Posted on

Another Frazer Descendant and DNA Match: Christine

One of the good thing of having a network of Frazer relatives who have had their DNA tested is that I get notified when there is a new match. That happened when Jane told me about a new match she had. Here is what Jane sent me:

Jane has a match to Christine as a 3rd cousin once removed. I have access to Jane’s matches and see that Christine matches Jane at 127 cM. That is actually quite a large match for a third cousin once removed:

Ancestry gives that relationship a 2% chance.

Christine and Me

I match Christine at 18 cM:

Ancestry has Christine and me as half 6th cousins. Actually, I think we must be full cousins. I see that from a previous Blog I wrote, I had identified this line:

This line is from Australia.

My ThruLines at Ancestry

My ThruLines show Christine:

This image also has Jane and Suzanne who I don’t have on my chart. I don’t have Alan on my ThruLines, but he is probably there due to a match to someone else on the Chart.

Christine’s Genealogy

I don’t have any reason to doubt Christine’s genealogy, but I will take a look at it. All the Ancestry trees have Beatrice Frazer as Christine’s grandmother:

I have not done thorough research on this line, but Beatrice’s middle name Honora could come from her grandmother Honora White. Here is a gravestone inscription:

This inscription is from Boroondara, near Melbourne:

Here is Christine added to my Chart:

I have four of my siblings tested at Ancestry. Only one of the four matches Christine. This makes sense as a 6th cousin is quite a distant relationship.

My Match with Suzzanne

It turns out I already wrote a Blog on Suzzanne about a year and a half ago.  The reason I didn’t see her is that I had placed Suzzanne here – on the Richard Frazer Line:

This diagram is meant to indicate that Suzzanne and I have a common ancestor in Rebecca above. This shows that Suzzanne and I are actually 5th cousins – not 6th cousins. I am on the Richard Line because of Violet Frazer. I have that she married her first cousin James Frazer. James Frazer is on the ThruLines but that puts us out another generation. I suppose that I am related to Suzzanne as both 5th and 6th cousin – due to my 1st cousin ancestors: James and Violet Frazer.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Christine is my 6th cousin, so a DNA match at level is somewhat rare. According to FTDNA, I should have a less than 2% chance of matching Christine by DNA.
  • Some of our ancestors married each other’s families which may account for the match.
  • As this is such a distant match, it would be interesting to see on which chromosome Christine and I (and other Frazers) match.
  • I didn’t do a full genealogical analysis of Christine’s tree, but it seems clear that due to a large DNA match with cousin Jane (127 cM), that the genealogy is correct.

 

Posted on

FTDNA’s Time Tree for YDNA BigY Testers

FTDNA has a new Time Tree which is interesting. I have three trees that I am interested: Frazer from my father’s mother’s side, Hartley from my side and Butler from my wife’s side

Frazer Time Tree

The Time Tree is under Discover More:

Then there is a menu on the left:

Here is the Frazer Time Tree:

I didn’t take the tree all the way back. I thought that back to the time of Christ was probably far enough.

A Closer View

Here we can related more and focus in on the genealogical timeframe. I assume that between the years 1200 and 1400, the clans were forming as the top 6 BigY testers are five Frazers and on Frazier/Frasher. The Frazier tester has an American Flag as the genealogy is colonial and cannot be traced back – though it likely goes back to Ireland or Scotland. This branch of Frazers is called R-YP6489. Down from Frazier on Time Tree above is Dingman. Then there are Rick and my by cousin Paul. Then there are Rodney and Jonathan.

Here is how I have the North Roscommon Branch of BigY-tested Frazers:

Dingman on the left has the generic North Roscommon Frazer Haplogroup of R-FT421618 because no one else on his branch has tested.

This is how the ‘Block Tree” at FTDNA looks like:

Here I have Frazier also in the image. By comparing the two previous images, there are some interesting things:

  • Jonathan and Rodney share an average of 5 private branches. That would seem to indicate the potential for some branching below R-Y151390 which is the branch for Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836. There is also a spare SNP which is FT421607. This is available for branching between James Frazer born about 1720 and Archibald Frazer born about 1792.
  • Rick and Paul show an average of three Private Variants. These would be for branches below James Frazer born 1804. The Private Variants in this case and for Rodney and Jonathan are not as important as the genealogy is better known in these two lines where these Variants would be applicable.
  • Perhaps what seem unexplainable at this time is why R-Y85652 has two additional equivalents. That would imply that, if my tree is right, that Philip Frazer would have had two mutations. I don’t think that is very likely. As these are equivalent SNPs, the other potential, given the above tree would be that Philip had one mutation and James had two mutations. I posed the question to the BigY Facebook Page as to whether one man could have two variants or SNPs. Some thought that two mutations in one person was possible.
  • Dingman’s line has four Private Variants. They would have ocurred in the seven generations since Archibald Frazer born about 1743.

