New Frazer Tester: the Saga Continues

We have a new Frazer tester. This is always exciting as it brings new possibilities. The tester is Cathy. She is on the Archibald Frazer line which is mine but on an Archibald branch of that line which is not mine. Here is the Archibald Line.

Archibald Line Chart

There were actually 4 brothers below Archibald, but we’ve only found descendents for 3. I’m under the first 2 brothers due to a cousin marriage. Those under the first 2 brothers all have had Frazer cousin ancestors who married each other except for the purple line. This is for someone who didn’t know he was related but likely is due to triangulation. These first cousin ancestry marriages make figuring out the ancestry a bit tricky. One help is that under the 2nd brother shown above, Richard, we have a triangulation group. This means that Richard’s DNA was passed down to the 4 lines and testers today all match each other.

Now on the right is the Archibald that we are looking at today. Our new tester, Cathy is on the orange line. Ros’ line is to the left of her. Ros and Cathy don’t have ancestors that were Frazer cousins that married as far as we know, which should make things a bit simpler. The light green line is for someone who awaiting his DNA test results.

Here is a close up of the Archibald/Stinson Line. The thing I like about this line is that all of the spouses are identified. The other 2 brothers of Archibald (Philip and Richard) don’t have wives with names which leaves a bit to guesswork.

Archibald Stinson Chart

Just in this Archibald/Stinson Line, we have 5 testers and one planning on testing. 3 of those 5 testers have Frazer ancestors in other lines – those are due to the cousins who married as I mentioned previously. I was hoping to find a triangulation group here, but haven’t so far at the standard levels used at the Gedmatch.com website. However, when I look at Cathy’s results compared to the other testers at Gedmatch, I see this on Chromosome #6:

Chromosome #6

This looks like Bill, Ros and Cathy form the tiniest triangulation group. It is difficult to see the overlap in green above, but in the chart above a very slight overlap is shown. I don’t know if this is a triangulation group or not. I have seen in some definitions that the overlap has to be significant, but I don’t see that mentioned in the ISOGG web site. It would be interesting to run the Tier I Gedmatch Utility for Triangulation to see if Gedmatch thinks this is a triangulation group. This is something that takes up to 45 minutes, so it is a long process. If this is a true triangulation group, it is likely that this would indicate the common ancestors of Archibald Frazer and Ann Stinson.

I did try the Triangulation utility for Cathy at Gedmatch, but this group didn’t show up. It was too small. However, I did try other matches. The first was with my sister at Chromosome #3. She (and I) aren’t even on the Archibald Frazer and Ann Stinson Line.

Heidi CathyR match

It looks like my sister Heidi and Cathy are 5th cousins, once removed going by lines which we have identified. That match is fairly small at 7.2 centimorgans. When I check Cathy’s triangulation report, I find she has a triangulation group at Chromosome 3. In fact, she has a huge one there. On a spreadsheet, it goes from line 296 to line 1289. That is quite a large triangulation group. That doesn’t mean that there are over 900 people in the group as people match multiple people along the way. Once the trees of these people are identified, it may be possible to find out who the common ancestors are for this triangulation group. Recall that a triangulation group means that people in that group should share a common ancestor. These ancestors should either be on the Frazer side or the Parker side. However, as my sister also matches at least some of those people, I would think that the ancestor would be on the Frazer side. It is an important thing is that I checked to see if my sister matched any of the people in the triangulation group. This is because the triangulation group could be on Cathy’s mother’s side (the Frazer side) or her father’s side. By checking if these people match my sister I am making sure this is a Frazer side Triangulation group.

The next match of Cathy’s is her largest. I would think that this should represent Archibald Frazer and Catherine Parker. Here is her match with Jane – one of the testers in our Frazer group.

CathyR Jane Match

This match is on Chromosome 4 and is for 34.8 cMs which is quite large. Let’s check to see if there is a triangulation group here.

Cathy 5 TG

Here, Jane is A974138. She is in a triangulation group with F318689. So Jane or Cathy may want to get in touch with this person to see if s/he knows about his or her ancestry.  I then checked to see if Jane matched F318689. She does, but not large enough to make the Gedmatch cutoff.

