1840 Butler PA Parent list

I made an informal survey of Thompsons from Butler PA in 1840 that have children in the 5 year old range. On the assumption that Levi Thompson would be about 5 or 6 and would still be living in the Butler area (lots of assumptions). If his age is right in his other census records he really should be in the 5 to 9 category. So I'll give the amounts, and the total boys that should fit and then I'll mark the ones who have 5-9 with a *.

Here is the list from the 1840 census of Butler PA:

james thompson from Cranberry two boys under 5 and two 5-9 (4 total) *

john thompson from Middlesex one boy 5-9 (1 total) *

john thompsoon buffalo one under 5 (1 total)

john thompson Donegal one under 5 and one 5-9 (2 total) *

2nd john thompson from Donegal one 5-9 (1 total) *

joseph thompson Cherry one under 5 and two 5-9 (3 total) *

moses thompson one under 5 (1 total)

robert thompson clearfield one under 5 (1 total)

robert thompson middlesex two under 5 and one 5-9 (3 total) *

robert thompson muddy creek one 5-9 (1 total) *

saml (samuel thompson centre butler two under 5 and three 5-9 (5 total) *

william thompson buffalo one 5-9 (1 total) *

william Thompson center three 5-9 (3 total) *

I guess the next step would be to try to identify these guys in 1850, what I always run into though is that I get confused with all the Johns and James and Williams and that people come and go quite a bit.

New Year Task List

Things I should do without DNA:

• I want to make some kind of list of Thompsons who emigrate from England before 1835, but it may not be worth it because there are many of them and their point of entry into the U.S. may not be telling. Also even though my Y seems to be English, it's still most likely that they came from Ireland (even if they were only there for a generation).
• I should make a survey of 1840 Thompsons who have children around 5 years of age that live in Butler PA. If he was born there, then maybe he was still there in 1840.
• I should contact the Anderson Public Library and Madison County Historical society to see if I can get more information on the trial Levi was in when he disappeared. Obviously it was memorable because they were writing about it 20 years later. Maybe the trial he was in will shed clues on the 1880s.
• I should order death records for Rosa Blades and Henry Williamson and Ida Williamson Thompson (all died after 1900 so they have state records with the Indiana Health department). It would be to gather information on their mothers who are all unknowns at this point. Each record look up is about $8 I think, so this is well worth the stamps.
• I should order Levi Thompson's entire pension record from the national archive. I ordered the short version and have been disappointed that it didn't have a lot of information. It's a $75 gamble though so  it will come later.

Things I should do with DNA:

• Order a Y test for the Indiana Thompsons. It's an expense, and it's limited to male line only, but it would give me either a good match or more to think about and may help me make autosomal DNA decisions. If it's a good Y match then maybe I should test the same person for autosomal, if not, then maybe I should do more Y tests among known relatives to see if I can identify a break point.
• Order autosomal testing for a Seelye. I need some sort of guide post on who is a Seelye match and who is not. A living Uncle would be nice, cousins of any kind will do too. It would be some kind of wedge, even if it only identified 1/8th of my father's matches as Seelyes it would give me over a hundred matches to consider as Seelye candidates. At $99 it's about the cheapest test I can order with 23 and me.
• Order an autosomal test for a Finks relative. There are a few still alive who are cousins of my grandfather and could be valuable in identifying matches that are Finks related.  Again $99. If you're tallying things up you can see that my list of things to do without DNA is much less expensive than my to do list with DNA!
• Upgrade my Y DNA results to 67 markers (and see if my Elmer match is able to do the same). It will give us a much better idea of how closely we continue to match up. Right now that's $79..but it's on sale so the price will likely be higher later.

And so this is Christmas..and what have you done

I think since I've moved my Y DNA results to FTDNA, I've been able to take advantage of a lot of good testing and research within the FTDNA groups and also take better advantage of what I got from Ancestry.com. Last year, I thought my Y was a pretty obvious dud. Now I have what I think is a clearer picture of where my Y DNA ancestor was from..or at least the journey they took.