Hartley Time Tree

This is from my own family.

The man in red represents my father as he is the one my brother and I have as a common ancestor. The man with the blue cross is a Smith. We have a common ancestor around 500. It is not clear as to whether our ancestors were from Scotland or if his branch moved North. Going up a branch, it would seem that most of the people from this line were in the area of England. A few testers in the branch above had ancestors from Wales:

For reference, the blue circle three from the bottom of the above image is Smith.

Hartley and Mawdsley

The top tester above is a Mawdsley. There had been some question as to whether this person should have been a Hartley. If we go with this timing with a common ancestor between Hartley and Mawdsley of around 1100 AD/CE, then there would be no need to group the two as surnames were not common at that time for the average person. I like to quote FamilySearch on this topic:

The custom of applying a man’s by-name to all his children began in the late 12th century and spread slowly, with the manorial classes and the south of England leading the way. The first legal recognition of an hereditary surname is found in 1267; it was de Cantebrigg meaning ‘of Canterbury.’ By 1400 three-quarters of the population are reckoned to have borne hereditary family names, and the process was complete by about 1450 in England. Wales is an exception, in that although they had surnames they were patronymics (derived from the father’s first name) and thus changed each generation.

The Hartleys seem to fit this general statement as the first Hartley common ancestor (if FTDNA’s estimate is correct) is shown to be:

In general terms, the Hartley “Time Tree” shows two major branches of Hartleys. The first group branches off from R-A11134 and the second group branches off from R-A16717:

This branch is about 140 years more recent than R-A11134. The common ancestor of this branch was born, according to the tree in 1572. This date is about 90 years off from the to the actual genealogy. However, it could be that A16717 first ocurred in the grandfather or great-grandfather of Edward Hartley:

I call this the Quaker Branch of Hartleys. Edward Hartley from Little Marsden came to Pennslyvania and started the US branch of this Hartley family. There is another YDNA tester who is considering the BigY test who descends from the Thomas Line above. This is the line from the Hartley researcher I have corresponded with:

>Edward Hartley born 16 May 1666 married? Sarah Midgley
>Thomas Hartley b. 29 Dec. 1700 Solebury, Bucks County Pa. married Elizabeth Paxon
>Anthony Hartley b. 3 Dec. 1730 married Elizabeth Smith
>Jonathan Hartley b. 221 Octoner 1761 married Elizabeth Bunting
>David Bunting Hartley b. 28 Sep. 1786 married Phoebe Park
>Hiram J. Hartley b. 27 March 1824 NJ married Rebecca Church Lee
>Harry Lee Hartley b. 9 June 1864 married Emma Bell Leach
>Robert Hartley b. 17 June 1896 married Grace Maloney Roberts
>John Robert Hartley b. 4 August 1922 married Alice Buren Wrighy

One way to look at it, is if the Quaker Line is about 90 years too old on the tree, then perhaps we could move the other branches ahead 90 years. That wouldn’t work for my father’s branch as the timing on that is so close. Here is my tree with the John Robert line added:

Butler Time Tree

My wife is a Butler and there are a few Butlers who have taken the BigY test:

On this line, it doesn’t take much to get back to over 3,000 years ago. The Frazer lines were R1a, The Hartley lines were R1b. This line is in the I Haplogroup. Let’s start with the red Haplogroup I-FT241245. The two testers are my brother-in-law and father-in-law. In this case, my father-in-law is the common ancestor who has FY241245. The estimated date for that Haplogroup is 1907 or close enough to 1932 when my father-in-law was born.

The next person up on the tree is Butler researcher Peter:

This tree is showing that Peter and my in-law’s have a common ancestor born around 1557. In a Blog I wrote on 1 March 2021, I came up with these dates:

That’s a difference of about 125 years.

Next Branch Up

The next Branch going back in time includes a Whitson and a Batt.

The date that FTDNA gives for the common ancestor at I-BY50783 is 1449. This is interesting as it seems like only one SNP separates these two ancestors. That comes up with 108 years per SNP in this case. That is about what I was using in my guess – 100 years per SNP.  But I came up with a different result somehow.

Comparing the Three Time Trees

I am impressed with the regular branching on the Time Tree that the Frazers are on:

This is true especially starting after 900 CE with some sort of branching in every 200 year period following. This may be a result of the fact that many people with Scottish origins tend to have their YDNA tested. Another explanation would be lines that were successful and prospered.

