One of my Y matches has had a great idea and some early success. In my Elmore results post I talked about our latest addition of another tester on the line from Edward Elmer's son John and comparing his results to the Elmers and mine.
We've decided to try to get men down the other lines too, so we can see how close they get.
Edward Elmer's son Edward has several descendants that move through New York. Placing them really well to be related to the New York Elmers. Since I appear to be a different version of them at this point, Edward2 would also be a target person for me.
Edward Elmer's son Samuel is very active on the east coast and elsewhere and I believe we may have a lead on a good candidate for him. Hopefully we'll be able to find a few more, because you never know..they could be that 100% match everyone is looking for.
We've been scouring family trees, census records and obituaries to try to find living descendants of these Elmers and Elmores to test. It's a real struggle.
First, they don't know who we are, so it's really hard not to come off as a sales call. Add to that that we're offering a free test and it gets a little harder for them to accept. People are right to be suspicious. There are real weirdos out there, so someone who wants to collect your spit and pay to have it analyzed is kind of in that category.
The second issue, is that it has to be a man at this point. The odds should be even, but we keep finding that several of these lines pinch down to only one son in a family or that they have multiple childless sons and only one son has any children. We can pretty easily get responses from women or from men related to Elmer and Elmore grandmothers and great grandmothers, but autosomal testing without a clear Y match would be even riskier than cold calling Y candidates.
The third issue is that from 1640 to now is a pretty long time and anything can happen. So even with the best trees and good research we could end up with an Elmer or Elmore who doesn't match the others. That would be my inverse I think.
We've got to try anyway. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
So far we've been turned down flat three of four times, although we do have one bright spot who hasn't totally cut off communication on the Edward2 side. So that is hopeful. We also have that decent possibility for Samuel too which would be great to get.
We'll also be continuing to push those New York lines to see if we can find yet more living men there too...fingers crossed.
Sorting out the Puzzle Pieces in My Big Messy Family
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
Sunday, July 6, 2014
R-U152 Thompsons - Begin at the Beginning.
I've spent a lot of time with my own Y and it's amazing how foreign another Y result can seem when you're used to staring down your own pattern. So I decided to get a handle on what the 23 and me Haplogroup results for my U152 Thompsons might mean. So I begin..sort of at the beginning of my own DNA search when I found out I was U106.
U152 also called S28 has a slightly different frequency map than I'm used t looking at:
Here is another one. I'm unsure what the stars represent:
U152 also called S28 has a slightly different frequency map than I'm used t looking at:
Here is another one. I'm unsure what the stars represent:
In the discussion groups for this haplogroup, I saw lots of references to the Celts..which is pretty common in this part of europe. Italy and the Alps seem to be a hot spot. There is quite a bit of U152 in the Isles and I was heartened to see a Scottish cluster for a child haplogroup Z36. Not that that is where my Thompsons fit, but it was heartening to see.
I have more information than just U152 to work with. I know that my Thompsons are not L2 under U152. L2 seems to be the major branch of this haplogroup. The other main branches from U152 appear to be Z36 and Z56. So those would be my next SNP tests for these Thompsons.
Their Y pattern is just too generic to get a handle on. In their case, I'm always going to need to go back to the Thompson project because many people have not tested even to their level of SNP and they match most everyone in Europe at 12 markers. I need to test them out to 37 or 67 just to get a better resolution on the image.
The chatter I see on the internet for this group is the same sort of stuff I see associated with U106 in the Isles, although with less emphasis on the Anglo Saxons and more on the Celts and Norman/French. Ironically there was some talk of the Danes because of a penchant for S28 in western Denmark.
I will have to see where the results take me. I'm tempted to further test their SNPs because that is ironically cheaper than upgrading their STRs. I would probably get the most information on matching Thompsons from those STRs though so they are important.
Overall this is a hopeful new start with fresh possibilities.
The autosomal results I have for them won't make much sense until I have another test to compare to from the same family. So that will be my next step on that side of things.
Ball 2: 23 and me Results... the Harder-er Way.
As I talked about in three balls in the air and my Y breakdown post. I have been waiting for an autosomal match with my Indiana Thompsons trying to identify if we can find Ida Williamson in our shared DNA. I have a lot of autosomal matches that seem to float around the same locations as my Williamson family and many have turned out to be paternal matches for my dad.
