Checking such a paper trail is by far the best way to use Y-DNA testing.� The history of Fox families in Colonial Virginia has been exhaustively studied, particularly the ancestry and the descendants of Henry Fox and Anne West of Colonial Virginia.� Virginia Fox family trees often made erroneous connections to this family, partly because the Fox line can be traced back to 1541 in Buckinghamshire, England, and partly because Anne West was the grand niece of Lord De La Warr and had royal ancestry.� Probably the most exhaustive review of this family line was done by Joseph Steadman[2].� Many times his conclusions were drawn based on limited or conflicting evidence, thus offering a wonderful target for verification by genetic testing.

Two possible sons of Henry Fox and Anne West, Thomas and Henry, the 2^nd, provided the perfect challenge�� Some researchers denied that Henry the 2^nd �was their son because he was not mentioned in the will of Anne West�s brother.�� Testing living descendants of these two men has confirmed their relationship as brothers.� We can now say with confidence that we know the haplotype of Henry Fox, the first, and can now prove or disprove other proposed connections.� This paper is a first attempt to set the record straight.

Genetic Testing of Known Henry Fox/Anne West Descendants

There are several types of testing applied to genetic genealogy but this paper is concerned primarily with testing a large group of markers on the Y-Chromosome. These markers are sections called microsatellites where there are repeat patterns � and the number of repeats can be measured.� The resulting set of numbers (i.e. marker repeats) is called one�s haplotype.� Only men carry the Y- Chromosome and the haplotype is passed almost intact from father to son.� Replication errors occur frequently enough with these markers, however, that this test is useful for genealogical purposes.�� Y-DNA testing is governed by the laws of probabilities of rare events and thus gives a wide range of estimated generations back to a common ancestor.� Combined with a paper trail, however, it can be very effective in either confirming or denying a relationship.� Roughly speaking, it can be said that two Fox men are related with a genealogical time frame, say 400 - 600 years, if they match repeat lengths on 33 or more out of 37 markers.�

How do we know the haplotype of Henry Fox 1^st, who was born in about the year 1650 in England and married Anne West in Virginia in 1673? The answer is given in Table 1, which should be referred to in following this analysis[a] :�

Early on, we tested out to 37 markers two well-documented project members who descended from different sons [William Fox (1791-1852) and Joseph Carroll Fox (1802-1879)] of another Henry Fox (1768-1852) who married Sarah Harrell, a southern USA Fox family with many living descendants[3].�� The 37 marker haplotypes of these fourth cousins were identical. �Another cousin (not shown) matched them on 25 markers.� As a very good approximation then, this must also be the haplotype of their common ancestor, Henry Fox (1768-1852).� It was accepted by most genealogists that Henry Fox (1768-1852) was the son of William Fox (1743-1816) who had married Sarah Carroll and the pretty well-defined ancestry then went:� Henry Fox, 3^rd, (1698-1770) - Henry Fox, 2^nd, (1674-1750).

Secondly, we tested two second cousins who had identical 37 marker haplotypes to each other and descended from another son of Henry Fox, 3^rd, named Thomas Fox (1725-1822) who had married Elizabeth Hancock. �Recall that our first group descended from his brother, William Fox (1743-1816). �Joseph Steadman has Martha Keene as William�s mother and Mary Goodwyn as the mother of Thomas[4]. Table 1 shows mismatched markers only the rest being identical. The 37 marker haplotypes of the descendants of each of these two sons of Henry Fox, 3^rd, differed at only one marker, a multivalued, rapidly-mutating marker called CDYa,b.� This five person matchup defined the haplotype of the common ancestor, Henry Fox, 3^rd, except for the value at CDYa,b and the relationship was now proven back another 2 generations to Henry Fox, 3^rd.� The question still remained: Was Henry Fox, 3^rd, (1698-1770) the son of Henry Fox, 2^nd, (1674-1750) and the grandson of Henry Fox, 1^st?