The Hartley Time Tree does not have the same regularity in its branching:

Here we see no branching between around the years of 500 and 1100 CE. This could be due to fewer testers and/or lines that were not doing as well. Intermediary lines may have died out. This could be due to wars, famine, disease or simply famiilies have no males born.

The Butler Time Tree has even less branching:

There are two main branches that ocurred before 1,000 BCE. After that there was no addition branching until almost 1500 CE. That is about 2,500 years without branching. This line is probably severely undertested and/or went through very tough times. This is picked up somewhat at the SNP Tracker Website:

Notice that whole eras are skipped. Medieval and Iron Ages are missing.

Summary and Conclusions

  • FTDNA has a new helpful representation of a timeline for BigY testers. This is not the final say, but a helpful tool to compare with other estimates and with genealogy where available.
  • I looked at the trees that I have looked into. Those are Frazer, Hartley and Butler
  • I compared the three trees to each other. I noted that the Frazer Time Tree has the most consistent and regular branching going back in time. The Butler Time Tree has the sparsesest branching going back before the time of Christ.
  • As a result, I would ten to have the most faith in the Frazer timelines. There is good branching and somewhat of a check as we believe that common Rocscommon Frazer ancestor represented by R-FT521618 was born around 1690. I feel the Hartley Time Tree is slightly less reliable due to fewer branches but we have the genealogy for the common ancestor for the ‘Quaker Line’ born in 1666. In my opinion, the Butler Time Tree could be the least reliable of the three due to no ancient genealogy to check and the fact that branching in the line is sparse – especially before the genealogical timefrane.
  • FTDNA is continuing to calibrate its age estimates. One good example of how FTDNA’s Time Tree can be calibrated is with Edward Hartley born 1666. If this person is reported to FTDNA, they will be able to use that information to correct their current estimate of a common ancestor of 1572.

 

Posted on

Another Frazer Heard from

I guess that is an awkward title. I heard recently from a Frazer with Irish roots who is certainly related to a large group of Frazers that I have been looking at. He sent me an interesting tree which his family had worked on.

A Frazer Tree

Here is the tree that I got from John:

I blurred out some information at the bottom left. John is the last John bottom left. John was a bit confused as to how the tree fit together. I told him that the right of side of his chart should go up to James brother of Archibald. John has his line coming from the John Frazer Line at the top of the chart. I think that he should be coming from the Archibald Line. I have that Archibald married Ann Stinson and John has a 2nd great grandfather Alexander Stenson Frazer.

I sent John a copy of my Frazer Genealogy/DNA tree. That tree has Frazers who have had their DNA tested.

John thought that he might fit in on the left hand side of my chart, but I think that he should be in the Stinson section. That would be the bright green line.

Here is where John fits in on my Frazer Web Page:

John’s ancestor is Edward Lillie born 1854 at the bottom of the image above.

More on John’s Tree

Here is Edward Lillie in 1891:

He is now in North Leeds married to Adelaide Cooper. Edgar H. Frazer is in this Census. He is next in line in John’s genealogy. Here is how I make the connection:

The good news is that John has sent me photos. These always liven up a dry Blog on genealogy. Here is Edgar Hamilton:

 

John says this is :

Edgar Hamilton Frazer leaving Buckingham Palace with his wife Margaret Frazer (née Dale) dated 1932 having been awarded an OBE

I have that Edgar was born about 1885, so that would make im about 47 in the photo.  Here is Edgar’s wedding record from 1912:

The woman in the photo above must be Margaret Dale.

Edgar’s Father Edward Lillie Frazer

 

He was the younger brother of Frazer researcher’s Doug’s ancestor Archibald of Shanvoley:

Looking at these photos, I would have a hard time saying that these two were not brothers. As older brother, Archibald would have stayed on the ancestral lands in Ireland and the younger brother Edward sought his fortune in England. Here is Shanvoley in North Roscommon where Archibald and Edward were born:

My ancestors would have known them as they lived in Derrycaster to the Northeast of Shanvoley. This map shows the boundaries between the two Townlands:

 

I believe that my ancestor James Frazer lived on parcel 12 and leased other lands nearby.

Here is how some of these Frazer lines fit together:

I am a 6th cousin to Doug. John is one generation up so we are 5th cousins once removed. However, John’s ancestor Alexander Stinson Frazer and my ancestor James Frazer were first cousins.

