In this Blog, I would like to update my Hartley Theories and beyond. I have about 10 DNA results that I have uploaded to MyHeritage. MyHeritage has Theories based on DNA matches that also have possible genealogical matches. Here is a chart I made and updated last August:
I highlighted 2 because of similar names that showed up. I also made a dstinction between paternal and maternal theories. I see that I did not include my cousin Paul’s results. This may be better sorted by common ancestors:
Looking for New Theories
Next, I need to add to the list. For me, that appears to be Jane. Jane shows a possible connection with Clarke and Bachelour:
The problem with this connection is that I have that the father of Thomase Clarke was John Clarke. That makes two matches that I have that show this apparently wrong common ancestors.
Heidi and Wolf
I previously had Wolf on my Biedermann tree and not my Gangnus tree:
This is more in line with Wolf’s tree:
The question is, which is the right Theory: MyHeritage’s or mine? I tend to want to go with my own analysis. I wrote a Blog on Wolf here.
Sharon’s Theories
My sister Sharon has the most Theories so far:
Go Sharon. I didn’t see any new Theories for Sharon.
Brother Jon’s Theories
Here is a new one:
Although the Theory seems wrong, I should double check MyHeritage’s reasoning. Also this could be a case of where there is smoke, there is fire.
I need to check the genealogy for Leonie, Jane and Susan. If they all truly go back to the same ancestors, then either:
- Their genealogy is right and mine is wrong
- Mine is right and theirs is wrong
- We have a different common ancestor but near the place where it seems like our common ancestors are showing in this Theory
I think I’ll wait to analyze this later.
Lori and Jim’s Theories
I either missed Lori or had her mis-labeled as Jon. I deleted the extra Jon, so now I need to add in Lori’s Theories.
This Theory looks new for Jim. It is his last:
Ashley is from New Zealand and adds to the Clarke mystery.
Checking the DNA on Jim’s Clarke Match
Jim has 2 small DNA matches with Ashley:
These are Chromosomes 9 and 18. If these are truly Clarke or related DNA matches, then these DNA matches should be in areas mapped for Jim under his Frazer grandparent side. Here is Jim’s Chromosome 9:
Jim’s match with Ashley on Chromosome 9 is between 80 and 85M. I put an arrow where that would be. Jim’s map shows that he should have Hartley DNA in that area – assuming the match is on Jim’s paternal side. That means that this match cannot be a Clarke match.
That match is consistent with Chromosome 18 where Jim has his paternal side mapped as all Hartley shown in orange:
Jim and Leonie
While I have Jim’s visual phasing maps out, I’ll look at his match with Leonie:
Jim shows a lot of Frazer in blue on his Chromosome 1:
On Chromosome 7, the formatting is off, but Leonie’s DNA maps to Jim’s Frazer side:
Checking Jon and Lori against Leonie
I checked Jon and he had no Theory with Leonie. That means that I had to redo Jon’s list. He has the fewest Theories of any of my siblings at 6 now:
Lori matches on the Frazer side on Chromosome 7:
Lori doesn’t match on Chromosome 1 even though that portion of her Chromosome maps to Frazer.
At this point, I’ll move on to people other than my siblings. Between my siblings, the average number of Theories we have is 12 if I have it right.
My Mom’s Theories
Right now, I have that my mom has 11 Theories based on my spreadsheet. When I check MyHeritage, she has 10. The issue is with matches with mulitple theories:
Wolf and Patrick have multiple Theories. It is possible that others do also. Here my mom’s theories are all on her father’s side. There are two with Lentz, but they seem off. There is another issue in that 5 Theories that my Mom does not have that at least one of her children do have. This seems a bit off. Also, it seems like my mom is the only one who seems to have the theory that I verified with Biedermann and Lautenschlager. I am not sure why her children didn’t include this theory, but they did include the Gangnus Biedermann connection that I have not been able to substantiate.
My Father’s First Cousins: Joyce and Jim
These two should help to push back further on my Hartley side. These two have many theories, but I will only look at the ones on their Hartley side. When I check Joyce, I see that I had three mentioned on my spreadsheet, but two of these I no longer see as theories. When I reviewed Jim’s results, he still had the one Theory on his Hartley side. Here is the chart so far:
Summary and Conclusions
- MyHeritage’s Theories are worth looking at
- The Theories seem to be in four categories:
- Those are obvious,
- those that are close to be being right, but the actual common ancestors are nearby,
- those that I can’t prove are right are wrong
- those that are obviously wrong
- I think that some Theories have disappeared
- I’ll keep looking at MyHeritage’s Theorys. Ancestry’s ThruLines seem better but Ancestry doesn’t show DNA segment information
- Using other tools to test the Theories is a good idea. I used visual phasing in this Blog to show one Theory could not be right based on the DNA.