I'm pretty resigned that we're looking at Anglo Saxon England or some later migration from Flanders or Denmark before 1500AD. I think the Anglo Saxon/Frisian thing circa 500AD is most likely at this point but I can't totally rule out Flemish weavers or Hanseatic League members.

It's not shocking because I've been building this case for a while, initially with a lot of hesitation, but more recently with actual excitement. I feel like I've been able to move from a feeling of dread in the beginning that we Thompsons were not exactly like the other Thompsons to acceptance of a sort. Now I've moved on to learning about where we may have come from outside of the general mythology of Thompson-ness. I have actually enjoyed learning about these groups of people we call "Germanic".

I think the last few days have been an enormous success in that I feel like I'm seeing a pattern emerge that incorporates the Knowltons and Elmers that I've spent so much time with. I can see in the cluster at "Z18 and subgroups" a broad migration round the bottom of the Balitc Sea and over to England...or maybe what would become England in the future. As I watch this pattern play out I'm seeing a definite area of England for us and it's southeast England and maybe more specifically East Anglia although a paper trail to Kent wouldn't be a surprise either.

When I look at autosomal DNA I'm seeing some ties to the area as well, in the many matches that have roots in Suffolk, Essex and Norfolk. By the same token though I can't ignore my father's genetic connections to Germany and Ireland which remain a bit of a mystery. I could definitely see Germany through the Finks (Thompsons) family but many Germans have X matches which means it would be carried on the Seelye side, not the Thompson side. There is also a French component that is evident in our paper trail, but not yet making itself apparent genetically.

Clearly the Y DNA move was good for boiling things down and our autosomal DNA tests require similar work. Like the move for the Y, I should transfer autosomal tests over to FTDNA. Gedmatch.com has proven that the FTDNA database holds some clues for us.

In both the Y and autosomal cases my father and I can no longer be the only representatives of our family. We'll need others beyond the level of my grandparents to help us sort and order matches. Painfully, we'll need them for both the Y (because the Y is important for continuity) AND autosomal tests (because the Thompsons need help on all their lines) which costs money. For my dad it will become important to have a Seelye representative and a Thompson for autosomal testing. Eventually, if we can establish that the Y carries through to the Indiana Thompsons and we're not looking at a more recent NPE, we'll need to look at testing Y candidates from Butler PA..which is a shot in the dark with no guarantee of participation.

It's easy to forget, in the midst of all my talk about genetic testing, that we've made some good advances in paper work too. I think the John B Hollingsworth information is an important clue and gives a good time frame for a move from Butler PA to Madison IN. It's nice to have someone I CAN follow back to Pennsylvania with clear ties to Indiana. It may mean that I should focus more on the Thompsons in Grant Indiana where the Hollingsworth family settles down. All of that is totally paper trail driven.

I've also been able to make good progress on the Hibbard (Thompson/Finks) family totally with photographic evidence and paper trails and made progress on the Finks family itself using census records and oral histories from Finks related people in Virginia. We've had excellent success on the Thompson/Williamson front as well and added a wealth of leads for that family just by using the census to leap a missing generation. I know more about the Jeffers/Jeffries family (Thompson/Finks) than I did before and I may have some genetic evidence to support the wishy washy family trees coming out of Kentucky.

So you can't have just DNA testing alone, you have to be able to find records and connect with people if you're going to be able to make anything out of this mess. I'm lucky to live in a time where most of this work can be done online and I can take advantage of all the great work done by others to fill in gaps.

I think there are still many discoveries to be made and new cultures and histories to learn about and I'm still excited to see how things unfold and we haven't been totally backed into a corner yet. Big studies are coming out of England and Ireland that may shed new light on old data and as always, I meet new people all the time who give me great ideas and fresh creative perspectives.

Autosomal DNA Butler PA possibility?

One of the issues I've had with Autosomal DNA results is that I seem to be looking way to far back in time to match up with anyone near my missing realtives. As an example, I have several people born in the 1800s that I struggle to place, and I have nearly a thousand genetic matches with people who probably match me in the early 1700s. There's quite a leap of time.

Needless to say, Butler Pennsylvania matches are slim to none. I have a few genetic matches with family in Washington PA, but not Butler..until now. Now I have a single match with a person whose Critchlow family is from Butler PA in the 1800s. It was an awesome find! It was also frustrating, because there is no obvious connection with my Thompson family.