So I what I did above was to go from the known to the unknown First I looked at the matches with the people in the Frazer testing group. We know they are all related in some way – either through the Frazer family or through spouses of Frazers. As we all know we have Frazers in our ancestry, the chances are that many of the matches do represent Frazers. I looked at the specific place on the Chromosome where there was a match. I ran a triangulation at Gedmatch to see if anyone else had the same or similar ancestors. In the case of Chromosome #5, I did contact the person (named Jen) and she did have a Frazer in her ancestry, though she didn’t know much about this person. The good news is that we have a person who we didn’t know before who has a Frazer ancestor and who we know must share a common ancestor with the Jane and Cathy from our DNA testing group.

Cathy’s Well Behaved DNA

When I say Cathy’s DNA is well behaved, this is what I mean. At her closest match with her 3rd cousin, Jane, she has her largest DNA match which is 34.8. Here are Cathy’s matches:

cathy matches

I rented a brand new Excel program for this blog and I thought it would sort better than it did. However, this shows my point. For the closer relationships, she larger cM matches (see green highlights). The correlation isn’t perfect, but it is about as close as one might expect for DNA.

What We Learned from Cathy’s DNA

  • Cathy’s DNA is well behaved. When DNA is not well behaved, I have issues. For example, if the relationship is not close but the DNA match is high, or vica versa, it is sometimes difficult to tell if the DNA is just being difficult, or if there is something wrong with the genealogy.
  • Cathy appears to have at least 2 triangulation groups.
  • One triangulation group is very large, but the match levels are smaller. This likely means that the match is more distant. The more distant the match, the more descendants there are which explains the large triangulation group. Either that, or this line had a lot of descendants that tested their DNA.
  • The other triangulation group is small. However, the matches are a bit larger. This could be a more recent group, with fewer descendants, explaining the smaller triangulation group.

Frazer DNA – Celebrity Edition!

In this Blog, I’d like to write about the other Frazer line. I’m in the Archibald line. The other line is the James line. These were 2 Frazer brothers born in Northern Roscommon, Ireland before 1750. Well, we think they were brothers. We’d like to prove that somehow. I had thought that we’d have to prove this by Y (male line only) DNA. I think we can show quite a few matches between the Archibald and James Frazer Lines with autosomal (every ancestor line) DNA.

Below I’ll mention:

  • Celebrities from the James Line
  • James Line DNA and Matches
  • Matches between the James Line DNA and my own Archibald Line

First, A Few James Line People You May Recognize

Does Mia Farrow ring a bell?

Mia_Gatsby_80872t

Or perhaps her mother Maureen O’Sullivan who starred in Tarzan movies? I used to watch Tarzan movies on TV when I was young. I wonder if the Jane I saw was her. I know there were different versions, but I bet I’ve seen Maureen in a Tarzan movie or two. Well, her mother was a Frazer from the James line.

Maureen O'Sullivan with Father and Frazer mother
Maureen O’Sullivan with Father and Frazer mother

I can imagine this conversation between my teenage father and his mother: “Ma, I’m going to see a Tarzan Movie”. “What, and see that woman Jane with hardly any clothes on?”. “Aw, c’mon ma.” All this with my grandmother not knowing she was related to Maureen O’Sullivan. Here are some photos of Maureen who played Jane from about 1934 to 1942.

Maureen Tarzan

You probably know about Maureen’s daughters. One was Mia Farrow. Before I knew I was related to this branch, I was traveling in the area of my ancestors and saw a sign mentioning that Mia’s family was from the area. So don’t mention Woody Allen, the sign warned. Then Mia has a younger sister named Prudence. The two Farrow sisters visited the Maharishi with the Beatles. The Beatles wrote Prudence into one of their songs, “Dear Prudence”. Here’s Prudence (lower left in the photo).

Ringo_with_Prudence

How closely am I related? If I have it right, I’m a 6th cousin twice removed to the Farrow sisters. Is that far? I’m nine generations away from a common ancestor. The Farrow sisters are only 7 generations away – that gets to how I’m twice removed. But I’m not from the James Line. [Actually I have 3 Frazer ancestors. Two are probably from the Archibald line and one may be from the James line. So I may be more closely related.] Other of my fellow testers who can show they descend from the James Line by their paper trails would be as close to the Farrow sisters as 4th cousins.

James Line DNA

Here is what a portion of the James line looks like starting with James himself from the early 1700’s at the top. I have the bottom generations cut off.

