(This data posted on November 14, 2004)

The TEST

The Y-chromosome DNA Test is performed on men. The Y-chromosome is only carried down in families through male line descendants, passed unaltered from father to son, although occasional mutations occur.  This test is performed to ultimately determine if two particular men share a direct male line ancestor.  This is not a substitute for doing genealogy, but can be a great tool for solving mysteries once and for all or for narrowing down possible avenues of research.  For more information on the test, visit the website for the testing company at the link below.

The TESTING COMPANY

The company that performed the tests is Family Tree DNA, based in Houston, Texas.  Their website is http://www.familytreedna.com/.   If anyone is interested in participating, they should contact Richard Hite at [email protected] or Dan Wharton at [email protected] of Pelham, New York, about the Hite/Hoyt DNA project.   Dan started this project as a Hoyt project and then joined forces with Richard to make it a Hite/Hoyt project.  The administrators arrange for kits to be mailed and then participants can get the test analyzed for a lower price ($169.00 as opposed to $209.00).  $169.00 pays for a 25-marker test, which is the most sophisticated test offered.  It is also possible to take a simpler 12-marker test for $99.00 when ordering through Richard and Dan.  The simpler test can be upgraded later for $90.00 more.  The difference is explained on the website.  Richard Hite encourages going ahead with the 25-marker test from the beginning, but if $169.00 is too much of an investment to make at once, a 12-marker test is worth taking.  Payment is not expected until the kit is returned to the company.

Terminology:

Haplotype -      The unique set of all markers of an individual sample.  If two men have identical haplotypes, they are considered related in the male line.

Haplogroup -    A genealogical group defined by a specific set of similar readings on selected markers (less specific than a haplotype).  All men fall into a specific haplogroup and there are probably fewer than 50 worldwide.

DYS -              DNA Y Chromosome unique Segment

Allele –             any of two or more genes that have the same relative position on related chromosomes

Allele Value –   the number of repeats of the short nucleotide sequence in the locus, obtained by adding a fixed offset to the

score

Each marker checked is assigned a DYS number by the laboratories.  The allele value is then determined for each marker.  These are the numbers assigned to the markers analyzed (in the order listed by Family Tree DNA):

393, 390, 19 (also called 394), 391, 385a, 385b, 426, 388, 439, 389-1 Link 1, 392,

389-2 Link 1, 458, 459a, 459b, 455, 454, 447, 437, 448, 449, 464a, 464b, 464c, 464d, 464e, 464f, 464g Link 2 (Most subjects only have 464a-d here, but there are exceptions).

Calculating Genetic Distance Between Two Sets of Readings

For most of the markers, the genetic distance is simply the difference between one subject’s reading and another subject’s reading.  For example, if Subject A has a reading of 12 on DYS 393 and Subject B has a reading of 13, the genetic distance between them for that marker is 1.  These markers are scored differently - 389-1, 389-2 Link 1 and 464a-g Link 2.

At the 25-marker level, if all 25 readings match or if 24 of 25 match (with a difference of only one or two on the mismatched reading), then the two individuals definitely have a common male line ancestor.  A 23 of 25 match, with a disparity of only one on each of the mismatched readings (for a total genetic distance of two between the subjects) is also an indication of a relationship in the direct male line.  With any disparity greater than that, it becomes questionable, but it is clear that it is possible for two men with a common male line ancestor to have a slightly greater number of mismatches (Please check the links for the markers underlined above because their scoring is different).  This type of testing is still relatively new and much more remains to be learned (average mutation rates Link 3).  The average marker mutates once every 500 generations, meaning that one should expect one mutation every 20 generations when testing 25 markers (500/25 = 20).  It should be noted that when comparing two lineages, one should expect a mutation every 10 generations because the chances of a mutation double in that event.

The results follow.  So far, ten separate family groups have been identified by these tests.  Obviously, the Hite surname and its variants are not unique to one lineage.  Because of the difference in the scoring, DYS 464a-g is separated from the other markers.

.

Results Table

DYS 19 is also known as DYS 394.

  

  

This DNA calculator Link 14(downloadable to a disk) can be used to calculate average mutations for other distances in relationships.