Aaarrgh.

In reality this match has family in the right place at the right time, but we could still really match up in the 1700s on a totally different line in a totally different town in a different state with anyone on either side of my dad's family.

The closest I come to something familiar is an offhand relationship between this match and a Bodine from New Jersey. Not stellar.

I still have hope of finding that connection somewhere though and I'll keep picking away at it. Since this and several other larger matches at Gedmatch.com are actually tests from Family Tree DNA it may be a good idea to pay the $50 and get my dad's test over there for a while.

Also it goes without saying that getting DNA from other known Thompsons would be helpful too.

New Eyes on Y DNA

During the course of puttering around on various DNA related forums, I began a conversation with another Z14 person who is not in my cluster. In conversing back and forth about his Y STRs and mine I asked if he would check his DYS458 to see if he had a microallele there. For all I know it is common to every Z14 person...so why not check. Truthfully I had expected that he did have one.

Interestingly though, he did not. Meanwhile other members of  my cluster do have this microallele. To me it really gives validity to the clustering that has been done by the project admins. They grouped us without knowing that we shared this oddity simply by the strength of the pattern in our other markers.

Okay so what it means to me that there is another Z14 person who does not have a microallele on DYS458:

Since I've learned that you retain the microallele through mutations it would place the mutation that caused the microallele in a period in time after the SNP Z14 came into being. I'm not sure if microalleles are a one way street, but it seems that way from what I've heard. So for me  and the people I've contacted in my cluster who have the DYS458.2 it would make the timeline something like this:

R1b -> R1b-U106 -> R1b-Z18 -> R1b-Z14 -> microallele at DYS458

I've seen the age of Z18 given as roughly 2000 years so Z14 is necessarily younger than that (although I don't know the estimates of it's age) and our shared microallele is younger than that. All it does is get you closer in time to the current date. To me that was exciting, because it really would be some sort of definition between Z14 people, creating branches in our tree and the possibility that there are SNPs that may follow these clusters that we don't know about yet.

The second thing that came about during our conversations was that I looked at some of my values that weren't as obvious at the 458.2 that I've spent so much time with.

We were talking about killer values at specific alleles. Values that almost no one shares. As an example I used my DYS463 which is 23. 

Here's an example of why this stood out to me. It has a lot to do with Ancestry.com's presentation. The highlighted values with numbers are those that differ from mine. You can see that my GATAH4 is not incredibly popular, but my DYS463 is down right offensive to other mammals. 

See it there DYS463 I have 23...nearly everyone else has 25. No one at ancestry has 23. I had never really put it together but my new Z14 person sure did. It's right on the Z18 and subgroups page labelled 

DYS463=25 or the "Root of all Evil". http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r-z18/default.aspx

Apparently if you have a 25 at DYS463 then they are 78% sure that you're going to come out R1b-Z18. So 25 is the mode for Z18 humans. It's also the mode in my cluster at FTDNA where I appear to be the only person who does not have it. I'm also one of the few people who tested for it.

That is why all of my ancestry matches seem to have this 25 value at DYS463..they are all also more likely to be R1b-Z18. I thought 25 was the value for all humans, but it turns out it's a dead giveaway for Z18 status. So the irony is that I don't have it and I'm Z18 positive. I am the odd man among my own matches.

It's odd, but how odd can it be?! Well, there are some reasons I may not see other Z14 people with my 23. One is that you would only know anything about DYS463 if you tested at SMGF or Ancestry.com for their 46 marker test or ordered the 111 test at FTDNA.

According to SMGF 23 at DYS463 is about 8% of the population. If I take that as a rough guide and look at Z18 where 25 is the mode and I'm also in a smaller subset of the population that has a DYS458.2 then the odds of finding matches at all seem pretty unlikely.

So nobody at ancestry has it, and nobody at the Z18 group had it (of those that tested for it). Time to go back to good old SMGF and have a look. 