James Line Chart

On the left is the Minnie Frazer Line (#1). There are 3 DNA testers there (CJK, KK and MHB in the spreadsheet below). Next is the Edward Fitzgerald Line (#2). 3 testers here, all siblings (Joanna, Janet and Jonathan). The 3rd Line is the O’Sullivan (Famous) Line (#3). One tester (PB). On the far right is the Michael Line (#4). There is one lonely tester out there (JFS). I like these tester’s DNA for the same reason I liked Ros’ on my line. They don’t appear to have multiple Frazer ancestors like most on my line do.

We would expect that if Line #1 matches Line #2, then the most likely common ancestors would be Archibald of 1792 (or spouse). If line #1 or #2 match with Line #3, the common ancestors would be Archibald Frazer and Catherine Peyton. If Line #4 matches with any of the other lines, the common ancestors should be at the top with James Frazer (and unknown spouse). That means that the 3 boxes above representing most likely common ancestors of our James Line matches would represent 6 people (2 per box)

Now for the James Line DNA – Drum roll, please.

James Line DNA

Actually, it’s not all that exciting. The matches in pink are iffy according to Gedmatch. I color the matches above 15 cM in green, because those are pretty strong matches. Our famous O’Sullivan Line tester has one large match with CJK on the Minnie Frazer Line. Then 2 medium matches with sisters Joanna and Janet on the Edward Fitzgerald Line. They all appear to be 4th cousins which makes sense and have as a common ancestor Archibald b. about 1792 (and his wife whom we know nothing of). Notice there is no triangulation as the matches are on different chromosomes (#6 and #12).

Then of note are 2 large matches in green between brother and sister Jonathan and Janet and JFS who was out on the lonely Michael Line. The DNA has given us a bit of a backwards trick. The DNA match is high at the 5th cousin level for Jonathan and Janet. You would think it would be low there. But at the 3rd cousin level where we would expect a large match, there is only a small one. Joanna, the other sister matches 3rd cousin CJK on the Minnie Frazer Line at only 7.9 cM, not much above the Gedmatch cutoff level of 7.0 cM. However, all these families match as expected, but not at the levels expected perhaps.

I used a Gedmatch utility to look at the number of matches between the James Line testers. This is what I got.

3D James Line

The large numbers in the middle are due to mother, daughter, aunt, niece, cousin, brother and sister relationships. I ignored these when I added the segment matches on the side and bottom. This takes out the actual cM numbers which can be confusing. What this tells me is that everybody matches everyone else in the James Line which is what we would suspect and bolsters our paper trail research. Also notice that the celebrity line (PB) has one match for everybody (on the top row above). This is what the above Gedmatch chart looks like with Total Shared cM’s:

James Line Shared Segments

For this utility, Gedmatch uses a lower cM value of 5. Note that here, MHB doesn’t show any shared cM’s with the O’Sullivan Line. I’m not sure why when she shows a shared segment above. However, not to worry. She is the cousin of KK and the niece of CJK. That means that MHB should be related also.

How the James Line DNA Matches the Archibald Line DNA

When the Frazer cousins first started DNA testing, it was a bit discouraging as no one was matching at good levels as expected. However, after more people tested, I was surprised at the number and level of matches we had. There were also matches between the James Line and the Archibald line – the one I’m in. So apparently there is no need to have the Y test done on a male from each line to prove the lines are related.

Archibald James Line Matches

Here we see my family (Hartleys), Bill, and MFA from the Archibald Line matching Joanna’s family, the O’Sullivan Line and CJK from the James Line. Missing are Jane (who had large matches within the Archibald line) and Ros who didn’t have cousin marrying ancestors from the Archibald Line. Missing from the James line is mostly JFS if I take CJK to be representative of MGB and KK from the Minnie Frazer Line. However, her match is small and therefore suspect. Then my sister matches on the X Chromosome to CJK. The X matches follow interesting patterns. So that means my sister’s interesting pattern has to match CJK’s interesting pattern. My sister’s X inheritance includes a Frazer way back who married into my McMaster ancestors. This Frazer could have been in the James Line. That may eliminate my sister’s match as going back as far as Widow Mary the Cottier and joining the 2 lines. Mary is the supposed mother of the Archibald and James Lines. Here is the Census that shows all 3 Frazer families in 1749.