The results are in. Of course this is where I'd like to announce that I've made sense of tons of matches and tied things up nicely with my Williamson family and at least half the people from Virginia and Kentucky..and well..that's not going to happen.
Unfortunately or..maybe... fortunately depending on how you choose look at things, there is no autosomal match with my closest Thompson/Williamson relatives. I have a good idea of the size and scope the match should be, but there are no common segments.
Further, when looking at the ancestry finder csv file, there appear to be no common matches with other people between the two. It is an absence of data. That can be troublesome. It doesn't really give a direction to go in. My hopes of finding common ground, even through an unknown adoption in the community, sort of went up in smoke.
I'm sure there is a probability somewhere that any two people who share a great grandparent will not show a match X times out of whatever..but our match already had some bumps in the road and this doesn't really instill confidence.
So what is the up side?
I now have a good haplogroup for my Thompson family. R-U152. It's a different branch of the Y tree from mine. Of course I was pretty certain that we were not a Y match and I had already let go of being able to find Levi through my Y since I have no promising Thompson leads.
I feel that I've verified my grandfather and my grandfather's uncle through Y testing the different sets of first cousins (see Y breakdown). The most likely culprit for being my grandfather is my grandfather. The same goes for the grandsons of Francis.
This calls for a Y/Autosomal combo chart!
The divergent Y results are as shown in the last chart in Y breakdown for the descendants of Albert Thompson. Definitely two Y lines. The person I was trying to reach with the 23 and me results is Albert's wife Ida. The red dots signify autosomal tests taken. My dot is worthless here because I can only inherit DNA my dad has in this scenario..but there it is anyway. My dad in this scenario is the stand in for my grandfather (the dapper boy pictured). Y test 2 took a test to stand in for the autosomal DNA of my grandfather's uncle Francis (the sharp looking light haired brother on the right there).
I cannot say that my grandfather is not the son of Ray Thompson, but it would mean that either Ray Thompson or Francis Thompson are totally unrelated to both Albert and Ida (Williamson) Thompson. That is an unknown. People are adopted sometimes from the community. I had hoped if there was some internal family adoption that the 23 and me test would show some level of cousinship, but at this time we appear to be completely unrelated people.
I have to go with what I DO know and put aside the question of Ray vs. Francis for the moment. I just can't prove Ray the way I can prove Francis. Not enough data for that.
The R-U152 Thompsons, to me, have good chances of matching with other Thompsons (looking at their early results). There are some similar R-U152 Thompsons out there. Since I can get them further back in time on the Y than my own branch of the family, they also hold more hope of finding relevant autosomal matches. My dad has no Thompson cousins..so in that regard, I am dead in the water and stuck on my grandfather's paternal side.
My next steps with the U152 Thompsons will be to attempt a 23 and me test of the other Thompson cousin to play off the results of the first tester. Where they match each other will represent their shared set of grandparents. One of whom is a child of Albert Thompson and Ida Williamson. Using what I've learned following my dad's maternal family we can try to eliminate variables to identify Francis Thompson in that mix and through him reach Rosa Blades and Levi Thompson along with the Williamsons and Maynards.
I will also need to test their Y to 37 or 67 to get more definitive matches for them. That may prove to be the best way to get Levi by himself. Like I said, there are other U152 Thompsons in the Thompson DNA project so it looks promising to me.
On my end of things..it turns out, I have a more diverse family than I thought I did. I feel free to seriously and more closely look at the Elmers and follow my branch's R-DF95 Y results with them. It's a great big world and lots of things can happen.
Autosomally, for my side of things, I need to focus on defining the paternal Finks family and the maternal Campbells in my dad's results to eliminate variables and get a good direction on my new unknown. Do all the Kentucky and Virginia AT matches belong to the Finks or are there other players in other branches there?
I owe it to my Indiana Thompson family to follow through and take the evidence for them where it will go. Hopefully to Levi in Butler PA and beyond. I also owe it to myself to puzzle my own branch of the family out and see where that trail leads.
If my family members are still willing to put up with my nonsense, then I will be working a lot of different angles and paths in the future.
The descendants of Levi Thompson are proving to be as hard to nail down as the old man!