  

Participants 1A, 1B, and 1C are documented descendants of Jost Hite (1685-1761) Link 15, the prominent pioneer settler of the Shenandoah Valley.  Particpants 1A and 1C are descendants of Jost’s son John Hite (ca. 1715-1792) and participant 1B is a descendant of Jost’s son Joseph Hite (died 1757). 1A and 1C match on 22 of 25 markers with a total difference of three between their readings. 1B matches 1A and 1C on 22 of 25 marker readings with a total difference of four in both cases. This is further apart than two men related through the direct male line would be expected to be, but it does happen (more analysis Link 34).  In any event, these two participants are not even close to matching the readings of any other test subjects, so it is clear that none of the other subjects are related to Jost Hite in the direct male line.  Jost, of course, has long been known to be of German origin.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – E3b Link 37

  

Participant 2A is a descendant of John Hite (ca. 1760 – ca. 1824) Link 16 who lived in present-day Page County, Virginia as a young adult and then moved to Sullivan County, Tennessee.  Participants 2B and 2C are descendants of Andrew Hite (1758-1819) Link 17 who also lived in present-day Page County until he moved to Fairfield County, Ohio in the early 19^th century.  Participant 2D is a descendant of Daniel Hite (died 1827) Link 18 in present-day Page County.  Daniel came to the area from Pennsylvania about 1772 according to land records.  It has long been assumed that Andrew, John, and Daniel were brothers and since their descendants match on all 25 marker readings (with 2C matching the others on the 12 markers tested), it is clear that they have a common male line ancestor and it is highly probable that the assumption that they were brothers is true.  It is also assumed that Abraham Hite (1750-1828) Link 19, who arrived in Page County later, was a fourth brother, but no descendant of Abraham has yet been tested.  Abraham eventually followed Andrew to Fairfield County, Ohio.  Participant 2E’s lineage is only definitively traceable to James Erwin Hite, born in 1850 in Kentucky, though it is likely that James was the son of Andrew J. Hite and Susan Eraimy-Ann Taylor, who married in Louisa, Kentucky in 1848 and divorced there in 1851 after Andrew had abandoned Susan.  That couple definitely had a child named James, born in 1850, but nothing further is known about them except that Susan was only fourteen at the time of their marriage.  Participant 2E matches Participants 2A, 2B, and 2D, on 24 of 25 markers, with a difference of two on the single non-matching marker.  This is sufficient to prove a relationship in the direct male line so it is likely that James Ervin Hite (born 1850) was a descendant of Andrew, John, or Daniel Hite (or perhaps Abraham Hite) or some other male line relative of theirs.  This family is clearly of German descent.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

  

Participant 3A is a descendant of Jacob Hite (1761-1839) Link 20 who was born in Frederick County, Maryland and was brought to Frederick County, Virginia when he was a year old.  He married in Frederick County, Virginia, lived most of his adult life in Rockbridge County, Virginia, and then moved along with some of his children to Rush County, Indiana in the 1820s.  He is often confused with Jacob O’Bannon Hite, a great-grandson of Jost Hite (1685-1761) Link 15, but Augusta County, Virginia court records prove that Jacob O’Bannon Hite died without issue.  Since this DNA reading is not remotely similar to that of the readings of confirmed descendants of Jost Hite (1A and 1B), it can be stated that this participant is not related to Jost in the direct male line.  Participant 3B is a descendant of Matthias Hite (ca. 1767-1832) Link 21.  These two participants match each other on all but one marker with a difference of only one on the non-matching marker, proving beyond question that they have a common male line ancestor.  Therefore it is clear that Jacob and Matthias Hite were related, but it has not been determined at this point how they were related.  This family is probably of German descent.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

  