Frazer DNA

The above chart is based on Frazer descendants who have taken an autosomal DNA test. Five Frazer men have also taken the BigY DNA test. This test is a male only test and test the DNA that was passed only from father to son. That makes it a good test for a surname studay such as Frazer. Here is how the Frazer YDNA tree looks like so far:

There are currently about 59,000 branches of the male line identified and Frazer have three of those 59,000 branches. These branches form better in pairs. The general Frazer haplogroup is FT421618. I had a cousin Paul test and R-Y85652 defines the James Line of the Archibald side of the tree. Rodney and Jonathan tested on the James Line side and found out that at least the Thomas Henry Branch of the Frazer Line was named R-Y151390. If John were to test or someone else on the Archibald side, they may end up naming another Frazer Branch. This testing is important as it can clarify confusing genealogy at times. For example, I don’t have proof that my James Frazer ancestor had Philip as a father. In the Dingman side, we couldn’t be sure if Archibald’s father was John or Richard Frazer.

Alexander Stinson/Stenson Frazer

Here is the third photo that John sent me:

This is Alexander Stinson Frazer born in 1806. My understanding is that Alexander Stinson Frazer made his way to England before his death. I believe that this is Alexander’s burial record:

Here is the Census for Edgbaston in 1881:

Here we see Mary who was Alexander’s wife and some of her family – mostly born in Ireland. It is likely that one of Alexander’s children in England had his painting done.

This Alexander is important as he would be a brother or first cousin to many other Frazers who have many more descendants today. In my family he was first cousin to my ancestors James Frazer and Violet Frazer.

The John Frazer Will

One Frazer researcher has posted a most interesting will at Ancestry. I will copy it below:

The transcript which follows is one of those documents most beloved by family historians. In it John Frazer, younger brother of Archibald Frazer one of my GG Grandfathers, gives details of most of his family and his extended family. Read on.

This is the last will and testament of me John Frazer of Stockfield Hall Tyseley in the parish of Yardley County of Worcester Manufacturer I direct payment of all my just debts funeral and testamentary expences as soon as convient after my desease I appoint James Frazer of Stackfield hall aforesaid William Frazer of Westley Brook Warwick Road Acocks Green in the County of Worcester manufacturer and Edward Lilly Frazer of 16 Spencer Place Roundhay Road Leeds (hereinfter called my trustees) to be the Executors and Trustees of this my will. I give to John Wesley Johnstone of Hay Mills in the parish of Yardley aforesaid a clerk in the employ of Frazer Bros Hay Mills aforesaid if he shall be in their empoly at the time of my decease the sum of twenty five pounds and I direct my trustees in case the said John Wesley Johnstone is not in the employ of the said Frazer Bros at the time of my decease to pay or withold the said legacy as they may think fit. I give all that residence known as Stockfield Hall in which I now reside to my brother James Frazer together with my share in the furnishing of same and my private and personal bellongins. I devise and bequeath all my real and personal Estate not otherwise disposed of unto my trustees upon trust that my trustees shall sell (or value) call in and convert unto money the same or such part thereof as shall not consist of money and shall invest the same in the business of Frazer Bros or such other investment as my trustees shall think desirable upon the following trusts viz 1. As to six hundred pounds in trust to pay same to Maria Anne Donohoe of Buffalo New York in the United States of America Daughter of my sister Eliza. 2. As to six hundred pounds in trust to pay same to Samuel Dowlex of Canada son of my sister Eliza. 3. As to six hundred pounds in trust to pay same to Mary Martha Hassard of Toronto Canada daughter of my sister Anne. 4. As to six hundred pounds in trust to pay same to Florence Hassard Toronto Canada daughter of my sister Anne by installments of Two hundred pounds each but without interest at the expiration of five ten and fifteen years after the date of my decease. My trustees shall set aside yearly such part of the income as would be equal to interest at 2 1/2 per cent per annum upon the whole ammount invested In trust to pay divide and distribute yearly out of such income 1. the sum of £10 per annum to my sister Mary Ward of Worcester during her life 2. £15 per annum for the first five years after my decease to Maria Annie Donohoe aforesaid, £10 per annum for a further period of five years and £5 per annum for a further period of five years 3. £15 per annum for five years to Samuel Dowlex aforesaid £10 per annum for a further period of five years and £5 per annum for a third period of five years 4. £15 per annum for five years to Mary Martha Hassard aforesaid £10 per annum for a further period five years and £5 per annum for a further period of five years 5.£15 per annum for five years to Florence Hassard aforsaid £10 per annum for a further period of five years and £5 per annum for a third period of five years 6. £10 per annum for five years to the Trustees of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 146 Queen Victoria Street london. 7. £10 per annum for five years to the Church of England Missionary Society, Salisbury Square, Fleet Street London. 8. £10 per annum for five years to the Church Association of 14 Buckingham Street, Strand, London. And I give my trustees the power with reference to the shares of income and principal heretofore given to Maria Annie Donohoe and Samuel Dowlex to withhold the share of income and principal payable to Maria Annie Donohoe and to pay the same to Samuel Dowlex or vice versa at the discrection of any two of my said Trustees if circumstances seem to them to call for such a course to be adopted and as to the remainder of the interest at 2 1/2 per cent per annum to pay devide and distribute same every year between and amonst the following persons in equal shares 1. John William Frazer of hay Mills aforesaid son of my Brother Archibald 2. Edgar Hamilton Frazer of Leeds son of my brother Edward. 3. Alexander Stenson Frazer of Leeds son of my brother Edward. 4. Douglas Villiers  Frazer of Leeds, son of my brother Edward. 5. Hector Mc Kenzie  Frazer of leeds, son of my brother Edward. 6. Vera Adeliade Lilian  Frazer of leeds Daughter of my brother Edward. And upon the death of any person entitled under this my will to a share of income as aforesaid leaving issue such issue shall be entitled to their deceased parents share of income. And in case their is no issue the share of such deceased person shall be divided equally amonst the remaining persons participating in the division of income as aforesaid. And I direct & empower my trustees (should they so desire) notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained limiting the interests of any person participating under this my will to income only to pay to any one or all of the said participants any sum or sums from the said principal money invested as aforesaid and from the date of such payments to reduce the payment of income proportionately and as to the remainder of income in excess of the 2 1/2% per annum arising out of the principal moneys invested as aforesaid upon trust to pay the same to James Frazer, William Frazer, Edward Lily Frazer and John William Frazer in proportion to the amount of capital which each of them shall then have invested in the said business of Frazer Bros. And should any member of the firm of Frazer Bros (or after his death his Executors or trustees) withdraw in any one year from the business of the said firm any part of his capitol (besides his profits) in excess of 5% of the amount standing to his credit in the books of the said firm I direct my trustees at their discretion to withdraw from the amount invested by them as aforesaid with the said Frazer Bros an equal sum or at the discretion the whole amount they have invested with the said firm. In trust to reinvest the same and apply the income as aforesaid or in their discretion to distribute the principal money in discharge of their trust and I expressly declare that any member of Frazer Bros who may withdraw such amount as aforesaid without the consent of a majority of the other partners of the firm they and their descendants shall be excluded from any benifit whatever under this my will and I further declare that in case any person interested under this my will shall take precedings to set aside this will or shall commence any action against the trustees (except to recover any ammount due to him under the terms of this my will) or shall instruct any procedings whatever for the purpose of having the intention and construction of this will defined by a court of law they and their descendants shall be excluded from any benifit whatever hereunto in witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand to this my will contained in this and the two proceeding sheets of paper this 13th day of November One thousand nine hundred and two.

