Origin: Probable English
Surname variants: Dymond; Diamond; Dimond; Dymen; Dymand

Genetic Root [Deep] Ancestry
Y chromosome haplogroup: I-M253

SNP testing results:
M253+
P259- M72- M21- L300- L258- L22- L211- L205-

The Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) M253 is a subclade within haplogroup I.  Y DNA haplogroup I represents nearly one-fifth of the male population of Europe. It is found in the majority of present-day European populations; the greatest density is found in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Norway, Sweden, Serbia, Sardinia, Denmark and Germany. The haplogroup is almost non-existent outside of Europe, suggesting that it arose here.

New York and Newfoundland Lineage Branch Lines

It is believed that generations of Dimonds from both Kittery and Marblehead were involved in the seasonal fishery at Newfoundland, sometimes manning their own schooners. The Maritime History Archive at St. John’s, Newfoundland, is a repository for a number of records on the merchants and ship owners of New England and their dealings with the fishermen. The fact that such records are housed in St. John’s speaks to the relationship between the two colonies. For example, in the fishing account books (1658-1672) of George Curwen, a prominent Salem merchant who supplied fishermen at Salem and Marblehead, there is a record of Edward Diamond (of Marblehead), whom he outfitted in 1663¹, providing him with such sundries as soup plates, stockings, “woolmill mittings”, salt, gloves, hooks, and a knife. A century later, William and Benjamin Knight, shoremen from Marblehead who were themselves involved in the deep sea cod fishery, similarly outfitted Joseph Diman of Salem (1756), Jeames (sic) Dimon of Gloucester (1759), and John Diamont of Danvers (1773).

Dimonds were also among the mariners who engaged in the transatlantic trade. A quick look through the admiralty records, which lists ships passing through Newfoundland en route to foreign ports, revealed the following:

     1752: George Dymond, captaining The Pottery out of Boston, bound to Cadiz and Malaga.

     1754: John Diamond, captaining William of Orange out of Boston, bound to Bilboa and the Mediterranean.

     1754: John Diamond, captaining Sussanah out of Marblehead, bound to Spain and Portugal.

     1757 (March): John Diamond, captaining Eunice out of Marblehead, bound to Lisbon and Barcelona.

     1757 (November): John Diamond, captaining Neptune out of Marblehead, bound to Spain and Portugal.

     1761: John Diamond, captaining Neptune out of Marblehead, bound to Balboa.

     1761: John Diamond, captaining Alexander out of Gloucester, bound to Lisbon.

     1762: George Diamond, captaining Morning Star out of Boston, bound to Cadiz and New England.

Adam’s Cove²

The first documented Dimond settler in Newfoundland was a William Dimond (c 1752 to 1840), who, in 1773, laid claim to fishing rooms situate on a plot of land measuring 30 yards from south to north and 25 yards from east to west in Adam’s Cove, a tiny fishing outport on the north-east side of the Avalon Peninsula³. There he would stay and, with his wife, Mary, raise a family, descendants of whom are still living there today.

Documentation for this time is scarce, but from piecing together what is available it appears that William arrived with what must have been his parents and at least two of his brothers. Old cemetery records show that a John Dimond died in Adam’s Cove in 1779 (six years after William staked his claim), at the age of 56. Some 15 years onward, an Ann Dimond and her son Robert were mortgaging property, including their fishing room or plantation, in Adam’s Cove.⁴ This property bordered on the land claimed by William Diamond in 1773. Two years later, in 1796, this property formed part of the holdings of William Dimond & Co.—at that time the property was, the claim stated, “bequeathed by mother’s Will”. This suggests that Ann, who was clearly the owner of the property in 1794, had died sometime between 1794 and 1796. It therefore seems reasonable to infer that:

(a) Ann Dimond was the widow of the John Dimond who died in 1779,
(b) William and a second John Dimond (who shows up in later records) were her sons as well as Robert, and
(c) it was William, Robert, and John who comprised William Dimond & Co., particularly given that the next generation of young Dimonds did not reach the age of maturity until well after 1796 and were unlikely to have been William’s partners.

It is not surprising that John Sr.—or Ann, for that matter—does not appear in these early property records: These records were created in 1805, and although any claims of ownership were back-dated, the records reflected only those owners alive in 1805.

William Dimond died on January 22, 1840, at the respectable age of 87. Mary had predeceased him a number of years earlier, on May 23, 1815, after having taken ill at the funeral of Mr. Evans, one of their neighbors and friends. In his will, William generously remembered his daughter and grandchildren, and then left the remainder of his estate to his son Peter Dimond (c. 1790-1864). Whether the reason Peter was the only son to inherit was that Peter was his only son, his only son living at the time, or his only son living in Adam’s Cove at the time is unknown.

