If you would like to participate please contact us. Donations to the general fund to support those who cannot afford the cost of the test are welcome.
DNA STUDY
The name Hawgood was been misspelt over the years, but none more so than in the US following the move there of Francis Hawgood around 1650. Descendents of the below have in many instances traced their ancestry back to Francis, and their paper records have now been validated through the DNA match to Hawgood test results.
HAYWOOD
There is an exact match between a US based Hawgood and a Haywood whose roots go back to Henry Haywood of Hawkins county, Tennessee, born 1801. The match is 51/51, with another 6 markers matching with other Hawgoods tested. Normally this would indicate a common ancestor within just a few generations.
There is another Haywood match, again exact with the Hawgood and also the first Haywood. This second Haywood’s ancestor was Charles Haywood born 1808 in Hawkins County, and is believed to be the brother of Henry Haywood above. Both Henry and Charles’ father may have been William Haywood of North Caroline, born either 1760 or 1765.
Charles Haywood appears in the trees of others as being a descendent of Francis Hawgood born c1620 in Gloucester, later known as Francis Hogwood, with subsequent generations adopting the names of Hagood, Haguewood, and Hagewood. This line of Haywoods does not however match genetically with other Haywood lines which are of a different Haplotype and it is therefore uniquely connected to the Hawgood line. In other trees, Charles is shown to have different parentage and descended from Haywood who lived in Barbados - the DNA evidence suggests that this line is likely to be incorrect.
HAGEWOOD
There is also a match with a Hagewood descended from Francis Hawgood/Hogwood of Gloucester, with just two mutations present. The actual distance to Francis is 10 generations, and the mathematically most likely generation gap is calculated at 6-8 generations which correlates allowing for statistical variances.
A further Hagewood match who is descended from Francis Hawgood/Hogwood of Gloucester
HOWARD
There is very close match to a US based Howard who shares a mutation at DYS 391 (11 instead of 10) with James Haywood. These are the only two tested that have this mutation and it is likely that both are from the same branch of the tree despite the name variance.
HEGWOOD
There is an almost exact match between this result and 1) and 2) above. This would suggest a common ancestor no earlier than 1750.
HAIGOOD
There is only one mutation at DYS464 from the Hawgood Modal values compared to the descendents of Francis Hawgood
HAGOOD
There is a match with a Hagood name whose DNA matches those known to have descended from Francis Hawgood of 1620
HAGWOOD
There is an exact match with a Hagwood name whose DNA matches, and whose paper trail is believed to traced back to Francis Hawgood of 1620
Francis Hawgood c1620 - 1676
(also known as Francis Hawkwood, Francis Hogwood)
Based on the DNA results, Francis Hawgood is the ancestor of all of the above names. He moved to America from Gloucester, although this is not likely to be his birth place, around 1650, marrying Elizabeth Creed. His will shows his name as Hogwood. US records show numerous misspellings of his name and those of his descendents, including Hawkwood, Haywood, Hagood, Hogwood, Haguewood, Hagewood and Hagwood. Francis Hawgood was the ancestor of virtually all Hawgood derivative names that have been found to match Hawgood DNA.
Below are various extracts attributed to Francis Hawgood of 1620 :
Howgoode : 1652 - Surrey County records by Eliza Timberlake Davis
Page 21 26 Oct 1652. “Jno Gibbings and Francis Howgoode bind themselves to pay unto Wm Murrell the sume of eighteen hundred pounds of good tob”
Haughgood : 8/5/1661, 10/10/1661 - Charles City County record - Francis Haughgood
“Court proceedings: Accusation by Peter Grey. Court heard "sev'all circumstantiall exa'iacons to us presented. Ordered FH taken into custody of sheriff until delivered by "due Course of law." SE 10/10/1661: many witnesses summoned by PG agst. FH, "to excess chg to Co., the law allowing but 3, and 3 being sufficient, paymt to the others suspended until pleasure of Gov. and Council is known." [APPEARS he was fG] SE 12/3/1661 judgt. in favor of Capt. Edd Hill agst. est. of Francis Haughgood for 4158 l.t. SE 2/3/1662: John Stephens ordered to pay Francis Houghgood 250 l.t. in 10 days.”
Francis Hawgood :
"On 30 JUL 1670 FRA. HAWGOOD WAS LISTED IN a second patent AS A HEADRIGHT IN A PATENT TO WILLIAM PEBLES FOR 473 ACRES on the South side of the James River in Charles City County, included with nine other persons ref: Cavaliers and Pioneers Vol. II, p. 74 by Nugent"
Francis appears in many US trees with descendants having various ‘H’ names. These versions of Hawgood, in particular a Haywood line, are not however related to most other lines with the same surname. It is likely that in the case of Haywood, that the name already existed in the US, and in times of illiteracy, that the spelling of a similar sounding and known name was adopted in error.
A number of trees on ancestry believe that Francis Hawgood's father was George Awood. There is no evidence to confirm this and indeed a detailed search of Gloucester records has not revealed any Hawgood families of the timescale involved. Bristol was a hub of shipping and it is more likely this was simply a departure point and not Francis' birthplace. There is no connection between this line of Haywoods/Haguewoods/Hawgoods to the Heywoods and later Haywoods living in Barbados in the 1600s.
Link between the above and Henry Hawgood of 1762
A US based Haywood descendant is an exact genetic match (STR testing) with a descendent of Henry Hawgood born 1762 who lived in Dale, in Wales. Since that result was identified, we have discovered an autosomal DNA match between Hawgood test participants which has allowed us to position Henry in the broader family tree.
These matches also tell us that Francis Hawgood (Hogwood) was closely related to John Hawgood of 1663, who is the father of all modern Hawgoods that we have been able to trace.