The results are in. Of course this is where I'd like to announce that I've made sense of tons of matches and tied things up nicely with my Williamson family and at least half the people from Virginia and Kentucky..and well..that's not going to happen.
Unfortunately or..maybe... fortunately depending on how you choose look at things, there is no autosomal match with my closest Thompson/Williamson relatives. I have a good idea of the size and scope the match should be, but there are no common segments.
Further, when looking at the ancestry finder csv file, there appear to be no common matches with other people between the two. It is an absence of data. That can be troublesome. It doesn't really give a direction to go in. My hopes of finding common ground, even through an unknown adoption in the community, sort of went up in smoke.
I'm sure there is a probability somewhere that any two people who share a great grandparent will not show a match X times out of whatever..but our match already had some bumps in the road and this doesn't really instill confidence.
So what is the up side?
I now have a good haplogroup for my Thompson family. R-U152. It's a different branch of the Y tree from mine. Of course I was pretty certain that we were not a Y match and I had already let go of being able to find Levi through my Y since I have no promising Thompson leads.
I feel that I've verified my grandfather and my grandfather's uncle through Y testing the different sets of first cousins (see Y breakdown). The most likely culprit for being my grandfather is my grandfather. The same goes for the grandsons of Francis.
This calls for a Y/Autosomal combo chart!
I cannot say that my grandfather is not the son of Ray Thompson, but it would mean that either Ray Thompson or Francis Thompson are totally unrelated to both Albert and Ida (Williamson) Thompson. That is an unknown. People are adopted sometimes from the community. I had hoped if there was some internal family adoption that the 23 and me test would show some level of cousinship, but at this time we appear to be completely unrelated people.
I have to go with what I DO know and put aside the question of Ray vs. Francis for the moment. I just can't prove Ray the way I can prove Francis. Not enough data for that.
The R-U152 Thompsons, to me, have good chances of matching with other Thompsons (looking at their early results). There are some similar R-U152 Thompsons out there. Since I can get them further back in time on the Y than my own branch of the family, they also hold more hope of finding relevant autosomal matches. My dad has no Thompson cousins..so in that regard, I am dead in the water and stuck on my grandfather's paternal side.
My next steps with the U152 Thompsons will be to attempt a 23 and me test of the other Thompson cousin to play off the results of the first tester. Where they match each other will represent their shared set of grandparents. One of whom is a child of Albert Thompson and Ida Williamson. Using what I've learned following my dad's maternal family we can try to eliminate variables to identify Francis Thompson in that mix and through him reach Rosa Blades and Levi Thompson along with the Williamsons and Maynards.
I will also need to test their Y to 37 or 67 to get more definitive matches for them. That may prove to be the best way to get Levi by himself. Like I said, there are other U152 Thompsons in the Thompson DNA project so it looks promising to me.
On my end of things..it turns out, I have a more diverse family than I thought I did. I feel free to seriously and more closely look at the Elmers and follow my branch's R-DF95 Y results with them. It's a great big world and lots of things can happen.
Autosomally, for my side of things, I need to focus on defining the paternal Finks family and the maternal Campbells in my dad's results to eliminate variables and get a good direction on my new unknown. Do all the Kentucky and Virginia AT matches belong to the Finks or are there other players in other branches there?
I owe it to my Indiana Thompson family to follow through and take the evidence for them where it will go. Hopefully to Levi in Butler PA and beyond. I also owe it to myself to puzzle my own branch of the family out and see where that trail leads.
If my family members are still willing to put up with my nonsense, then I will be working a lot of different angles and paths in the future.
The descendants of Levi Thompson are proving to be as hard to nail down as the old man!
Saturday, July 5, 2014
Ball 3: Results from Denmark
I attempted to contact four or five Cumberland candidates from Denmark. Some from Ancestry.com some from Ysearch and a couple from the Scandinavia project at FTDNA. Of the people I contacted three of them were definitely in the DYS458.2 section of the Cumberland cluster.
One of my contacts agreed to run the test for DF95 and just recently came back positive. So now we have a confirmed group member from Denmark, which to me was conspicuously absent in a group that appears to follow the migrations of germanic peoples so well.
One of my contacts agreed to run the test for DF95 and just recently came back positive. So now we have a confirmed group member from Denmark, which to me was conspicuously absent in a group that appears to follow the migrations of germanic peoples so well.