Lower Island Cove

Some 25 years after William and his family settled in Adam’s Cove, a Joseph Diamond is recorded, in 1798, as living at “Island Cove” (Lower Island Cove), a community 12.5 miles (20 kilometres) north of Adam’s Cove. He doesn’t appear to stay long, as evidenced by the fact there is no record of him in the Plantation Books of 1805 for Lower Island Cove. A George Dimond, however, is listed,⁵ although he and his wife, Mary, also disappear from the landscape, leaving Lower Island Cove to John Dimond (1788-1854) and—for a little while at least—to Nathaniel Dimond, both of whom appear as parents from 1817 onward in Methodist birth records for the community.

John stayed, and with his wife, Grace Snelgrove (c 1787-1883), raised a large family, consisting of at least two daughters—Ann (abt 1831) and Eliza (1833)—and five sons: twins Peter (1817-1874) and James (1817-1887), William (bef 1827), Robert (1827), and Nathan (1836). In later years, around 1852, Peter, James, and Nathan would move to Russell’s Cove (now known as New Melbourne), while it would appear that William and Robert would eventually (after 1871) move on to St. John’s. There have been no Diamonds in Lower Island Cove since at least the 1890s and probably even before then.

Y-DNA has established that the Dimond families of Adam’s Cove and Lower Island Cove are related.

Catalina

It has been speculated that George and Mary, at least, moved further north to Catalina, a community located on the eastern side of the Bonavista Peninsula, north of the Avalon Peninsula, where Lower Island Cove is located. This speculation is based partly on the record of a Mary Diamond who died there on December 18, 1866, at the age of 91; this would make her of the right age to have been the Mary Dimond who shows up in the Plantation Book records as owing property in 1803. The Catalina records also note the death of a George Diamond at the age of 65 in the 1800s; although the precise year of death is not legible, he does not appear in death records from 1864 on, which suggests his death occurred before then.

Catalina records also show a Nathaniel Diamond, planter, resident there in 1820.⁶ However, it cannot be speculated with any degree of certainty that he and the Nathaniel Diamond who appears for Lower Island Cove in 1826 are the one and the same.

Nevertheless, it has long been believed by Diamond descendants today that the Diamond families of Catalina, Adam’s Cove, and Lower Island Cove are related, possibly originating from the first Diamond settlers in Adam’s Cove. A quick look at early Diamond names in all three communities bolsters this belief: William, John, Robert, Peter, and Nathaniel were common in each community, with George appearing in both Lower Island Cove and Catalina and Thomas appearing in both Adam’s Cove and Catalina. It might also be significant that all three families were of the Methodist faith, a religion that was first established in Newfoundland in 1766 and was very much at that time a minority faith.

Further y-DNA testing involving Diamond descendants from Catalina should definitively answer whether in fact they belong to the Adam’s Cove and Lower Island Cove families.

Change Islands

Another significant group bearing the Diamond surname can be found at Change Islands, Notre Dame Bay, on the north-east coast of Newfoundland.

The first Diamond recorded there was Robert Diment, who appears in the Slade Registers⁷ for the years 1788-1792. A few decades later, a William Diamond is listed in the 1836 census for Change Islands; his household at that time consisted of:

* three males under the age of 14;
* one male aged 14 to 60 (which would have been William himself);
* three females under the age of 14;
* one female aged 14 to 60; and
* one male servant.

Again, the Diamonds who show up in ensuing years in birth, marriage, and death records were Methodists. Further research, including y-DNA testing if possible, needs to be done to see if there is any connection between the Diamonds of Change Islands and those of Adam’s Cove and Lower Island Cove.

Diamonds Elsewhere in Newfoundland

Like many Newfoundlanders, some of the Diamonds from established communities migrated elsewhere when their home fishing grounds became crowded. Thus, as noted above, you see Peter, James, and Nathaniel Diamond of Lower Island Cove relocating to the other side of the peninsula, to what was then known as Russell’s Cove. Thirty years later, in the mid-1880s, James’ only son John moved to Flat Islands, Placentia Bay, which was hundreds of miles southwest of Russell’s Cove but renowned for its rich fishing grounds. Still others, like John and Aaron Diamond of Change Islands, resettled in remote communities such as Burnt Arm in Notre Dame Bay.

Today, the name Diamond can mostly be found at Change Islands and St. John’s. It should further be noted that the variant “Dymond” is also widespread in St. John’s.