Signed by the said John Frazer the testator as and for his last will and testament in the presence of us both being present at the same time who at his request in his presence and in the presence of each other have hereunto set and subscribed our names as witnesses. John Frazer
Arthur G Tanfield Solicitor, Birmingham
Frank Albert his clerk
On the twenty first day of october 1904 probate of this will was granted at Worcester to James Frazer,  William Hamilton Frazer and Edward Lilly Frazer the executors

This document is important for the relationships which it sets out. I will try to sort out the relationships:

  • The will is of John Frazer who is the son of Archibald Stinson Frazer.
  • After looking up trees including John Frazer at Ancestry, the three trees I found have him dying in Ontario which seems odd as he is here from “Stockfield Hall Tyseley in the parish of Yardley County of Worcester”
  •  James Frazer is listed as John’s brother
  • John has another brother named Archibald who has a son John William Frazer
  • John has a brother Edward who has a son named Edgar Hamliton Frazer. That Edward must be Edward Lillie. Their two photos are earlier in the Blog.
  • Other children of brother Edward listed are: Alexander Stenson Frazer, Douglas Villiers Frazer, Hector McKenzie Frazer, and Vera Adelaide Lilian Frazer
  • John had a sister named Eliza
  • Eliza has daughter Maria Annie Donohoe of Buffalo, NY and son Samuel Dowlex of Canada
  • John had a sister named Anne
  • Had had two sisters named Mary Martha Hassard and Florence Hassard
  • John had a brother named Archibald. This must be the Archibald of Shanvoley, Ireland
  • Archibald has a son named John William Frazer

I’ll go over some of these names in more detail. I’m curious to see how all lthese people fit together.

John Frazer

This record has his death in Ontario:

The year of death makes sense based on the will above, but I question that he died in Ontario. Here is a directory from 1883 in Birmingham:

James Frazer

John’s brother James ends up getting his house. This James is listed in the 1881 Census above. He was 34 then, so born around 1847.

Fellow Frazer researcher Joanna has this photo of Stockfield Hall:

This is the house James inherited from his brother John Frazer. Her note says:

photo taken in 1941 when it was used as a boarding house. Now demolished.