In 2013 and 2014, we tested two descendants of another son of Henry Fox, 1^st, and Anne West on 37 markers. �Again see Table 1, showing the mismatched markers.. �This son was Thomas Fox (1680-?), who married Mary Tunstall[5].� These two men matched the first pair at DYS 385a,b but showed deviations between themselves at DYS385a,b, DYS460 and DYS470.� On each of these three markers, however, one of them matched the first four.� A consensus ancestral 37 marker haplotype for all 6 cousins can thus be defined and Thomas Fox and Henry Fox, 2^nd, were indeed brothers.

�Finally, we have a slave descendant named Elder, who is obviously related. At 37 markers, he matched our first group at all but markers, DYS 458 and DYS 470.� He and one member from each of our first two groups have been tested out to 67 markers.� They matched each other and Elder differed from them only at DYS 413a,b in the last 30 markers.� His results help to confirm the consensus ancestral haplotype.

�Y-DNA testing had now proven that these Foxes were all one family and we now had a good good fix on the haplotype of Henry Fox, 1^st, as shown in Table 1.� The marker deviations found between descendants of the two brothers were about what was to be expected since Henry Fox, 1^st, was an average of 9 generations removed from each of those being tested.��

In addition, two of this group have been Haplogroup tested and are R-L47, a subclade of R-U106/S21.� Haplogroups are defined by mutations at specific sites on the Y-chromosome that are rare enough to define a timeline for the history of mankind.� These are called single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs, and they define deep ancestry.� Any other Virginia Foxes who are not in this particular subclade cannot be related within the last 4,000 years[6].

The Henry Fox 2^nd Controversy

It seems that only two sons of Henry Fox, 1^st, and Anne West were mentioned in the will of their maternal uncle, John West, the son of Colonel John West.�� John West was the brother of Thomas West, better known as Lord De La Warr.� Sons John and Thomas were mentioned but Henry Fox, 2^nd, was not.� This could well be because Henry Fox, 2^nd, was first in line to inherit from his father estate; nevertheless considerable doubt remained in the mind of researcher Ellen Cocke[7] and others.� In 1934, Ann Woodard Fox, wife of Edward Lansing Fox, founded �The Society of the Descendants of the Hon. Henry Fox and Anne West" that claimed they were the only "approved" Virginia line and descendants of Henry Fox, 2^nd, were not permitted to join.� Both Ellen Cocke and Edward Lansing Fox were of the Thomas Fox line. �Ann Woodard Fox is best known for her treatise emphasizing the royal West family connections[8].� She does not even mention Henry Fox, 2^nd.

Later researchers, including Joseph Steadman[9] and Frances Chan[10], felt that the overwhelming evidence was in favor of Henry Fox, 2^nd,being the brother of John and Thomas.� Even genealogist George Harrison Sanford King, who was the �registrar� of the above �Society�, agreed with them[11].� Nevertheless, the seeds of doubt had been planted.� The Fox Surname Project is happy now to confirm that these later researchers were correct.�� Genetic testing has shown that they were all one family.

Richard Fox (1707-1771) of Mecklenburg�

Joseph Steadman devotes several pages[12] to various claims as to the ancestry of Col. Richard Fox who married Hannah Williamson and left many descendants.� The story he tells is really quite fantastic.� It appears that many claims were made that he was the grandson of Henry Fox and Anne West; the son of either Henry Fox, 2^nd, or Thomas Fox � both mentioned previously � even to the point of a woman using this in a Colonial Dames application.� Steadman said that this was incorrect and agreed with George H. S. King[13] that he was probably the only child of a George Fox of Surry County, though even the evidence for this is weak.� The ancestry of Col. Richard Fox remains a mystery but Y-DNA testing is quite definite.� He was not a Henry Fox/Anne West descendant.� Results for a descendant of his son Jacob and a descendant of his son William are both in agreement.� They match each other on 36 out of 37 markers but are a complete mismatch with the Henry Fox/ Anne West descendants.� In fact, they are in an entirely different Haplogroup (I-L39.)