^[1] The record does not say where Edward Diamond fished. Some sources say fishing on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland by Essex County fishermen did not become widespread until after 1675, so it is possible that Edward was outfitting to fish closer to home.
^[2] Special thanks to Marilyn Wheadon, who kindly provided me with some crucial dates and put her head together with mine in reconstructing the existing Adam’s Cove records.
^[3] “Return of Possession held in Conception Bay, 1805 (known as the Plantations Book or Plantations Record), Volume 2. On August 21, 1804, in an effort to help avoid frequent disputes regarding possession and rights of fishing rooms, beaches, flakes and land, Governor Erasmus Gower issued an order directing his surrogates around the Island of Newfoundland to take an exact account of all fishing rooms, wharves, beaches, flakes, etc., within 200 yards from the high water mark and register them in a book. The claims of every merchant, planter, and boat keeper to the land he occupied were to be clearly defined. This official Register of Fishing Rooms was to be admitted as evidence in all land claim disputes.
^[4] Indenture made October 28, 1794 (in thirty-fifth year of the reign of George III).
^[5] Plantations Book, 1805, Volume 1. Both George and Mary are registered as property owners. Mary’s claim dates from 1803, by a deed of gift from her father; and George’s from 1805, a part of which was from clearing out the woods and a part of which was a gift from Philip Shano. George is registered as the principal occupant of Mary’s property.
^[6] E.R. Seary (ed. William Kirwin). Family Names of the Island of Newfoundland. Corrected Edition. (McGill-Queen’s University Press: 1998), p.142)
^[7] John Slade (1719-1792) was a merchant, shipowner, and sea captain of Poole, England, who established a fishery supply business (importing and retailing food and general goods; producing, purchasing, and exporting fish, sealskins, furs and fish oils; and building, purchasing, and running ships in connection with his business) in the Fogo-Twillingate areas of Newfoundland. For many years he kept a register of his employees, the years they worked, and the remuneration they received.
 

Newfoundland

John Diamond 1788 - 1854
The family first settled at Lower Island Cove, a fishing community on the northeast coast of the Bay de Verde Peninsula (upper portion of the Avalon Peninsula) of Newfoundland.  A generation later, John’s son James (with two of James’ brothers, including his twin Peter) relocated in the early 1850s to Russell’s Cove, on the northwest side of the peninsula.  In the mid-1880s, James’ son John move to Flat Islands, Placentia Bay, on the south coast of Newfoundland.

Peter Dimond abt. 1790 - 1864
Adams Cove

Clement Diamond 1840
Adams Cove

Locations:
Newfoundland

Adam’s Cove

Lower Island Cove                

Russell’s Cove (now New Melbourne)

Flat Islands (later called Port Elizabeth

Participant Lines:

Lower Island Cove

197085
John Dimond, b 1788, d 1854 Lower Island Cove, Newfoundland, m Grace Snelgrove
     James Diamond, b 1817 Lower Island Cove, Newfoundland, d 1887 Russell’s Cove, Newfoundland, m Mary Lowe (possibly nee Fagner)
          John Diamond, b 1853 Russell’s Cove, Newfoundland, d 1942 Flat Islands, Placentia Bay, Newfoundland, m Mary Hannah Gosling
                Frederick William Diamond, b 1897 Flat Islands, Placentia Bay, Newfoundland, d 1969 St. John’s, Newfoundland, m Amelia Nina Clarke

Adams Cove
207266
Peter Dimond, b abt 1790, d 1864 Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, m Elizabeth (unknown)
     William Thomas Diamond, b abt 1835, Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, d December 1887, Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, m Mary Pearcey
           Joseph Diamond, b June 30, 1858, Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, d May 21, 1933, Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, m Sarah King
                    Leonard Diamond, b July 21, 1893, Adam’s Cove, Newfoundland, d 1974, m Winnie Dwyer

New York Branch

John Dymond 1809                   
John Dymond

John Dymond 1809 and John Dymond father of Peter are thought be sons or grandsons of Marcus Dymond 1726 of Beekman Patent who is documented to be the son of Edward Dimond of Beekman Patent. Marcus migrated to Kinderhook from Beekman Patent about 1760, and then Stephentown by about 1790.
Edward had nine children three of which were males. They are recorded in southern Dutchess County, New York Province at Poughquag, Beekman Patent in the 1720s. Edward Dimond and his sons and their families migrated north along the Hudson river first to Kinderhook the the1760s. The document trail ends there for all but son Marcus¹⁷²⁶ who settled about nineteen miles to the NNE  of Kinderhook at Stephentown and Sand Lake. Marcus unlike his brothers left a Will naming his children. From that we can create the following outline;
 
  1- Edward Dimond
           2- Johannes¹⁷²³
           2- Marcus¹⁷²⁶
                     3-Jacob
                     3- Isaac
                     3-Abraham
                     3-Robert
                     3-John 
                     3-Henry
                     3-William
                     3-Mary
           2- Jacob¹⁷⁴⁴

The majority of these sons were over twenty year of age during the Revolution. They must be taken into account when attributing records.