Archibald and Son John William Frazer

Archibald is Archibald of Shanvoley (photo above given from Doug’s web site). Ancestry gives me this hint for John William:

Someone else posted this photo of John William with credit to Frazer researcher Doug:

Edward Lillie and Children

Here is Edward and family in 1891:

These are the first three children listed in the will out of five. This is the general area the family was living:

Here is the family in the same place in 1901:

This shows the five children of Edward L. Frazer. It appears that two sisters are living next door: Ann Robinson and Mary Robinson, but this may not be reported correctly.

Eliza and Children in North America

I have this record for Eliza (or Elizabeth:

I thought that Dowlex was a funny name. It should be Dowler. Here is the marriage record for Eliza’s daughter:

Hassard Daughters of Sister Anne

I have come across the Hassard name before, so I find this interesting. This appears to be Anne’s marriage information:

Here is the family in 1891:

The children are Minnie, Albert and Florence. Is Minnie a nickname for Mary? I don’t see Albert listed in the will above. Here is the 1881 Census:

Here is the transcription:

Sister Mary Ward

It is easy to miss people in a will and I initially misssed Mary Ward. First, I do not show on my tree that John Frazer had a sister named Mary:

This may be Mary in Worcester in 1901:

I found one tree with a Minnie Emma Frazer married to Berrow Ward:

I guess I didn’t know that Minnie was a nickname for Mary.

I don’t know if Jane was the first daughter. She may have been named for Mary Hamiltons mother. Then Ann would have been named for Alexander’s mother Ann Stinson. Next Minnie or Mary was probably named for her mother.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was glad John Frazer got in touch with me
  • His family tree was a little off. He had Alexander Stinson in the John Frazer Branch. His Alexander should be moved up to the Alexander in the Archibald/Stinson Branch
  • His photo of his painting of Alexander Stinson Frazer is likely one of the earliest representations of one of the Frazers from North Roscommon
  • The transcription of a will of a John Frazer (brother of John’s great-grandfather) shed some light on family relationships in this branch of Frazers
  • I was able to update my Ancestry Tree on this branch of Frazers
  • John is interested in taking a DNA test which will further solidify this branch of Frazers
Posted on

A New YDNA Match to the Frazers of North Roscommon

I was notified by two Frazer relatives recently of a new match to the Frazers who have had their YDNA tested. YDNA is the best test for paternal lines because it specializes in only testing the DNA that males pass down from father to son – all the way back from genetic Adam.

I am not a Frazer, but I am interested in Frazer YDNA because my grandmother was a Frazer, so I had my 2nd cousin once removed Paul tested.

Barker Match to My 2nd Cousin Paul

Here are the list of STR matches at the 111 level that my cousin Paul has:

Barker is the third match to my cousin Paul, but really is tied for second at 4 steps away. Barker took the 111 STR test but not the BigY test.

A Frazer BigY Tree

Based on BigY testing and known or supsected genealogy, I came up with a Haplogroup tree:

The overall North Roscommon Frazer Haplogroup is FT421618. Apparently Dingman knew that his grandfather was actually a Frazer. We believe that he descends from Archibald Frazer from around 1743 and that he also has the North Roscommon heritage identified by FT421618. Next is my cousin Paul and Rick. They are on the overall Archibald Branch (2nd generation from the top) and they are designated as Y85652. From the tree above, this was a new SNP that appeared in either James Frazer or his father Philip. On the right above is the James Frazer Branch identified as Y151390. Both Rodney and Jonathan are in this branch. Y151390 developed in one of the four generations between Thomas Henry Frazer and James Frazer born around 1720.

A Frazer STR Tree

A STR tree is difficult to make due to parallel mutations and back mutations of STRs. However, this is somewhat offset as the BigY test has been taken. That provides a framework for the tree.

In this tree, I brought in a Frazier. He tested, but does not know his genealogy past colonial America. That puts him in a more distant group – going back to Scotland perhaps. The way I have this drawn, Jonathan has the STR profile that is closest to the ancestral Frazer. At Ancestry, here is the Block tree:

Above, the “Your branch” refers to my cousin Paul. The Block Tree looks at the world of SNPs and Barker has tested STRs. Hopefully, Barker will take the BigY test to place him in the group also.

How Does Barker Fit In?

Barker is clearly in the Frazer lineage. Further he is most certainly from the James Frazer (born about 1720) half of the Frazer Tree. Barker matches Jonathan perfectly:

However, perfectly may not always be perfect. That is because of the parallel mutations and back mutations of STRs which I mentioned earlier.  The CDY STR which defines the James Frazer Line is a fast moving STR. That means that Barker’s CDY could have mutated independently of Jonathan’s and Rodney’s line ancestor. However, let’s assume that didn’t happen.