Participant 4A has traced his lineage to Henry John Hoyt (born 1823) Link 22 from Jefferson County, New York.  Participants 4B, 4C and 4E are descendants of Simon Hoyt (1593-1657) Link 23 who arrived in Massachusetts in 1628 on the ship Abigail, settling first in Charlestown and then later moving to Connecticut, finally settling in Stamford where he died in 1657.  Participant 4D has traced his lineage to Orrin A. Hoyt, born about 1835 in Indiana. Participant 4F has traced his lineage to Benjamin Haight, born about 1812 in New York, who resided in Gallatin County, Kentucky in 1850. These test results, showing that Participants 4A and 4D match participant 4B and 4E on 12 of 12 markers and that both match Participant 4C on 11 of 12 markers, provide a clear indication that Henry John Hoyt and Orrin A. Hoyt were related to Simon Hoyt, perhaps even direct descendants (though that remains to be proven). Participant 4F matches 4A, 4B, 4D, and 4E on 11 of 12 markers and matches 4C on 10 of 12. With only these 12 markers, there would be doubts about a connection. However, Participants 4F and 4E (the latter a proven descendant of Simon Hoyt) have extended their tests to 25 markers and they match on 23 of those 25, separated by a genetic distance of only two. Therefore, it is clear that they are related, so Benjamin Haight is also likely to have been a direct descendant of Simon Hoyt. It is known that Simon Hoyt has descendants who spell their surname as Haight. Even though the other subjects (4A, 4B, 4C, and 4D) have only been tested on twelve markers, their haplotype is rare in European populations, thereby strengthening the case that they were all related.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – E3b Link 37

  

Participants 5A is a descendant of John Hoyt Link 24 of English origin, who owned property in Amesbury, Massachusetts by 1654 and died there in 1688.  Participant 5B is thought to be a descendant of John Hoyt and the fact that 5A and 5B match each other on all 12 markers tested lends credence to this theory.  It is noteworthy that these participants do not match the descendants of Simon Hoyt Link 23.  Researchers of the New England Hoyt families have long wondered if the two immigrants, Simon and John Hoyt were related.  These test results indicate that they were not.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Participant 6A is the biological son of a man with the Hoyt surname, though it is not his surname.  Nothing further is known of his lineage.  It is interesting that he matches Subjects 5A (descendant of John Hoyt Link 24) and 5B on 10 of 12 markers (note explanation of 389-1, 389-2 Link 1).  Readings this similar indicate that a relationship is feasible, but it will be necessary to obtain the additional readings on Subject 5A or 5B to confirm or deny the possibility.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Participant 7A is a descendant of Christopher Hite (ca. 1759-1827) Link 25 of Bedford County, Pennsylvania.  Participant 7B is a descendant of Conrad Hite (1763-1835) Link 26, born in Bedford, Pennsylvania, who settled in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.  Circumstantial evidence from tax records strongly suggests that Christopher and Conrad Hite were brothers and sons of John Hite (Johannes Heytt) Link 27 of Bedford, Pennsylvania.  The two participants match each other on 24 of 25 marker readings, with a difference of only one on the non-matching marker, proving beyond question that they have a common male line ancestor.  Therefore, it can be stated without question that Christopher and Conrad Hite have a common male line ancestor.  The test results do not prove that Christopher and Conrad were brothers, but when considering them along with the other circumstantial evidence from the Bedford County tax records, the theory that they were brothers is the only logical conclusion. 

Participant 7C is a descendant of John Heitt (Johannes Heidt, 1831-1904) Link 28, a native of Grötzingen, Baden-Durlach, Germany, who came to the United States in 1853 and settled in Clinton County, Iowa.  His lineage can be traced to Martin Heydt (ca. 1611-1675) of Grötzingen and the Heydt surname was recorded in that village as early as 1482.  This participant matches Participant 7B on 24 of 25 marker readings and is a 23 of 25 match with Participant 7A.  This match clearly shows that the aforementioned Hites of Bedford County, Pennsylvania are related to the Heydt/Heidt family of Grötzingen in the male line and other evidence indicates that it is the likely birthplace of John Hite(Johannes Heytt) Link 35 who apparently died in Bedford County in 1791.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1a Link 40