Perhaps some clue will eventually be found from another interesting Fox Project result.� �Several descendants of Joaquin Fox of New Orleans are obviously related to the Richard Fox descendants.�� One of them, tested on 67 markers, is a 66 for 67 match with our William Fox descendant.� Since the descendants of Richard Fox and Hannah Williamson have been so well researched, this connection may well predate Richard Fox himself, even though the match is so close.

John and Matthew Fox of Abbeville, South Carolina

Henry� Fox, 3rd, had several other sons than Thomas by his first wife.� One of these, John Fox, was born around the year 1729.� It appears that he may have participated, along with his brother Henry, in the French and Indian Wars.� Steadman has also identified him to be John Fox, a private on the payroll of Captain Andrew Miller�s Company from February 1779 through May 1780 in the Revolutionary War[14].� In this case, the Y-DNA evidence has proven Steadman to be wrong.��

In December 1781, after the truce at Yorktown, Private John Fox was captured at Pratt's Mill on Long Cane Creek by Hezekiah Williams, a Tory leader, and carried to the Cherokee Nation where he was killed.� His widow, Mary (Mollie) Fox, received payment of the amount due him for service and for articles of his that were lost at Pratt's Mill.� She died in 1828 and her will mentions a son Matthew and four daughters.� Matthew Fox, born in 1766, "in Abbeville District, S.C.", enlisted at age 15 as a soldier in the Revolutionary War.� He later moved to Newport, Cocke County, Tenn., where he was living when he applied for a revolutionary war pension.

Matthew �Fox and his wife Martha left many descendants and we have four of them in the Fox Project.� They descend from three different sons of Matthew; Anderson Fox, William Fox and John S. Fox.� In 37 markers there is only one deviation among the four of them.� They are definitely not descendants of Henry Fox and Anne West, having 17 or more marker deviations on 37 markers.� Being members of Haplogroup R-L1/S26, rather than Haplogroup R-L47, puts their common ancestor back thousands of years.

Instead, these Matthew Fox descendants are close matches at 67 or more markers with the British and the American Fox families described in detail in Growing with America[15].� A comparison of marker mismatches for these three families is shown in Table 2.

�With the advent of affordable Y-Chromosome sequencing we can now pinpoint the common ancestor with confidence. The Big Y test, offered by FamilytreeDNA starting in 2013, used �next-generation� targeted non-recombining Y-DNA sequencing of around 11.5 to 12.5 million base pairs to reveal genetic variations across the Y-Chromosome.� One member of each of the two American Fox families and two members of the British Fox family were tested.� All four had 20 SNPs in common downstream from L1/S26 but the British pair had one more.� The common ancestor of the British pair was George Fox, born in 1693 in Cornwall, England.� Best estimates of the rate of mutation are 100 to 150 years per SNP, which puts birth of the common ancestor of all four at from 1543 to 1593.� George Fox was the grandson of Francis Fox, born in 1606 in Wiltshire.� Our best estimate, therefore, is that the common ancestor of all four was the father of Francis Fox.� One researcher has found evidence in the parish register of St. John the Baptist Church, Devizes, Wiltshire, that that Francis Fox was the seventh son of Henrie Fox and his wife Edith[16].� This would put Henrie�s birth right in the middle of the above range of dates.

