James Moore, I - Incorrect date and place of birth and death

I'm still researching this. About 40 hours into it so far this week. I want to clearly review the Ireland connection before recommending anything. So, what you see is a work in progress and the connections are placeholders. What is for certain is the nine children of John and Jean (Stirling) Muir, that four most likely died young, and John's death came before February 19,1663. I've seen a significant about of DNA data, but I'm not an expert and question its validity if the ancestor has never been tested.

I have a 230-year-old family journal that includes my fifth great grandfather Jeremiah Moore, who married Innocent Wightt on 7/6/1776, presided over by the Rev James Hunt of Blandensburg. He was 27 and she was 24.

As genealogy is the science of what is most likely and best supported, Those who understand DNA certainly help.

I hope to find the basis of the Moores in Ireland and where they went, but haven't been successful yet.

"I want to clearly review the Ireland connection before recommending anything."

Unless someone sourced a possible Ireland connection, I'd say your efforts in that respect are to establish whether or not a connection with the Ulster Plantation exists or not, not a review of a known Ireland connection). Note also that there are two possibilities noting the arrival of James in the Maryland Colony... one in 1657 (James More) and the other, in 1661 (James Moor). Regretfully, neither notes origin. Then too, neither may be the James who later patented Four Hills in 1671.

"What is for certain is the nine children of John and Jean (Stirling) Muir, that four most likely died young, and John's death came before February 19,1663."

Of the children, Bessie I, John I, and Marie I definitely died young, considering children with the same names were later born to the couple... the renaming trend being common practice. Who is the fourth child you speculate to have died early, and why?

"I've seen a significant about of DNA data, but I'm not an expert and question its validity if the ancestor has never been tested."

Y DNA is a specialty of mine. I sponsored multiple kits of known descendants of James Moore/Muir (1644-1735). Specifically, the tests taken are of descendants of brothers, Peter and Benjamin Moore, and James Hook (we all fall under the haplotree BY3368 > FGC15791 > FT176771). So, we can say, without a doubt, that we descend from the James Moore, of PG County, who claimed varied ages, up to 110 in 1735 (and, as I've mentioned, there's a good argument as to why he falsified his age in order to evade taxes). Additionally, I spoke just yesterday to a descendant of James' brother, John Moore (1650-1697), and he is considering moving forward with a Y DNA test.

Further, we have one connection (he is also haplogroup FT176771) who may be a descendant of William Muir (the son of John and Jean born in 1655). He is now a citizen of Germany, was born in Manchester, England, but is traceable, via his paternal grandfather (Patrick O'Brien), to Dublin, Ireland, born in the early 1800s. Even further, Ive established a connection (BY3368 > FGC15791 > FT88521 > Y133164) with a Y DNA test taker who currently lives in Gateway of Fleet, in Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland. Given the genetic age, between descendants of James and this test taker, our lines intersect with a common ancestor in the 1500s. Further reinforcing that connection was a fluke autosomal DNA match (Family Finder, Amily Tree DNA) we found with a family in New Zealand. This family descends from two different lines of Muirs, one of which connects with the Muir who lives in Gateway on Fleet. It is a fluke of a match, becayse it is greater than 10 centimorgans, and at a dulistance of over 500 years, is a very uncommon and unlikely autosomal DNA match to see.

Pertaining to Y DNA, I'm also the Project Administrator of Family Tree DNA's Moore Y DNA Project, of which the descendants of James are only one part (of about a hundred different, unrelated lines).

To be clear, Y DNA testing is not the standard test sold by Ancestry, 23andMe, etc, which focuses on autosomal DNA, but a test that analyzes Y DNA, which is exclusively passed from father to son (and the maternal lines have no bearing on Y).

"I have a 230-year-old family journal that includes my fifth great grandfather Jeremiah Moore, who married Innocent Wightt on 7/6/1776, presided over by the Rev James Hunt of Blandensburg. He was 27 and she was 24."

Interesting, and given your bringing it up in the context of your response, leaves me with the question... does it reference origins of James of Four Hills?

Lastly, I've been working on the connection with James of Four Hills for over 30 years. Fortunately, it's the Y DNA that has improved our abilities to adjust the lens on what was before James.

One easy answer:

The fourth child is Marie II, born in 1652. Marie III was born in 1654.

My journal does back up to James Moore, just to Jeremiah and to his father through the will. That is as far back as my for sure goes.

There are a whole much of extra James and John Muir/Moores with wives and children. Most do exist, but the question is where and with whom do they exist. I have found a few new homes because they belong somewhere else. Still looking for others. For example, Jean Mayne and Robert her son and his five siblings unlisted in Geni could belong to another John Muir. Or this one as the last child was born before 1642 when John Muir married Jean Stirling.

MUIR JONNET JON. MUIR/JEAN MAYNE F 15/10/1635 644/1 30 138 Glasgow
MUIR MARGARET JON. MUIR/JEAN MAYNE F 14/01/1638 644/1 30 196 Glasgow
MUIR JEAN JOHNE MUIR/JEAN MAYNE F 25/12/1638 644/1 30 221 Glasgow
MUIR JOHNE JON. MUIR/JEAN MAYNE M 04/02/1640 644/1 30 252 Glasgow
MUIR ROBERT JON. MUIR/JEAN MAYNE M 04/02/1640 644/1 30 252 Glasgow
MUIR JEAN JON. MUIR/JEAN MAYN F 18/04/1641 644/1 30 286 Glasgow

I haven't been researching anyone for thirty years, but I have been doing research for almost 50 years. I have a subscription to every source I can find and use all of them before making recommendations. DNA is great, but its flaw is assuming descendants from an untested source. Without digging up the father, how do you know? All one has to do is take a DNA test to realize that some of our ancestors were messing around a bit and not admitting it. Well, at least mine were.

I'm not a curator anymore and am not the decision maker. I'm simply doing the best I can and involving anyone who can help.

Genealogy is the science of what is most likely, simply because we weren't there. If what you have is most likely, go for it.