Still the CDY mutation could have happened anywhere between James Frazer born around 1720 and Thomas Henry Frazer born in 1843:

Now the James Frazer in the Tree above was thought to be born around 1720. I believe that the Archibald Frazer with the red DYS710=34 value was of the next generation or from about 1743. If that is the case, it is theoretically possible that the match could even be on the Archibald (1715) side of the tree. However, so far based on the autosomal results so far, that does not seem to be the case.

We know that Barker does not have the same STR that defines Rodney’s branch. That STR is DYS552=24. That means that Barker, based on STRs descends from anyone between James Frazer born about 1720 and Edward Fitzgerald Frazer born 1867. As my understanding is that the father for Barker’s grandfather born in 1901 is unknown. That would make Edward Fitzgerald Frazer the latest possible ancestor of Barker. However, it appears that the autosomal results (see below) are too low for Barker to descend from Edward Fitzgerald Frazer.

Autosomal Results

Right now, we don’t have autosomal results for Barker, but we have some for his nephew. Barker’s grandfather was born in 1901, so he would be probably one generation removed from Rodney and Jonathan and Barker’s nephew would be two generations removed.

Here is a chart I have made up of those who have tested autosomal DNA from the James Frazer Line:

Not all these people have tested at the same company including Barker’s nephew. However, Barker did test at Ancestry which has the largest database, so that is good. At Ancestry, Barker’s nephew matches Madeline, Janet and Jonathan. There may be additional matches.

There are two major sides of the James Frazer Branch. They are the Archibald and Michael sides. From what we know so far from Ancestry, it appears that Barker’s nephew matches on the Archibald side.

Barker’s nephew matches:

  • Madeline at 17 cM
  • Janet and Jonathan at 14 cM

Ancestry usually considers 20 cM to be the cutoff for a 4th cousin, so this match may be a further out level than fourth cousin.

One guess that I had was that Barker may descend from the Edward Frazer Branch on the right side of the chart above. He was the one who married Mary Kirkwood. However, that branch is not well-represented by DNA testing or may just not be a prolific branch. The reason that I chose that branch is that Barker’s nephew matches people from the Archibald Frazer (born abour 1792) Branch at about the same rate. That could mean that Barker could be from a parallel branch. Edward Frazer is a parallel branch to Archibald Frazer.

Next Steps

Next, we can wait for any additional autosomal testing or BigY YDNA testing on Barker’s side.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Based on YDNA testing, It appears that Barker must descend from a North Roscommon Frazer historically
  • Futhermore, Barker appears to descend from the James Frazer (born about 1720) Line of these Frazers.
  • Based on Frazer YDNA tester Rodney, Barker does not descend from Rodney’s ancestor William Frazer
  • Based on autosomal testing of Barker’s nephew, it appears that Barker could be a third to fifth cousin once removed to Jonathan and Rodney. That would have him descending from James Frazer born around 1720, his son Archibald Frazer born 1751 or James’ grandson Archibald Frazer born abut 1792
  • More DNA testing should clarify Barker’s place in the Frazer genealogical tree.
Posted on

Dating Some of My Frazer Relatives’ YDNA Haplogroups Using a New FTDNA Tool

FTDNA has a new YDNA tool called Discover:

Here is a tree I made up of my Frazer relatives who have BigY tested:

Here Dingman’s grandfather is a Frazer. However, there is some confusion at the point of John or Richard Frazer in his line. This Branch has the umbrella Frazer Haplogroup of FT421618. It looks like Y85652 should be older than Y151390, but they are in parallel positions on the tree. What it should mean is that there has been more time to develop privant variants on the James Frazer Line of 1804 as compared to the Thomas Henry Frazer Line of 1836.

Here is what all that looks like on the FTDNA Block Tree. This is from the perspective of Jonathan (Joanna’s brother):

Here I went back one haplogroup to bring in the Frazier name. We don’t know how Frazier fits in with the Frazer tree except that the connection predates what we know about the Frazer tree. On the tree above, Paul is my second cousin once removed.

Dating R-Y85652: James Frazer c. 1804

I’ll start with my closest relatives’ Haplogroup.

I’ll zoom in on my image from above:

We know that James Frazer must have been Y85652 and if we have the tree correct above, Archibald Frazer born about 1743 was not Y85652. That means that it is possible that Philip Frazer was Y85652.

Here is the verbal part of the report:

Now I will need you to check my math on this one. It is 2022 and 350 years before that is 1672. I’m not sure how that ended up as 1700 CE. When I checked on my own Hartley dating, it seemed like the years were being subtracted from the date of 2000.