You'll have to squint, but it's there DYS463 is 23 and who do I share it with at SMGF? The Knowltons and the Elmer. Since there are multiple Knowltons and I also have Knowltons and Elmers at FTDNA, I would imagine this is a pattern for our families. SMGF is hard because it has no haplogroup information. There are others at SMGF who have the 23 like Dester from Switzerland, Nunn from England and Burke from Ireland (apparently the name is an anglo saxon name based on burg).

I couldn't tell you who else in the cumberland cluster has it beside me the Knowltons and the Elmers, but I can say that the one Damron at Ancestry.com has 25 there. The Damerons share the DYS458 microallele, but not this really odd value at DYS463...or at least that is the case for the single Dam(e)ron test I have at Ancestry.

So to me that is exciting. if we had more 111 marker tests in our cluster it would be interesting to see who else in there has this. It's also interesting that these two families, the Knowltons and Elmers have their roots in Southeast England and maybe even more specifically East Anglia?

It makes me more confident of the work that has gone on thus far and, to me at least, it strengthens the position of England on my Y line.

It also points out how valuable another set of eyes is, even when you may not be related for the last 1500 years you can still give each other a helping hand.

DNA Wide and Thin

In the past when I've talked about the searches I've done I've been laughed at. Mainly because I accept some pretty broad results. I call them my matches but functionally at FTDNA they would not be matches. We all have this same general pattern and that is what I've homed in on to make my list, but for most people this wouldn't be a list.

I search for people at a genetic distance of 5 which most people wouldn't do, but it's the only way I could get any results at all. At best I've been looking at some pretty ancient relationships. I think at the very best I may have a good match with the Elmers in the last 200 to 500 years although estimates vary.

My name appears to be irrelevant, other than maybe I've noticed in the past a swing toward personal names rather than "task" based names in my matches. Thompson, Edwardson, Peterson, Janke (diminutive of Jan) Pipkin (diminutive of Philip I think). I've also noticed place names like Knowlton in Kent...Elmer is an anglo saxon descriptive name in England from the area of Kings Lynn but in Switzerland it denotes someone from Elms...Although the English family seems most likely. The Damerons may be from Flanders. I'm not sure what the origin of their name is (they are also not sure although they do have a patriarch from Ipswich England) although it is sometimes associated with Belgium, "West Flanders" and the Netherlands like the Winne/Winner family who actually does trace to the same area. I can't totally say there aren't job names because there is a Chandler in the mix from somewhere in England.

In my closest group there is only one Elmer 35/37, the other Elmers I would match with would be 34/37.

So in my lists of FTDNA sanctioned 25 marker matches I have Southeast Englanders, Germans and Netherlanders/Belgians...if that is a word. Right now that is Chandler, Emery, Dameron/Damron, Pipkin/Pipken, Elmer, Boettcher and Winne/Winner.

In the wider group that I claim as matches like the Coens, Knowltons, Edwardsons, Petersons, Kuhlman etc.., the range is pretty similar...although the Coens bring in Ireland, when I include Janke it edges into Poland and the Petersons swing up into Denmark.

If I widen out even more, I end up at the Z18/Z14 cumberland cluster and I gain some people from Wales, more English and more Polish people like Ralowicz, Stanuszek, Szczublewski. Since they're not in my matches, I'm not sure where their last ancestor is from although Ralowicz seems to also be popular in Belarus.

With so few people in this cluster (20 something but further testing should find more) and so much ground to cover you can't help but think of some huge migration event. The Z18 group seems to cover the "Germanic" world and to me seems to be roughly the same area as U106..if a bit more Baltic-centric, but our cluster also seems to cover most of this territory too. Like dandelion seeds blown in the wind.

When I look at the cumberland cluster I see a lot of "unknown" origin people, like myself. My Thompsons seem to be people on the move at the edge of society, with few records. They have a common name, but are not related to others in the same area that share the name. Sprawled out. Part of a major group, but oddly different from others in the group. Waxing poetic, I can see that same story echoed in the DNA results of the cumberland cluster, people who are everywhere and nowhere all at once.