Saturday, June 21, 2014
Ball 1: Elmore Results
When I was discussing the three balls in the air that I was waiting for, I talked about a cold contacted Elmore test. One of my Elmer related friends was active in the surname group and convinced one of the people with documentation back to Edward Elmer from Hartford to Y test at FTDNA.
The results are in and, with some interesting mutations away from the modal for the cumberland cluster, they are definitely a match. Our group in cumberland (under R-Z18 -> Z14 ->DF95) has some modal STRs. We show a 25 at DYS390, 11 at DYS385b and 22 at YCAIIb. Our subgroup of Cumberland also shows a micro-allele on DYS458..in my case 16.2.
What is interesting about our new Edward Elmer descendant tester is that they show the R-Z18 modal of 24 at DYS390 and 23 at YCAIIb. They do however have the 16.2 microallele and the 11 at DYS385b. They are also one of only 4 matches for me at 37 (3 Elmer/Elmores in that list now). So I'm certain they are a good match and are definitely on for the Elmer line. They just appear to have some back mutations away from the general "cumberland" pattern.
Stack this result up with the two other results that document back to Edward Elmer, and the two Elmer families from New York that follow this same pattern and I think we have a pretty compelling case. This is exactly how Y DNA testing is supposed to work.
Ironically, the New York Elmers are so close the modal for the Cumberland cluster that I could not find a novel STR value that wasn't shared by another close-ish group..the Knowltons. The Knowltons have some interesting differences with the Cumberland cluster modal at 37 and they also for the most part share the values that make the Elmers stick out from the modal..they just go a couple of steps further. So there are some signature values at STRs that make Knowltons stand out from Elmers.
In other words: Looking at the Elmer/Elmore group I could see what would make them "not Knowltons" but it was the fact that their values were overall more vanilla "Cumberland" than the Knowltons and any variation from the norm that I found was also shared by the Knowltons.
To me, that means we have not defined an STR that just screams Elmer. There may not be one, but further 67 and 111 testing might turn something up. Of course the trick would be to get the Elmers, myself and at least a few similar DF95 candidate Knowltons up to that level to see what patterns there were.
This post calls for some illustration.
First up. These are the Elmers/Elmore results with mine listed at the bottom as Levi Thompson. You can see the Elmers have some variation from each other right in the first 12 STRs of the Y test. So too, do the Knowltons. The green bar is the modal for Cumberlands. The dark blue vertical bar is a variation all the knowltons seem to share away from the Cumberland modal. Where we usually have two 11s for DYS385 the Knowltons seem to have an 11-12.
The results are in and, with some interesting mutations away from the modal for the cumberland cluster, they are definitely a match. Our group in cumberland (under R-Z18 -> Z14 ->DF95) has some modal STRs. We show a 25 at DYS390, 11 at DYS385b and 22 at YCAIIb. Our subgroup of Cumberland also shows a micro-allele on DYS458..in my case 16.2.
What is interesting about our new Edward Elmer descendant tester is that they show the R-Z18 modal of 24 at DYS390 and 23 at YCAIIb. They do however have the 16.2 microallele and the 11 at DYS385b. They are also one of only 4 matches for me at 37 (3 Elmer/Elmores in that list now). So I'm certain they are a good match and are definitely on for the Elmer line. They just appear to have some back mutations away from the general "cumberland" pattern.
Stack this result up with the two other results that document back to Edward Elmer, and the two Elmer families from New York that follow this same pattern and I think we have a pretty compelling case. This is exactly how Y DNA testing is supposed to work.
Ironically, the New York Elmers are so close the modal for the Cumberland cluster that I could not find a novel STR value that wasn't shared by another close-ish group..the Knowltons. The Knowltons have some interesting differences with the Cumberland cluster modal at 37 and they also for the most part share the values that make the Elmers stick out from the modal..they just go a couple of steps further. So there are some signature values at STRs that make Knowltons stand out from Elmers.
In other words: Looking at the Elmer/Elmore group I could see what would make them "not Knowltons" but it was the fact that their values were overall more vanilla "Cumberland" than the Knowltons and any variation from the norm that I found was also shared by the Knowltons.
To me, that means we have not defined an STR that just screams Elmer. There may not be one, but further 67 and 111 testing might turn something up. Of course the trick would be to get the Elmers, myself and at least a few similar DF95 candidate Knowltons up to that level to see what patterns there were.