Documentation clearly shows that Participant 7D is also a descendant of Martin Heydt of Grötzingen through his great-grandson, Jacob Heydt (1717-1781) Link 29 ,a native of Grötzingen who sailed to Philadelphia in 1751, arriving there 16 September 1751 on the ship Brothers and eventually settling in Berks County, Pennsylvania.  For that reason, Participant 7D is grouped with this family.  It is clear from the marker readings, however, that this participant does not have a common male line ancestor with Participants 7A, 7B, and 7C, differing from them on no fewer than 11 of the readings.  Obviously a “nonpaternal” event Link 36 occurred somewhere in the lineage of Participant 7D.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Participants 8A and 8B are both descendants of Stanley Hite (before 1761 –1827) Link 30  of Halifax County, Virginia.  They match on all 25 marker readings, which was expected.  Stanley Hite was probably a descendant of the Hight family of Virginia’s eastern shore, most (if not all) of whom apparently descend from John Hight Link 31, who arrived there in 1656 as a headright passenger.  Stanley may have been one of the unidentified children of John Hight (ca. 1723-1795) Link 32 who lived in Halifax County until 1770 when he moved to Franklin County, North Carolina, dying there in 1795 and leaving a will that stated he had twelve children, only six of whom were named.  Further research is needed to prove this connection, however.  It does appear that Stanley Hite was of English origin.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Participants 9A and 9B are descendants of James Madison Hite (1824-1910) Link 33 (he should be added to the ancestor table) who was born in an unknown location in present-day West Virginia and moved many times before settling in Oklahoma where he died in 1910.  As expected, the two descendants of James match each other on all 25 marker readings.  Because they are descendants of two different sons of James (and thus as distantly related as possible for two descendants of James) it can be stated clearly that their readings are those of James’s family.  It is also clear that James is not related, at least not in direct male line, to any of the other participants so far.  This family’s ethnic origin is not known.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – H Link 41

  

Participants 10A and 10B are descendants of Jacob Hite (1780s-1845) Link 33a  of Cumberland Valley Township , Bedford County , Pennsylvania . 10A is a descendant of Jacob's son Elias Hite (ca. 1812-1860) and 10B is a descendant of another of Jacob's sons, John Hite (ca. 1808-1882). Because the participants are descendants of two different sons and they match each other 25 of 25, there is no doubt that this reading is valid for Jacob Hite. Because these participants do not match the descendants of Jost Hite Link 15 , the idea that this Jacob Hite was a great-grandson of Jost can be discarded. It is possible that this Jacob Hite was the son of John Georg Heyd and Magdalena Sahler, baptized in 1787 in present-day Lebanon County , Pennsylvania , but more research is needed to prove or disprove this. It is perhaps noteworthy that when one discounts the erratic marker DYS 464, Participant 10A is separated from Participants 3A and 3B Link 6  by genetic distances of only 4 and 3, respectively. However, the distances grow to 7 and 6 when taking DYS 464 into account and this is too great a disparity to consider the possibility that the three share a male line ancestor within a genealogically meaningful time frame. This comparison is a prime example of the advantage of the 25 marker test over the 12 marker test, because a 12 marker test would have shown an 11 of 12 match for 10A with 3A and 3B and may have led researchers to jump to a false conclusion that the families did share a male line ancestor. The ethnic origin of the family of this Jacob Hite is not known, but it is probably German.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

  

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I
Return to TABLE  

http://members.aol.com/dnafiler/MutationCalculator.exe
Return to TABLE  

Link to Jost Hite (Hans Justus Heyd, 1685-1761) of Frederick County, Virginia

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Hite (ca. 1760 – ca. 1824) of Shenandoah (now Page) County, Virginia and Sullivan County, Tennessee
     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Andrew Hite (1758-1819) of Shenandoah (now Page) County, Virginia and Fairfield County, Ohio

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Daniel Hite (ca. 1752-1827) of Shenandoah (now Page) County, Virginia

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Abraham Hite (1750-1828) of Shenandoah (now Page) County, Virginia and Fairfield County, Ohio

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Jacob Hite (1761-1839) of Rockbridge County, Virginia and Rush County, Indiana

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Matthias Hite (ca. 1767-1832) of Frederick County, Virginia

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Henry John Hoyt (1823-1864), born in New York, died a Union Soldier in 1864 in NC

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Simon Hoyt, died Stamford, Connecticut, 1657

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Hoyt, died Amesbury, Massachusetts, 1688

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

Link to Christopher Hite (ca. 1759-1827) of Bedford County, Pennsylvania

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Conrad Hite (1763-1835) of Bedford County and Somerset County, Pennsylvania

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Hite (Johannes Heytt) of Bedford, Pennsylvania, probably died 1791

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Heitt (Johannes Heidt, 1831-1904) of Clinton County, Iowa

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Jacob Heydt (1717-1781) of Berks County, Pennsylvania

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to Stanley Hite (1761 or earlier-1827) of Halifax County, Virginia

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Hight, headright passenger to Virginia, 1656

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to John Hight (ca. 1723-1795) of Halifax County, Virginia and Franklin County, North Carolina

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

  

Link to James Madison Hite (1824-1910) born in West Virginia, died in Pond Creek, OK 

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

Return to TABLE  

Link to Jacob Hite (1780s-1845) of Cumberland Valley Township, Bedford County, PA 

     - More details on the "Hite/Hight/Hyde: Earliest American Ancestors" Page.