�How a member of this family arrived in South Carolina remains a mystery but there are some clues. The genealogy of the British Foxes descending from Francis Fox, born in 1606 in Devizes, Wiltshire, is very well documented in Burke�s Landed Gentry[17]and only one of them is known to have emigrated to America in the time frame in question.� James Fox, son of the above Francis Fox, came to Philadelphia in 1686 on the ship Desire as a leader of the Plymouth Friends but his line died out by the year 1700.� He brought with him Justinian Fox, a 13 year old who was the progenitor of the Philadelphia Fox family.� Justinian, who was not a Quaker, had an older brother named John and there was also a John Fox on the ship Desire who was not a Quaker,�

The Y-DNA results say that these all three Fox lines were closely related and Big Y testing puts the common ancestor as the grandfather of James Fox born in about 1580 in Wiltshire.� James Fox was obviously bringing relatives along with him to America and there is indirect documentation to back this up. �John Fox, passenger on the ship Desire, is known to have married in Philadelphia and had children.� His wife died and he then disappeared from view. �Many Philadelphians headed south in those days to seek their fortune and he may have been one of them.

There is another possibility that is certainly worth a follow up.� In Burke�s Landed Gentry he writes that Francis Fox was �stated to be of the same family as the celebrated Sir Stephen Fox, ancestor of the Earls of Ilchester and the Lords Holland� and the Francis Fox family is permitted to use his coat of arms. �In his 1917 book on the Fox Family[18], James Wallace Fox relates several tales of how Sir Stephen�s grandson, the politician Charles James Fox (1749-1806), corresponded with and sent gifts of jewelry to several Fox relatives of his in Virginia, jewelry that ended up in the hands of another Charles James Fox, a bachelor who was said to be the son of John and Grace Fox .� Unfortunately, they all ended up in the possession of relatives named Moody or Montague and were lost or stolen. The Matthew Fox line is the only Southern Fox family identified by Y-DNA testing, up until now, that might fit this description. �There are known descendants of Sir Stephen Fox living in England and, hopefully, further Y-DNA testing will tell the tale.

William Fox of Loudoun County, Virginia

Another Virginia Fox family that has often been confused with the Henry Fox/ Anne West family is that of the descendants of William Fox, Sr., born about 1710 in Loudoun County, Virginia.� The descendants of his son, William Fox, Jr., have been well covered in a book by Nellie Fox Adams[19].� Interestingly, John Fox, the author of Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come, the first American novel to sell one million copies, was from this line.� This is also the family line of James Wallace Fox, who wrote that Fox Family history in 1917[20], a rambling endeavor that may have caused some confusion.�� At the end of this book he mentions a James Fox who married Mary Bartleson at Swede�s Church in Philadelphia on September 1, 1758 but fails to connect him to William Fox, Senior.�� Joseph Steadman[21] has James Fox and his son, Bartleson Fox, as descendants of John Fox (born about 1652 and brother to Henry Fox, 1^st,) who married a Miss Lightfoot.� Other researchers working on these Fox lines include Kevin Daniel who has an online Fox family tree[22] and Jane Fox Wheldon who has researched the Bartleson Fox line[23].�

There was also a tradition in one of these Fox families that another John Fox, who was born 1780 in Virginia, married Mary Elizabeth Hoffman (1782-1853) of Maryland and died 1852 in Montgomery County, KY, was a Henry Fox/Anne West descendant, either through their son Thomas or their son John[24].� Thus there was ample reason for some of this family to suspect a Henry Fox/Anne West connection.� DNA testing has now definitely rejected this connection.

The lines of descent are not yet all in place but we now have found that two project members descending from William Fox (1710)�s son, William Fox, Junior, and one member descending from his son James Fox (who married Mary Bartleson), are exact matches at 37 markers, confirming that William and James were brothers.� See Table 3 for a list of mismatched markers within the group.�

The John Fox/Mary Hoffman descendant matches them all exactly at 37 markers and has only one mismatch with the James Fox/Mary Bartleson descendant at 67 markers.� The family tradition was wrong and it is suspected that this John Fox (b 1780) was a descendant of James Fox by his second wife.� �A descendant of Enos Fox, born in 1814 in Kentucky, is also a member of this family group.� He also matches the James Fox/Mary Bartleson descendant on 66 out of 67 markers and matches the John Fox/Mary Hofmann descendant on 65 out of 67.� The ancestral 67 marker haplotype is pretty well defined.