I can't help but think about tying together in my mind a group of men who span the Baltic from Belarus to Ireland. Clustered together, but separated by huge distances. The first explanation I can think of is that we have a common ancestor, way back in time (more than a thousand years ago) and that what we are seeing is an undefined subclade of R1b-Z14 being played out in a cluster of similar STRs. Since Z18 doesn't seem to be that well traveled and I don't fall into it's known subclades, this seems reasonable.

I've spent a lot of time coming up with likely groups for us over the years (even before I knew there was an us) and I still fall back to those groups that epitomize sea trade and have a Germanic slant. You can't look at the territory from Germany to England and not think about the Anglo Saxons. They are still the major player in the minds of most genetic genealogists and looking at my maps and matches, I think it makes sense. I've covered a lot of that ground and given them a lot of thought, but then I wondered, who am I overlooking and how can I incorporate these new Polish people?

Saxons

Well, to an extent I've overlooked the Anglo Saxons. They are not a unified group. The definitions of people have been handed to us by the Romans largely and by the people themselves long after they migrated to England. I'm considering people in my matches that may be predate 500AD and may have been Roman transplants themselves. Would the Romans or Romano-celts have made a distinction between a Saxoni and a Warini in Britain? Would the people themselves have been able to make such a distinction?

Danes

A little more recently than the Saxons, I've focused quite a bit on the Danes, specifically around the 800-900AD mark where they are impacting England. I've made maps of matches that seem to mimic the borders of the Danelaw (and the extent of the Saxons in some areas). Given my single Danish match at Ancestry.com it seemed worth a look. England and Germany carry the bulk of people "like" me, but I can't discount the Danes for lack of testing.

I still get caught at what to do about the Polish matches. There was certainly a viking presence in the area of Poland and even further east. Thinking specifically about the Varangians who became the Rus out of Kiev. Like the Varni or Warini they were eventually assimilated into the greater Slavic ethnic group.

More recently though I ran across this interesting article about Harold Bluetooth and his army containing mercenaries from the south Baltic:  "The team of researchers examined a total of forty-eight skeletons using a new method called strontium isotope analysis. This made it possible to determine that more than half of the skeletons did not come from Denmark. The researchers were not able to trace the precise geographical origin of the deceased, but previous finds of artefacts such as pottery and weapons around Trelleborg indicate that many of them came from Norway or south of the Baltic Sea – i.e. what is now Poland."

Now that is what I'm talking about. Harald Bluetooth, whose son Sweyn Forkbeard became a Danish King of England and whose grandson Cnut conquered England with the help of Polish warriors: "Among the allies of Denmark was Boleslaw the Brave, the Duke of Poland and a relative to the Danish royal house. He lent somePolish troops,^[25] likely to have been a pledge made to Cnut and Harald when, in the winter, they "went amongst the Wends" to fetch their mother back to the Danish court. "

So we have a fairly long standing south baltic tilt to the armies of the Danish kings. I'm imagining that some of those Polish mercenaries stayed and eventually melded into the background. That would be one way to spread south balts around the Baltic and North Sea.

Hanseatic League

These guys are always on my mind because they could spread Y DNA really far in a really short timeframe. When I look at my closest match, the Elmer and see that his Elmer matches are a 1 or 2 mismatches away from him, and that it happened within the last 400 or so years, it makes me think we might be a fast mutating group. The Hanseatic league would probably be considered a little too close for comfort for our group, but if we are speed demons for mutation rates, then it could play out. Especially when I consider the coastal nature of the English matches and their proximity to the Netherlands.

The league was active from the 13th to the 17th century. Have a look at the range on this map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Extent_of_the_Hansa.jpg

Then have a glance at this map of the Hanseatic trade routes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Haupthandelsroute_Hanse.png

It contains multiple stops along the Cumberland Cluster path. Could we differentiate this much over 700 years?

Check out the towns in the Hanseatic League in Britian:

"In addition to the major Kontors, individual Hanseatic ports had a representative merchant and warehouse. In England this happened in Boston, Bristol, Bishop's Lynn (nowKing's Lynn, which features the sole remaining Hanseatic warehouse in England), Hull,^{[disputed – discuss]} Ipswich, Norwich, Yarmouth (now Great Yarmouth), and York." 