Return to TABLE  

It is unusual for two men with a common male line ancestor to have this many mismatches (three with a total genetic distance of three or four) at the 25-marker level. Estimates of its occurrence range from 1 of 35 cases to 1 of 200 cases (depending on whether more weight is given to the number of mutations – 3 - or the total genetic distance – 4 Link 3).  If two men were tested randomly and showed this many mismatches, one would guess they were not related.  In this case, however, Richard Hite (Hite Family Association President) thinks that they are related for the following reasons:

1.                  The ancestry of all participants back to Jost Hite is well documented.

2.                  All three readings fall into Haplogroup E3b Link 37 which is not that common among Western European Christians.  Jost Hite was, of course, a Western European Christian and the early generations of his family in this country interacted primarily with Western European Christians.  The chances of an undocumented adoption or illegitimacy involving a father with a Y-chromosome reading so similar to that of Jost (which, as previously stated, is a rare one) are incredibly remote (far less than 1 in 200).

3.                  One of the mismatches occur on the DYS 464 Link 2 marker, which is understood differently than the other markers and is also known to be the most frequently mutating marker examined by Family Tree DNA.

4.                  Another of the mismatches is at DYS 458, another rapidly mutating marker.

5.                  Although this number of mutations is rare between related men, it does happen. 

Bennett Greenspan, President of Family Tree DNA (link http://www.familytreedna.com/) agrees that these two subjects are related in the direct male line.

It would be a good idea for another documented male line descendant of Jost Hite to take this test, preferably a descendant of one of the three sons (Jacob, Isaac, or Abraham) not involved in this test.  With this much of a discrepancy, it seems likely that mutations occurred in both lineages and that the actual Y-chromosome reading of Jost Hite himself was something in between the three.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Return to TABLE  

Participant 12A can trace his lineage to Abraham Hite (1773-1823) Link 46who married Mary Feathers in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley in 1805 and eventually moved to Licking County, Ohio.  At least one more male line descendant of this Abraham should be tested to establish a definitive reading of his Y-chromosome, but this test has revealed that Subject 12A does not share a direct male line ancestor with any other participant in the project so far, including the other Shenandoah Valley Hite families.  The ethnic origin of Participant 12A’s family is not known, but it is probably German.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – E3b Link 37

  

Participants 13A and 13B are descendants of William Hite (ca. 1786 – before 1857) Link 47 who was born in Pennsylvania and married Sarah Zeckman in Berkeley County , Virginia (now West Virginia ) in 1818. 13A is a descendant of William's son Charles Andrew Jackson Hite (1828-1891) and 13B is a descendant of another of William's sons, William A. Hite (1829-1908). Because the participants are descendants of two different sons and they match each other 24 of 25, there is no doubt that this reading is valid for William Hite. The ethnic origin of William's family is probably German. Some circumstantial evidence hinted at a relationship between this William Hite and Jacob Hite (1780s-1845) Link 33a but that possibility can now be discounted because the two families have drastically different DNA readings.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Participant 14A is a descendant of Hans Jacob Heyd, who married Anna Barbara Scherer 10 January 1671 in Staffort, Baden, Germany.  Though this participant (whose surname is spelled Heidt) resides in Germany, some descendants of the Heidt family of Staffort are known to have come to the United States in the nineteenth century.  However, this participant does not share a male line ancestor with any Hite who has participated in this project so far.  It would be worthwhile, however, to test at least one other descendant of the Heidt family of Staffort to verify this reading.  It is noteworthy that this participant’s reading does not match that of Participants 7A, 7B, and 7C Link 10 because their ancestral village (Grötzingen) is within a few miles of Staffort.  If the validity of this reading for the Staffort family is established, it will serve as an illustration of how the same surname often developed independently in neighboring villages in Germany.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

  

Participant 15A is a descendant of Johannes Heidt (1755-1795) of Steinmauern, Baden, Germany.  His surname is spelled Heit.  The village of Steinmauern is probably less than thirty miles from Grötzingen Link 10 and Staffort Link 44, but again, the DNA reading shows no link between this participant and either of those families.  This participant is also not related to any other participants who have taken the test so far.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Link to Abraham Hite (1773-1823) on ancestors’ page.