This group is not even remotely connected to Henry Fox who married Anne West. ��The two groups have a genetic distance of 23 based on 67 markers and this family is a member of Haplogroup R-L21.� R-L21 is a subclade of R-P312 and any connection with the Henry Fox/Anne West line goes back at least 6,000 years.

To further confound the issue, we now have two descendants of Hugh Fox born about 1745 in Virginia who match the William Fox, Sr., descendants 32 for 37 and 34 for 37.� See Table 3 and note that while a mismatch at a multicopy marker can usually be considered a single event, in this case it case been considered two events.� �A third Hugh Fox descendant was tested at only 12 markers but confirms the mismatch at DYS 389ii.� The 32 for 37 match has two more mismatches at 67 markers.� These less-close Y-DNA test results could indicate that a possible family connection exists well prior to 1710 but this is only an indication, probability estimates being what they are.� �Current thinking is that all these Foxes may have come down to Virginia from Philadelphia or New Jersey and that may explain James� marriage back in Philadelphia.�

�William Fox (1710-1764) who Married Sarah Avent

Perhaps the most interesting of these erroneous matches, because it had been so abundantly documented, is that of two descendants of William Fox (b� 1710) who married Sarah Avent.� In Shirley Faucette�s comparison of the two genealogists[25], both Steadman and Robinson have this William Fox as the son of Henry Fox 2nd.� Steadman[26] actually comments as follows, "The said William Fox doubtless was that one who settled in Brunswick County (Virginia), being named as the son of Henry Fox 2nd and Mary Claiborne.� He married Sarah Avent who was a granddaughter of William Gooch and his wife Ursula Claiborne. - See Joseph Emery Avent's �The Avents and Their Kin of Avent Ferry, Chatham County, North Carolina�.�

We now have Y-DNA evidence that William was not the son of Henry Fox, 2nd.� One descendant of William Fox and Sarah Avent has been tested on 37 markers but he differs by 17 steps from our five Henry Fox/ Anne West descendants. �He is matched on 12 markers by his first cousin, confirming that the test was valid, but it would be good to have more William Fox/Sarah Avent descendants tested to confirm a deeper relationship.� The two men tested are descended from their son Thomas Avent Fox, born in 1750 in Brunswick County, Virginia, who married Lavinia Smith.� William Fox and Sarah Avent had several other sons (William who married Martha Rives and John who married Celia Bonnner) and it is a Fox Project objective to find and test a descendant of one of these brothers.

We are not even certain who Henry Fox, 2^nd, actually married. Shirley Faucette states that, "Some sources list both wives, others show only one but vary as to whether it was Mary Kendrick or Mary Claiborne."� It is quite possible that the Henry Fox who married Mary Claiborne was a different person than Henry Fox, 2^nd, son of Henry Fox, 1^st, and Anne West.

Interestingly enough, William Fox and Sarah Avent were the grandparents of Sarah Harrell, mentioned above as the spouse of Henry Fox (1768-1852) of Webster County, Mississippi, ancestor of three of our Henry Fox/Anne West descendants. One of Henry Fox/Sarah Harrell descendants, Frances Cooke Chan, writes that, �I don't think anyone in our family ever felt that they (Sarah Harrell�s grandparents) necessarily were in this Fox family, just that they had the same name and might have been relatives�[27].

�Andrew Fox (1749-1819) of Virginia and Tennessee

More than a dozen other Fox Project members erroneously thought they might be descendants of Henry Fox and Anne West.� This list includes a descendant of William Eires Fox, b 1758 in Virginia, a descendant of Allen Fox, b 1760 in North Carolina, a descendant of John Fox, b. ca 1705-15 in Essex Co, VA, two descendants of John B. Fox b. 1745 Orange County, Virginia, who married Ann Barber and two descendants of William Fox b. 1836 in Warwick County, VA, whose parents were William Fox and Nancy Stacy.