"The league succeeded in establishing additional Kontors in Bruges (Flanders), Bergen (Norway), and London (Kingdom of England). These trading posts became significant enclaves. "

"German colonists in the 12th and 13th centuries settled in numerous cities on and near the east Baltic coast, such as Elbing (Elbląg), Thorn (Toruń), Reval (Tallinn), Riga, and Dorpat (Tartu), which became members of the Hanseatic League, and some of which still retain many Hansa buildings and bear the style of their Hanseatic days. Most were granted Lübeck law (Lübisches Recht), which provided that they had to appeal in all legal matters to Lübeck's city council. The Livonian Confederationincorporated modern-day Estonia and parts of Latvia and had its own Hanseatic parliament (diet); all of its major towns became members of the Hanseatic League. The dominant language of trade was Middle Low German, a dialect with significant impact for countries involved in the trade, particularly the larger Scandinavian languages, Estonian, and Latvian."

Flemish Exiles

I've heard quite a bit about Flemish exiles and the weaving trade but never looked into them too seriously. There are sporadic articles about them on the internet. Even some information taken from a book on Benjamin Franklin and the Flemish Exiles of Norwich. I also found this article on the Flemish Exiles in London: http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/Collections-Research/Research/Your-Research/RWWC/Themes/1295/1286/

And this piece in the short history of Norwich:


"The medieval period was a prosperous one for the Norwich area and the main industry was the wool trade and weaving. (The heavy fabric called Worstead was named after the village of that name north of Norwich.) Large numbers of skilled Walloon and Flemish weavers came to Norwich from the Low Countries during this time, often to escape persecution at home."

This is a favorite group used to explain possible wayward Scots, English and Irish (like a Thompson that doesn't look so Thompsonish in their Y DNA).
Other German Migrations

I also don't want to ignore later German migrations. My own Finks family is said to have moved from the Palitinate to England and then on to the Americas. I know that Germans also lived along the Volga as I've seen Volga Germans among my autosomal DNA matches. I did some searching about German migrants to Poland and ran across this Wikipedia article about the German minority in Poland:

"German migration into the area of modern Poland began with the medieval Ostsiedlung (see also Walddeutsche). The historical regions of Lower Silesia, East Brandenburg, Pomerania and East Prussia were almost completely German-settled by the High Middle Ages, while in the other areas there were substantial German populations, most notably in the historical regions of Pomerelia, Upper Silesia, and Posen or Greater Poland."

These migrations are numerous and have many reasons, many involving the Catholic and Lutheran churches and making the Protestant "nations" inviting places to land...raise a family and possibly lose your last name.



My list is not exhaustive and it's not meant to be. It's my attempt to remind myself that I'm looking at where the leaves landed and trying to guess the wind.



 .

DYS458.2 Poll Returns

I asked several members of different families that I've mentioned here in the past like the Coens, Damerons, Elmers, Knowltons, Emery and Winnes if they have DYS458 with a microallele of .2 (like 15.2, 16.2, 17.2). So far everyone who has gotten back has returned true. Their results vary though. Several of us have 16.2 that reports as 16 at FTDNA. One has 15.2 that reports as 16. That was unexpected. 15.2 is a very rare value. I've heard that a mutation of a 458.2 up or down would still carry the .2 so 16.2 might mutate to 15.2...but not 15.


At SMGF 16.2 results make up 0.150% of their database. For reference the value of 16 at DYS458 is 24.022% of the SMGF database. So with that marker alone you drop from roughly a quarter of men to below 1% of men in their database. That gives you an idea of how narrow the playing field gets when you take this into account. We seem to be a fairly small group of men, but really wide spread. At SMGF and Ancestry.com the 458.2 men in my match lists are from Pomerania, Germany, England, Denmark etc...in a map it would roughly match my cluster (labelled Cumberland) at the Z18 and subgroups project where we have men from Poland to Wales and possibly Ireland.

We have fairly similar STRs with a good pattern of markers in common, but a really broad range that seems to hug the South Baltic. It's not such a surprising concept. I've spent a long time with these different results and made a lot of maps. I'm just always struck by how far apart geographically we are. Every time I think I can zoom in on a location, I'm forced to zoom out again.