Locations:
Beekman Patent
Dutchess County, NY
Rensselear County, NY
Kinderhook
Stephentown
Sand Lake

New York Branch
Stephentown, New York

Link to Stephentown Genealogy

Possible descendants of Marcus¹⁷²⁶ and Edward Dimond of Beekman and Kinderhook New York Province and in turn may be descendants of Edward Dimond of Marblehead Massachusetts Colony
      Edward ¹ Dymen (Dimond), b.~1687 New York Province or Massachusetts Colony
                                                        m. Christina Snyder
        Marcus² Deymon (Dymond) b. 1726 Beekman Patent d. c.1813 m. Marytje Sim(p)son
 

Persons who tested with Genebase and Ancestry have been included in the data as best as we are able. Not all outlines are known.

Haplotype Data

Note that there are random mutations away from the modal and ancestral. These are expected in two hundred and fifty years (5 to 7 generations).

Random mutations become branch line markers when the mutation is then passed to each new generation there after. In each case the mutation was or will be passed to successive sons.

Mutations

‘Altered DNA’ is another name for mutation. In molecular biology and genetics, mutations are changes in a genomic sequence: the DNA sequence of a cell's genome or the DNA. They can be defined as sudden and spontaneous changes in the cell. Mutations are caused by radiation, viruses, transposons and mutagenic chemicals, as well as errors that occur during meiosis. No one has yet established a connection between any mutagenic agent and the particular kind of mutation we measure replication slippage in STRs [Short Tandem Repeats] which is simply the lack of absolute perfection in counting repeats in the Y chromosome.

The mutations we are measuring occur during the continuous process of sperm creation through replication slippage. At the point in time when sperm reside "in" the father most of the millions of sperm in an ejaculate will be identical for the markers we test, but a extremely small fraction will differ. The occurrence of a mutation in a son is therefore a matter of chance as to which sperm fertilizes the egg.

When we say the mutation occurred "in" the son, that's saying the mutation occurred during the creation of the sperm that fertilized the egg that developed into the son. The next son to be born is a product of the same process, and his haplotype is independent of the prior son or future sons. The father's DNA has not changed.  The next ejaculate will be similar, with sperm that are identical for the most part but with a few mutations occurring in a random fashion.

Genetic genealogy

Paternal line genetic genealogy studies the sequences of repeating nucleotide (the base components of DNA) patterns on the Y chromosome known as short tandem repeats (STRs). Each STR is considered a separate marker for potential genetic matching because the number of times it is repeated will be the same for related males.

If a father were to have sons, no matter the number, the odds are extremely high that all will have the same yDNA measurements as their father. Every so often there will be the rare random mutation. This son will have a measurement that is different than his brothers and father.

It is possible but remote that another son might also have a mutation though the odds are significantly against this occurring. The odds that two brothers would have the same mutation at the same STR location are even more remote.

We can use this knowledge to study and construct paternal lineage relationships

Process

The first and primary use of Y DNA is to prove or disprove relationship to a specific paternal lineage. This can be taken a step further by assembling lineage descendant haplotype data across as many descendants of a common paternal ancestor as possible. The first step is to first determine the modal lineage haplotype.  Modals are determined by comparing measurements marker by marker the greatest tally being the modal.

As sample size increases we begin to see within the charted data random mutations becoming branch defining mutations. Random mutations are today yet to be triangulated branch markers or are future branches. With each mutation sons and direct line male descendants beyond the man will there ever after carry the same mutation. It will become a branch defining marker. Through a carefully thought out process of testing appropriate brothers, cousins, and fathers is possible to triangulate to the individual where the mutation first occurred.

With a broad representation of data across branches we can sometimes deduce the most distant common ancestor’s haplotype, this deduced ancestral haplotype.

Many markers ancestral markers will mirror the modal haplotype and are obvious. Where there are branch markers this is not as cut and dried. Sample bias be a real problem

By working back from the modal or ancestral haplotype we can, given enough data, construct a biological tree of descent. This is especially important when considering pre 1850 tree and branch constructions for accuracy the paucity of documentary evidence obscures or confuses.
 

What is the data telling us?
Revised 11.11.2011

There are too few participants to determine the ancestral haplotype. Additionally data from Genebase and Ancestry is incomplete for comparison purposes however we can say we have firmly established the Y DNA signature of this paternal lineage.

The lineage consists of two primary branches descending from a common ancestor. These branches separated some 300 years ago and have had no contact or knowledge of the other over this time. One branch settled in Newfoundland and the other in Massachusetts and New York. The Newfoundland branch in settled at least the 1700s and the Massachusetts and New York branch perhaps as early as the mid 1600s and certainly by the early 1700s.

It is now proven that the Diamond's of Newfoundland all descend from the same common ancestor. This fact had been lost over time.

Markers 389-2, 449, 570, and 531 are random mutations [un-triangulated branches]. Marker 449 is a clear branch marker among the Newfoundland branch.
 

            I-M253 Lineage Data