Ten years ago, I posted that I was descended from John Morse (1738 - 1797), who married Margaret Jones. There is still a great deal of confusion on Ancestry, and at the time I said that a few of them list John Morse as Rev. John Morse, son of Jackman, but I dismissed this as an error.

Since then, I have had my DNA tested on Ancestry, and lo and behold, it turns out that Jackman Morse is my 5th-great-grandfather, with four DNA matches. John Morse, married to Margaret Jones, is my fourth great-grandparent - from then on, the family tree makes sense. However, I cannot believe that amongst my coal miners and coal owners in the Forest there is an eminent vicar. The sticking point seems to be John Morse, 1738 - 1739, as in various trees on Ancestry, the children are the same as my John Morse, and in some, completely different. I really don't know how to prove this, but surely the DNA can't be wrong, or can it?

DNA will match you to similar samples ( taken from living people, and occasionally historic samples)

so you are on safe ground with living relatives

However historic trees still suffer the same potential (well intended) inaccuracies Im afraid

Interestingly there is a Rev Jackman who is Vicar of Newent in the 1670s, probably where he got his name from, I also note the Jackman is described as a Clerk at his marriage, asnd that his father Abraham is also a clerk.