)
20981
John C Payne
20981
Philemon Payne
945J
Issac Payne (1801)
4662, 16206, 4666
Isaiah Payne (1818)
4662, 4666
Tho Payne
Tho Payne (1797)
16206
Isaac Payne (1827)
4662, 4666
Gen. 7
John Payne (18??)
4664 & 945B
Isaac Payne (1849)
4662, 4666
Gen. 8
John Payne (1906)
945B
Moses Payne (18??)
4664