  

Link to William Hite (ca. 1786 – before 1857) on ancestors’ page.

  

Participant 16A is a descendant of Julius Hite (1756-1851 Link 49 who was born in Sussex County, Virginia and served in the Continental Army.  At least one more male line descendant of Julius should be tested to establish a definitive reading of his Y-chromosome, but this test has revealed that Subject 16A does not share a direct male line ancestor with any other participant in the project so far.  The ethnic origin of Participant 16A’s family is not known, but it is probably English.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – J2 Link 50

  

Link 49

Link to Julius Hite (1756-1851) on ancestors’ page.

  

  

Participant 17A is a descendant of Malinda Hite (1803-1893) Link 52 by her oldest son, James Franklin Hite (1824-1890) of Augusta County, Virginia.  Malinda had a total of nine children, the last six by Robert McChesney, who she never married.  Some researchers believe that Malinda’s maiden name was Hite and that none of her descendants would carry a Hite Y chromosome, but it is most likely that she did marry a Hite who was the father of her first three children, including James.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

  

Link to Malinda Hite and Robert McChesney on ancestors’ page.

  

Participant 18A is a descendant of John Nicholas Hight (1756-1850) Link 54 who was born in Somerset County, New Jersey, grew up in Middlesex County, and then, after serving in the Continental Army, moved to Steuben County, New York.  Participant 18B is definitely a descendant of Jacob Hight (born ca. 1775, New Jersey, who was living in Miami County, Indiana in 1850) who was probably a son of Nicholas Hight, Jr. (early 1750s-1799) Link 55 of Middlesex County, New Jersey.  Since John Nicholas Hight and Nicholas Hight, Jr. were contemporaries and since both lived in the same vicinity of New Jersey, the fact that they were related is not surprising.  It has not yet been determined how they were related though.  It is also not certain if their ethnic origin was German or English, but since John Nicholas Hight was known to have been a Baptist, English origins seem more likely.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

  

Link to John Nicholas Hight (1756-1850) on ancestors’ page.

  

Link to Nicholas Hight, Jr. (early 1750s-1799) on ancestors’ page.

  

Participant 19A is a descendant of Jacob Hite (died 1792) of Frederick County, Virginia Link 57 , a woolcomber first appeared in land records of Frederick County , Virginia in 1763. He had two documented sons, Alexander Hite (1740-1813) and George Hite (1755-1833). The fact that this participant does not match the descendants of Jost Hite Link 15  casts serious doubt on the belief held by many researchers that this Jacob was somehow related to Jost. At least one more descendant of this Jacob must be tested before this can be stated definitively, however. Because 19A is a descendant of Alexander, the best candidate for a comparison would be a descendant of George.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – R1b Link 39

Link to Jacob Hite (died 1792) of Frederick County , Virginia on ancestors' page.

Participant 20A is a descendant of Michael Hyde Link 59 , of German origin, who settled along the Saluda River in present-day Lexington County , South Carolina by 1774 and died there after 1800. The known male-line descendants spell their surname as Hite. Participant 20B is a descendant of Horatio Hite (1808-1898), who was born in Georgia and grew up in Nashville , Tennessee where he lived the rest of his life. The 1880 census noted that Horatio's father was born in South Carolina . Participant 20C is a descendant of Hiram Hite (born ca. 1802, North Carolina ) who was living in Humphries County , Tennessee by 1850. These three participants match all match each other 25 of 25, proving beyond question that they have a mutual male line ancestor. More research is needed to show what the connection is, but it is most likely that Horatio and Hiram Hite were grandsons of Michael Hyde.

Haplogroup as Defined by Family Tree DNA – I Link 38

Link to Michael Hyde (died 1803) of Lexington County , South Carolina on ancestors' page.