Elphin Census

Any Flies in the Ointment?

Sure, plenty. Let’s look at our chart again.

James Line Chart

In this chart we are focusing on Frazers. However, the DNA doesn’t know that. Can we assume that because the testers are all Frazers, then the matches must represent Frazers? No. To do this right, we would have to flesh out the ancestors for each of the DNA matchers. We have that Bill and Joanna match. From our charts, it looks like the match could be with Mary the Cottier, the mother of James. But that may not be the case. Let’s look at Archibald b. 1792 who is on Joanna’s line. He had a wife. She had 2 parents in the above generation; 4 grandparents in the James Frazer generation and 8 grandparents in Mary the Cottier’s generation. That adds up to 15 people we don’t know about. If we had started the exercise in a later generation, there would be many more ancestors. On Bill’s side there would be the same amount of unknown people. Plus, Bill appears to have 3 Frazers in his ancestry which would make for a potential 3 times the unknowns.

10 Generations of Frazer DNA: Combining the Two Lines

Here is the master chart of the Archibald and James Lines combined.  This represents 10 generations but shows 6. I took off 2 to 4 generations on the bottom. Mary is at the top. Archibald and James are her 2 likely sons. This is actually a simplified chart, showing only the lines where we have DNA testers. The goal is to make sure our genealogy is correct and to show the 2 Lines really are connected as we suppose.

Archibald James Combined Chart

 

Conclusions

  • The Frazers have some interesting relatives – especially in the James Line
  • Triangulation is the gold standard and shows common ancestors. The James Line hasn’t shown a triangulation yet. This may be because there are 4 lines and 4 testing families. However, as everyone matches everyone else by DNA that is good evidence to me that these people are in the same Frazer family.  However, there is still a chance that some of these matches may be non-Frazer matches. It would take a lot of work to figure all that out.
  • Does the DNA testing show that the very early Archibald and James Frazer were brothers? Definitely not. It may show they are related, but that is not even clear. DNA matches between the 2 lines seems more likely to show inter-relationships between the 2 lines at some later date than Mary the Cottier. There is a good chance that in my own family, I have a James line ancestor who was born probably 2 generations after James.
  • Let’s keep open the option of Y DNA testing. That is the surest way to link the Archibald and James lines.
  • I seem to be developing a knack for proving myself wrong

How I Added 2 Frazer Lines by DNA

Well, it looks like I’ve given away the blog in the title. I think I can add 2 more Frazer lines using DNA. Not just by DNA, but DNA helped greatly.

In my first 2 blogs I mentioned how I triangulated two Irish Frazer groups. These 2 triangulation groups I assumed, based on the people involved, had as their common ancestors Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilly. That couple would be the parents of the 4 brothers shown below: John, Philip, Richard and Archibald.

Early Frazer Research
Early Frazer Research

 

In this blog I will disprove my previous blogs and show that those common ancestors of Frazer/Lilly were probably off by a generation. What an idiot I was in my earlier blogs. Actually, as more DNA testing information came in from my generous Frazer relatives, the smarter I look now!

In my 4th blog, I mentioned endogamy and how many couples below the 4 brothers married 1st cousins with Frazer surnames. However, some of the triangulation matches were huge numbers considering the age of Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilly. This couple lived in the late 1700’s but I had a match in one case that was over 50 cM

Chromosome 1

When I compare the DNA of MFA (Michael) and Jane at Gedmatch, they look like this:

Jane Michael Gedmatch

That shows that Gedmatch thinks that Jane and Michael are 4 generations to  common ancestors. That’s not far. We are 1 generation from our parents, 2 to our grand parents, and 4 to our great great grandparents.

Archibald Chart

I know, the chart is small. You will have to click on it to make it bigger. Jane is on the green line. 4 generations only takes her up to the white box that has Archibald c. 1802=Catherine Parker. That is 2 generations closer than the top box where I previously thought her common ancestors were. In my Blog #4, I supposed that this discrepancy was due to endogamy. Ann Turner, who knows a lot more than I, saw my blog and commented that she thought endogamy should give you more matches, not necessarily higher matches. OK, I’m willing to be wrong if I can learn by it. I did check and the endogamous Frazers did have twice the matches as the non-endogamous ones (on another line). But I needed some common ancestors for Jane, Bill, Michael, my sister Heidi and me that weren’t so far away.