This post calls for some illustration.
First up. These are the Elmers/Elmore results with mine listed at the bottom as Levi Thompson. You can see the Elmers have some variation from each other right in the first 12 STRs of the Y test. So too, do the Knowltons. The green bar is the modal for Cumberlands. The dark blue vertical bar is a variation all the knowltons seem to share away from the Cumberland modal. Where we usually have two 11s for DYS385 the Knowltons seem to have an 11-12.
The second image here shows another move away from the modal Cumberland for Knowltons DYS464 shows 15-15-17-18 instead of 15-15-17-17. You can also see the new Elmore test results showing 19-23 at YCA where the cumberland modal is normally 19-22. Here too you can see one of my results that separates me from the New York Elmer tests. I have an 18 at DYS576. Some of the Knowltons have an 18 there too. It's a fast moving STR so that could be expected over time. In the dark blue vertical bars to the right you can see the Elmer standard of 35-37 at CDY. Here they depart from the modal which is 35-36...but the Elmer 35-37 appears to be the base value for the Knowltons too with some variations. Finally there was DYS442 where the SMGF Elmer test did not match anyone else.
Here near the middle you can see the Elmer DYS463 = 23 carried by the New York Elmers, SMGF Elmer, me and ...the Knowltons. That is also a big move away from the modal for cumberland and also the modal for our parent group R-Z18. SMGF Elmer also mismatched me on DYS446. Only the SMGF testers in the group had that value. My test results were 13 and that matches the Knowltons and the modal. It could be that the other Elmers also mismatch me there and that would be a novel value for them. We will have to test to find out.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Three Balls in the Air
As usual, I'm waiting for DNA test results. Impatiently of course. This time there are three tests I'm excited about seeing the results of for a multitude of reasons.
One of my Elmer friends has convinced person on a different branch of the Elmer family tree (descending from Edward) to run the Y 37 test at FTDNA. Barring an NPE, those results could be really helpful in determining a baseline Elmer Y profile. Right now we have the two FTDNA tested Elmers from New York and one partial (but close for them) SMGF tested match from Vermont. Hopefully we get a nice close match from this tester too.
I trawled the Denmark Y DNA project for possible cumberland matches and came up with two kits that looked really promising. Checking with both kits I've found that they both had the DYS458.2 micro-allele that (for the time being) marks our group in the cumberland cluster. One of the kits has agreed to test for DF95 which is excellent. I am 99.99% sure it will come back positive. Even FTDNA projects they will be Z14+ which is a good sign (DF95 being the child of Z14).
I also broke down and ordered a 23 and me test for one of the Indiana Thompsons. It should provide me with a haplogroup for the Indiana branch of the family which is nice because it will tell me where to start testing for the FTDNA Y tests for the Indiana branch. I am pretty confident we aren't a Y match given the STRs I've seen (unless there was some nuclear accident that made their Y chromosomes mutate back to "normal"). My hunch though is that they will still prove to be a good match at 23 and me for my dad. I have a lot of paternal genetic relatives for my dad lining up in Kentucky in areas surrounding my Williamson family. My gamble is that even though we are most likely not Y line related we are related through the Williamson family...somehow.
There are lots of options that don't have to involve infidelity, although I think most people focus on that. Anyway, my bet is that the Indiana Thompsons share at least one great grandparent with my dad. Even one great grandparent should be a pretty large match. So that is the hope.
Otherwise, I think I am good and stuck on the Thompson/Williamson side. I have had no luck in recruiting other people related to Levi Thompson or the descendants of Henry Williamson's siblings. I will have to wait for a big fish to come in on one of my lines and probably shift my focus to sorting out my grandfather's maternal Finks family to try to get a handle on their glaring unknowns.
With a month or two of wait time..I will be eagerly watching my email for news on any of these three balls in the air.
One of my Elmer friends has convinced person on a different branch of the Elmer family tree (descending from Edward) to run the Y 37 test at FTDNA. Barring an NPE, those results could be really helpful in determining a baseline Elmer Y profile. Right now we have the two FTDNA tested Elmers from New York and one partial (but close for them) SMGF tested match from Vermont. Hopefully we get a nice close match from this tester too.