�A classic example of how erroneous family trees get spread around is the tale of Andrew Fox, who first appeared in Culpeper County, Virginia, in 1772 and then showed up in Greene County, TN, in 1786.�� Someone dreamed up a connection to Henry Fox and Anne West via Henry Fox, 2^nd, and Mary Kendrick and then via a son named Jacob, a connection that managed to get into the files at the Mormon Library. �Once there, it was picked up by many others and published on various internet sites.� One such example is the Germanna Research site, which questions contrary evidence published by a researcher named John Fox and says Andrew may have been of German origin but still uses the Mormon Library family tree[28]. �John Fox had suggested that Andrew Fox came as an indentured prisoner to Culpeper, Virginia, in 1772 from Rutland, England, the son of a pauper named Anne Fox.

James Fox in his 2012 book Tracking Andrew Fox[29] concludes that John Fox was correct.� He says that Andrew Fox was indeed the illegitimate son of Anne Fox but thrived in America; serving in the Revolutionary War, marrying Sarah Render of Culpeper and acquiring 300 acres of property in Tennessee.� The evidence is all circumstantial but Y-DNA testing tends to confirm this version over the others.�

�Andrew Fox was definitely not a Henry Fox/Anne West descendant and may not have been a Fox by birth.� Three of his descendants have been tested out to 37 markers and they are all close matches to a non-Fox descendant who traces back to Scotland in 1898, as shown in Table 4.� In addition, they are all considered to be members of Haplogroup R-L21, a result strongly indicative of an ancient Scots/Irish ancestry.

The non-Fox descendant has been tested out to 111 markers and his Haplogroup assignment has been confirmed R- DF13 (a subclade of R-L21) by SNP testing.� If one of our Andrew Fox descendants were to upgrade it might well solidify the connection.

Conclusions and Recommendations

There must be hundreds of erroneous Fox genealogies posted on the internet that rely on sources mentioned here.� It is probably too much to hope that this paper will resolve all these problems but perhaps this is a good start.� As the public comes to realize the power of genetic surname testing, they will hopefully correct most of these errors.

�Those whose connection to Henry Fox and Anne West was disproven can take heart; they have learned a lot and usually have used this information to set new goals for their research.� Those whose connection was proven can rejoice that a contentious issue has finally been settled.

There are many challenges remaining and perhaps this paper will spur more people to help resolve them.� The many Virginia John Foxes remain something of a mystery.� The English ancestry of Henry Fox, 1^st, is high on the list as is the possible relationship of the Matthew Fox group to Sir Stephen Fox. �As mentioned previously, Henry Fox, 1^st, had a brother named John Fox who married Margaret Lightfoot and, hopefully, there may be a direct male descendant of this line we can locate and test.

Ann Woodard Fox took the ancestry of Henry Fox, 1^st, back to England and Joseph E. Steadman[30] later made a comprehensive review of what is known about the British ancestry of Henry Fox, 1^st.� He was the son of John Fox, a sea captain who also settled in Virginia in 1661, and this line has been tentatively traced back to Henry Fox (1521) who married a Hawes of Missenden and possibly to a William Fox (1497-1559) of Missenden, Buckinghamshire, who lived at Stewkley Manor[31].

A William Vaux, descended from a Norman Invader named Robert de Vaux, is known to have inherited Stewkley Manor by marriage in 1424. If a Fox/Vaux connection could be substantiated, this would carry the line back to 1066.