Ros to the Rescue

To tell you the end first, what I did was move Jane to the 3rd brother Richard Frazer on the second row above. Well, I didn’t move all of her, just half. What? And what does Ros have to do with it? Well Ros tested very recently. She is from Australia and her line is represented by the purple box. What I like about Ros’ DNA is that it appears that she doesn’t  have 1st cousins who married each other in her Frazer ancestry. So her results are, let’s say, more specific. She matches Ros, but only through Archibald Frazer (the brother on the far right of the second row) and Catherine Parker. Now these 2 are the parents of Richard Paton Parker Lilly Frazer (Jane’s ancestor). However, Richard blah blah blah Frazer (Jane’s ancestor) had a wife named Jane Frazer. Her descendent (also Jane) has had a difficult time figuring out where Jane Frazer fits in. This Jane Frazer certainly isn’t a sister of her husband Richard blah blah, so she must descend from somewhere else. I put this Jane Frazer goes under Richard who is brother #3 in the chart. How and why did I decide to do that?

Aunt Mabel and Triangulation

Aunt Mabel didn’t know much about DNA if anything. Our cousin Doug from England had an Aunt Mabel (family legend says) who scoured the Irish countryside for Frazer family history in order to get her brother a coat of arms around the year 1950. We think her information before about 1700 was pretty dicey, but after that, it seems pretty good and much better than what we can figure out from Irish records (or rather the lack thereof). She was likely the one responsible for the handwritten genealogy, part of which is at the top of this blog. She mentions an Archibald who was the son of Richard (brother #3). I have no other information on this Archibald and Jane Frazer had a father named Archibald. The dates also fit in well for Jane Frazer to be Archibald’s daughter and Richard’s granddaughter.

I’ve already mentioned the triangulation (above). Jane triangulates with 3 other people who are descended from Richard. DNA-wise, it would make sense if Jane through her ancestor Jane Frazer were also in that group of Richard-descendents. With large cMs, you want the triangulation group to be as recent as possible. It’s still off by a generation according to Gedmatch, but I don’t think that’s too unusual. Here is the revised Richard Line with Jane’s ancestor Jane Frazer added.

Jane in the Richard Line
Jane in the Richard Line

 

The Second Frazer Add to the Line of Richard

The second add to the line of Richard is David from Canada. Early on, before I talked Bill into testing and then the other Frazers, there was David. I noticed at FTDNA, he had a Frazer ancestor from Ireland. That was interesting. The earliest ancestor he could trace was a James Frazer who had a son in Enniskillen, Ireland. That son changed the spelling to Fraser and moved to Canada. My Frazer ancestors lived to the North of the Loch (Lake) above Boyle in the bottom left of the map below. It is about 40 miles from there to Enniskillen at the top right of the map.

Boyle to Enniskillen Map
Boyle to Enniskillen

So my 4 reasons for adding David to the line of Richard are the same for adding Jane; namely:

  • The genealogy done by David (and Jane’s research in her case)
  • My own genealogy research
  • DNA Triangulation
  • My secret weapon: Aunt Mabel

I wish I had a photo of Aunt Mabel. She was a classy looking lady. There was a picture of her on Doug from England’s web site, but that site is down as far as I can tell. Anyway, Aunt Mabel’s chart showed a James as a son of Richard. We have no other information on this James. Can we say this James took off to Enniskillen from North Roscommon and that his son moved to Canada? I say the evidence supports that theory.

Here is David (shown as DF) and how he triangulates.

Doug Triangulation

Well look at that. Have you ever seen a more perfect triangulation? Well perhaps you have, but it’s still pretty good. And unlike the Chromosome #1 triangulation above, it includes Doug. Note that everyone matches with everyone else. That’s what triangulation is, and it means these people have a common ancestor or ancestral couple. I didn’t include the matches between me (JH) and my sister Heidi (HHM) as that is too obvious. I hope that David doesn’t mind me plopping his family into mine.

So What Have I Learned From All This?

  • If you blog, you may get an expert opinion that is helpful
  • It helps to have an Aunt Mabel doing research in the past when people remembered who was related to whom
  • The relationships for Endogamous families are tricky to figure out; but the DNA helps sort out some of the problems solved my the first cousins who married in the early 1800’s
  • The more relatives that test their DNA, the less I look like an idiot