I trawled the Denmark Y DNA project for possible cumberland matches and came up with two kits that looked really promising. Checking with both kits I've found that they both had the DYS458.2 micro-allele that (for the time being) marks our group in the cumberland cluster. One of the kits has agreed to test for DF95 which is excellent. I am 99.99% sure it will come back positive. Even FTDNA projects they will be Z14+ which is a good sign (DF95 being the child of Z14).
I also broke down and ordered a 23 and me test for one of the Indiana Thompsons. It should provide me with a haplogroup for the Indiana branch of the family which is nice because it will tell me where to start testing for the FTDNA Y tests for the Indiana branch. I am pretty confident we aren't a Y match given the STRs I've seen (unless there was some nuclear accident that made their Y chromosomes mutate back to "normal"). My hunch though is that they will still prove to be a good match at 23 and me for my dad. I have a lot of paternal genetic relatives for my dad lining up in Kentucky in areas surrounding my Williamson family. My gamble is that even though we are most likely not Y line related we are related through the Williamson family...somehow.
There are lots of options that don't have to involve infidelity, although I think most people focus on that. Anyway, my bet is that the Indiana Thompsons share at least one great grandparent with my dad. Even one great grandparent should be a pretty large match. So that is the hope.
Otherwise, I think I am good and stuck on the Thompson/Williamson side. I have had no luck in recruiting other people related to Levi Thompson or the descendants of Henry Williamson's siblings. I will have to wait for a big fish to come in on one of my lines and probably shift my focus to sorting out my grandfather's maternal Finks family to try to get a handle on their glaring unknowns.
With a month or two of wait time..I will be eagerly watching my email for news on any of these three balls in the air.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Dark Side of the Moon
For reference here is a nice visual from ancestry.com of my paternal tree. This constitutes my "Thompson family" really starting with my grandparents Charles and Elizabeth Thompson. I like this view because it shows the two "halves" of my dad's family and gives you the idea of what we're talking about with the two halves of his DNA.
What I'm focusing on here are "knowns". So I have some results from known relatives of Elizabeth Jean Seelye. What is interesting is that these knowns supply information about genetic matches with my "Seelye" family, beginning with my grandmother Elizabeth, but they also supply information about my "Thompson" family beginning with Charles. Basically if I shine a light on the Seelye side of the house I can also see who is touched by their shadow and those are Thompsons.
- me 1/2 his DNA: 3586 cM
- maternal relative shares McKendree Seelye and Elizabeth Beadle: 455 cM
- maternal relative another generation removed who shares same Seelye Beadle Ancestors: 350 cM
- maternal relative, cousin 2x removed sharing the parents of Clara Beadle: 157 cM
- maternal relative 4th cousin level a couple times removed sharing grandparents of Adelia Light: 23 cM
I don't really count. I'm just there for moral support. I share the most DNA with my dad, but our comparisons are only for interest. Together though, you can see that his maternal relatives tested so far only could possibly cover about 985 cM. If half of my dad's DNA is roughly 3586 cM (given what my half of his is like) then you can see the gap in coverage even on a side of the family that is being actively tested.
In truth they cover less than their total 985 cM because the Seely/Beadle relatives often overlap each other (obviously because they share the same ancestors). At this point the representation from Mae Campbell is pretty small (but growing soon I think).
What I'm getting at here is that it is very hard to recreate my grandmother genetically even with all these resources, shared trees, known family...etc because I don't really get the full picture of her half of my dad's DNA. I get part. Mostly I'm getting the 1/4th of my dad's DNA that belongs to the Seelye/Beadle family.
Still it has been invaluable to have them tested and available. I have been able to use their matches to sort out people at 23 and me and gedmatch.com in ways I never could before. I can sometimes separate maternal from paternal and in some instances I get a glimmer of matches that may line up with Mae Campbell and her family.
So as daunting as it can be, it is also exciting because I have more resources now for genetic genealogy than I have had at any other time in the past several years. Effectively you can take the 600 or so cM (not counting overlaps among the seelyes) and double it. Where their shadow falls is all paternal territory.
So these are some things I've learned just recently with the addition of that 455 cM match:
My single Williamson direct match (previous post) is at least partially maternal (the match had multiple segments. One of them is definitely through Elizabeth Seelye). Ahhh so close, but so far away. That genetic relative did also have my grandmother's Fulkerson family. It may yet turn out that she is both maternal and paternal. We'll see.
