Identifying Core Melungeons
According to recently published paper by Estes, Crain, Goins and Ferguson on the Melungeons, to be considered a "Core Melungeon" one must be called a Melungeon sometime in history.
Page 23 states; ''Every family included is specifically referred to or identified as a Melungeon in one or more of these records.''In what record is Valentine specifically referred to or identified as a Melungeon?
On the next page of this report is Table 4
Melungeon Family Identification Table
First Column SURNAME Collins
Second Column CENSUS - 1830 1870 1880
Third Column JARVIS - Full Blood
Fourth Column COURT 1743 Orange Co., Va., 1745 Louisa Co., Va.1846 voting trial
Fifth Column TAX RECORDS 1755 Orange Co., NC
Sixth Column PLECKER (Mentioned by) Yes
Seventh Column ARTICLES Humble and DromgooleEighth Column 1890 CENSUS YesNinth Column GROHSE YesTenth Column OTHER Fincastle Co., Va. living on Indian land
The identifiers in this table under Collins all refer to Vardy Collins.
Valentine was member of Stoney Creek Church in Virginia until 1806 when he went to Clear Creek Church in Kentucky.
Valentine’s son Joshua was born 1805 in Hawkins County, Tennessee, his son David born around 1807 says he was born in Kentucky, probably Cumberland County. Elijah was born around 1812 and also lists Kentucky as a birthplace. Oatery was born 1816 in Tennessee -- probably Overton or Campbell County where Valentine had land. By 1820 he was on the Kentucky census.
Valentine Collins lived in Hawkins County only a few years and left no known descendants there. Magoffin County people are not called Melungeons.
Valentine and Vardy Collins cannot both be the sons of Samuel Collins. Valentine’s father is unknown, place of birth unknown, according to the DNA presented in this report Valentine Collins father was probably a Bunch. There is no proof he is Vardy's brother he is not mentioned in Louisa County Virginia or Orange County, North Carolina. Wasn't mentioned by Humble or Dromgoole.
Melungeon Patriarch Table
Martin Collins - Son of Samuel - Samuel also has sons Vardy (R1a1) b1760 and Valentine (E1b1a8a) b1764, both in Wilkes County, NC, whose haplogroups do not matchPage 39
Vardy is supposed to be the son of Samuel, as are Martin and ValentinePage 47
Valentine Collins Group - E1b1a8aValentine (29) and Vardy (Vardeman) Collins were believed to be brothers, both sons of Samuel Collins born in Louisa County, Virginia where in 1745 Samuel was summoned to court for concealing tithablesPage 48
Vardy Collins Group - R1a1
Vardy (21) has long been believed to be the brother of Valentine Collins. He could have been a half brother, but based on the DNA evidence, these two lines do not share a common paternal ancestor.
Why is Valentine Collins in the Core Melungeon Project?
Because he ‘may have been’ a half brother of Vardy Collins and Meredith Collins, none of the three match genetically.
Because he is a brother of Buck Gibson’s wife, Matilda Denham?
None of the above makes sense, including why Valentine Collins is considered a CORE Melungeon.
A letter written the 1980s states; "apparently one Wm. Grohse of Sneedville Tennessee received a letter indicating that there was a Bible showing the names of Vardy’s brothers and sisters as Meredith, Valentine, Matilda and Lucinda."I spoke to this lady who gave this informaton a year or so ago. According to her she never seen this Bible record and the lady she spoke with was a very old lady who did not have the record either, was only 'told of it.' We have since learned there is a Bible record that shows Matilda was not a Collins but a Denham and the three Collins’ mentioned DNA does not match. Is this "story" the basis for Valentine Collins being a Core Melungeon?
Throughout this report these four authors try to convince us that Vardy and Valentine are brothers, sons of Samuel, finally admitting they have different DNA and it is likely Valentine is a Bunch and not even a Collins.
Valentine's father might be a Bunch who came from Louisa County, Virginia or Orange County, North Carolina - but- this is supposed to be a 'scientific paper' reviewed by a 'scientific journal and there is no room for speculations -- right?