Table 1

Comparison of Henry Fox/Anne West Descendants at 37 Markers

Line of Descent from Henry Fox 1st	Results for Markers that Differ
	DYS 458	DYS 385a,b	DYS 470	DYS 460	CDYa,b

Group 1 - Henry/Henry/Henry/William
Henry/Henry/Henry/William/Henry/William/Malachi	16	11-14	17	11	36-38
Henry/Henry/Henry/William/Henry/Joseph	16	11-14	17	11	36-38

Group 2 - Henry/Henry/Henry/Thomas
Henry/Henry/Henry/Thomas/Thomas/Mike/Felix/Samuel	16	11-14	17	11	35-38
Henry/Henry/Henry/Thomas/Thomas/Mike/Felix/Everett	16	11-14	17	11	35-38

Group 3 � Henry/Thomas
Henry/Thomas/Joseph/Joseph/Joseph Steven	16	11-14	17	10	36-38
Henry/Thomas/Joseph/Thomas/Jeremiah	16	11-11-11-14	18	11	36-38

Group 4 - Elder	15	11-14	18	11	36-38

Probable Ancestral Value for Henry 1st	16	11-14	17	11	36-38

Table 2

�Descendants of Matthew, Francis and Justinian Fox at 37 Markers

Line of Descent	Results for Markers that Differ
	DYS 391	D YS 439	DYS 389ii	DYS 458	DYS 447	DYS 576	DYS 570	CDYa,b

Descendants of Matthew Fox (1766-Abbeville, SC)
Matthew/Anderson/Matthew Anderson	11	12	29	17	25	18	17	38-38
Matthew/Anderson/Matthew/Henry	11	12	29	17	25	18	17	38-38
Matthew/William/Silas	11	12	29	17	25	18	17	38-38
Matthew/John/William	11	12	30	17	25	18	17	38-38

Descendants of Francis Fox (1607-Wiltshire, Eng)
�Henrie/Francis/Francis/George/George	11	12	29	17	25	17	17	38-38
�Henrie/Francis/Francis/George/Joseph	12	12	29	17	25	17	17	38-38
Henrie/Francis/Francis/Francis/Francis	11	12	29	na	na	na	na	na
Henrie/Francis/Francis/John/John/Josiah	11	13	29	�� 16	�� 25	�� 17	�� 17	�� 38-38

Descendants of Justinian Fox (1673-Plymouth,Eng)
Henrie/Edward/Justinian/Joseph/Joseph	11	12	29	18	26	18	16	38-38
Henrie/Edward/Justinian/Joseph/Samuel	11	12	29	17	26	19	17	38-39

Ancestral Haplotype	11	12	29	17	25	18	17	38-38

Table 3

Comparison of William Fox, Sr. and Hugh Fox Descendants at 67 Markers

Line of Descent	Results for Markers that Differ
	DYS 389ii	DYS 448	DYS 456	DYS 576	CDYa,b	DYS 578	DYS 557	DYS 444
Group 1 - William/William
William/William/James/James	31	19	16	18	35-38	na	na	12
William/William/James/Reuben	31	19	16	18	35-38	na	na	na

Group 2 - William/James
William/James/Bartleson	31	19	16	18	35-38	8	16	12

Group 3 � John and Enos Fox
John Fox b 1780 VA d 1852 KY	31	19	16	18	35-38	8	15	12
Enos Fox b1814 KY d 1897 IA	31	20	16	18	35-38	8	16	12

Probable Ancestral Value for William Sr.	31	19	16	18	35-38	8	16	12

Group 4 - Hugh Fox Descendants
Hugh/Hugh/James	30	19	17	19	36-37	9	16	13
Hugh/Moses/Hugh	30	19	17	18	36-38	na	na	na

Overall� Ancestral Haplotype		19		18			16

Table 4

Descendants of Andrew Fox of Virginia and Tennessee at 37 Markers

Line of Descent	Results for Markers that Differ
	DYS 449	DYS 576	DYS 570	CDYa,b	GD From �Ancestral
Andrew/Jacob/Matthias	28	20	19	36-38	2
Andrew/Jacob/Joseph	28	18	18	36-40	2
Andrew/Jesse/Jesse	29	19	18	36-38	1

�Non Fox - Scotland � 1898	28	19	18	36-37	1

Probable Ancestral	28	19	18	36-38

Endnotes

[a] Table 1 shows results of mismatches in the first 37 markers, since this is what will be compared.� Several of this group have tested out to 67 or more markers