The autosomal match that had the Elmer family in her tree is also maternal and is related to Elizabeth Seelye. It's a small world. I had hoped they would be a paternal match and maybe solidify some connection to the Elmer Y match..but not go. This match does ironically have Seelyes but they are apparently the "wrong" Seelyes. We'll have to see on that too.
The single match that lines up with my dad's Finks family from Virginia (nice straight tree match) is definitely related to my grandfather (Ina Finks son) so that was good. A nice paternal surname match with the Jeffries family of Virginia has, at a minimum, lined up as a paternal relative.
Several of the matches that have Boltons and possibly Stinsons in them (including some of his biggest matches), are also paternal (related to Charles Thompson). So there may be a Bolton/Stinson component to the family I have yet to put together. I've had my eye on the Stinsons for a while and the Boltons seem to be on the rise now.
Two genetic matches that also match with each other are related to Robert Bolton and Mary Hubbard in early 1700s Virginia (they are actually more closely related than that through Robert's daughter Rebecca and down a few more generations to Rebecca's granddaughter Rebecca Nelson). A Third genetic relative who does not overlap with these two had a much closer Bolton family that intertwines with a Stinson family in the 1800s. Those Boltons also go back to Robert Bolton and Mary Hubbard. So again, I can clearly see how my dad's genetic relatives are related to each other..just not to him.
Add that to the possilble Ritchie or Fugate match that is paternal from Kentucky that I get the feeling is tied to my Williamsons but just can't prove. See my post about The Wrong Thompson Family.
There is also a new set of paternal matches who overlap with each other and share the family of Abner Pipes 1738 Pennsylvania and Alexander Dutton Rachel Feazel family from 1770s Maryland. Again totally visibly related to each other but no connection yet to my dad's paternal family.
When it comes to paternal and even some maternal family, I have an uphill battle to fight. There are enough unknowns in my dad's tree that even without NPEs a person could be busy tracking things down for a long time. The Finks family is old and from Virginia, but there are many many nameless souls there.They also contain the Purnell family which is a total wash before the 1800s as far as records go. Assuming for the moment that I am related to the Williamsons, I still have a lot of mystery surrounding Henry Williamson's father and may have the wrong branch of the Williamson tree. What if Henry Williamson's father was Hammond Williamson's nephew instead of son. What if the death certificate was right and Henry was wrong about where his father was born? How would that change things?
I am very likely staring right at my relatives and just have no idea. Pulling them out of the shadows has been much harder but also more rewarding than I expected.
Two genetic matches that also match with each other are related to Robert Bolton and Mary Hubbard in early 1700s Virginia (they are actually more closely related than that through Robert's daughter Rebecca and down a few more generations to Rebecca's granddaughter Rebecca Nelson). A Third genetic relative who does not overlap with these two had a much closer Bolton family that intertwines with a Stinson family in the 1800s. Those Boltons also go back to Robert Bolton and Mary Hubbard. So again, I can clearly see how my dad's genetic relatives are related to each other..just not to him.
Add that to the possilble Ritchie or Fugate match that is paternal from Kentucky that I get the feeling is tied to my Williamsons but just can't prove. See my post about The Wrong Thompson Family.
There is also a new set of paternal matches who overlap with each other and share the family of Abner Pipes 1738 Pennsylvania and Alexander Dutton Rachel Feazel family from 1770s Maryland. Again totally visibly related to each other but no connection yet to my dad's paternal family.
When it comes to paternal and even some maternal family, I have an uphill battle to fight. There are enough unknowns in my dad's tree that even without NPEs a person could be busy tracking things down for a long time. The Finks family is old and from Virginia, but there are many many nameless souls there.They also contain the Purnell family which is a total wash before the 1800s as far as records go. Assuming for the moment that I am related to the Williamsons, I still have a lot of mystery surrounding Henry Williamson's father and may have the wrong branch of the Williamson tree. What if Henry Williamson's father was Hammond Williamson's nephew instead of son. What if the death certificate was right and Henry was wrong about where his father was born? How would that change things?
I am very likely staring right at my relatives and just have no idea. Pulling them out of the shadows has been much harder but also more rewarding than I expected.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)