I had assigned FT421618 to Archibald Frazer who we think was born around 1690. This estimate would have him born about 50 years earlier or perhaps 1650. This estimate seems closer to the date we think that Archibald Frazer was born. However, we will have to wait until later in the Blog when I will plug FT421618 into the Discover tool.

Dating Y151390 from the James Frazer Branch

Here, the good news is that FT421618 is 400 years ago. That would have to be consistent.

Here again, I’m baffled by the math, but 150 years ago comes out to about 1900 CE. When I was young, I learned about the rules for rounding numbers and this doesn’t seem to meet those rules. Furthermore, 150 years ago with 150 years either way is a large margin. For example, it would be impossible to have a common ancestor with someone who was born zero years ago. At any rate, we are quite sure that the common ancestor for Rodney and Jonathan was born in 1836:

My guess is that the issue is that there is an average of 5 private variants between Rodney and Jonathan:

It would seem that is a large number of private variants for three generations. Usually, I believe that there should be about one private variant per every two generations or about every 84 years. That is close to one every three generations. It may be worth taking a second look at these Private Variants at some point. I looked that these private variants here in January 2021, but these were still in a state of flux at that time. For example at that time, there were only an average of 4 private variants in this Branch.

Dating FT421618 – The First Frazer in Roscommon, Ireland?

We believe that this Haplogroup represents Archibald Frazer born around 1690 and believed to be the first Frazer in North County Roscommon.

Here, the dates have normalized and they have been subtracted from the year 2000 to get the year 1600 for FT421618. I am quite sure that the large number of private variants that seemed to have occurred later in the two Frazer lines were creating havoc with the dating tool.

Note that above it says that there is 1 yet unnamed lineage. This would be the Dingman Line which still has the designation of FT421618. This report gives the next Frazer Branch going up the line as 600 years ago. That is the Branch that includes Frazier (or Frasher). If that is subtracted from the year 2000, then that date would be around 1400. As we think the 1600 date may be closer to 1690, I would feel comfortable in adding 90 years to 1400 to get 1490. Here is some information on surnames in England, some of which may apply to the Frazers who may have been in SW Scotland around this time.

According to familysearch.org:

The custom of applying a man’s by-name to all his children began in the late 12th century and spread slowly, with the manorial classes and the south of England leading the way. The first legal recognition of an hereditary surname is found in 1267; it was de Cantebrigg meaning ‘of Canterbury.’ By 1400 three-quarters of the population are reckoned to have borne hereditary family names, and the process was complete by about 1450 in England. Wales is an exception, in that although they had surnames they were patronymics (derived from the father’s first name) and thus changed each generation.

During this early period a married woman could be known either by her maiden surname or by her husband’s surname with wyf added, as in Mary Walker, wife of Henry Field, or Mary Fieldwyf. The term Mrs. for a married woman was not used until after 1500.

Dating YP6489 – Frazier

This Haplogroup goes back a ways.

As I had thought, this Haplogroup goes back to a predicted year of 1400, though as I mentioned above a somewhat later date by 90 years would not be unreasonable. The later date of 850 years ago or the year 1150 would most certainly be before surnames were commonly used.

YP6488 Includes the Stuart and Grant surnames.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It seems like FTNDA’s new Discover Tool gives Frazer Haplogroups within reasonable time frames
  • The large number of private variants on two of the newer Frazer Haplogroups seem to be giving the tool some problems.
  • I would like to take another look at Frazer Haplogroups and Private Variants in an upcoming Blog.
Posted on

My Frazer Cousin John at Ancestry

I have had a DNA match with John for a while at Ancestry, but haven’t figured out the connection until today. Here is the match:

 

John does not have a searchable tree. However, note that John’s test is managed by Dawn. She has a tree and in that tree, her husband John descends from a Frazer.

This is an easy connection, because I know who Hubert Frazer was:

Hubert was my great-grandfather’s younger brother:

My great-grandfather James Archibald Frazer is sitting down on the left. Hubert is standing on the right. James was about 11 yeaers older than Hubert.

Here, I’ll just add in John to my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Tree:

Assuming I have the right John, he is Paul’s first cousin. I had Paul’s DNA sent to FTDNA where he was tested for YDNA which is the male Frazer line. That makes John my second cousin once removed. This is a big discovery, because, as Paul was tested at FTDNA, John is a good representative of this line of Frazers at Ancestry where there are many more matches than at other testing companies.

My Shared DNA Match with John

My last Shared DNA Match with John is with Dianna. Dianna has a basic tree:

The top part of the tree is Belgian and the bottom favors Ontario. As I have traced one part of my ancestry to Ontario, that would be the place to look first.

Building Out a Tree for Dianna

Turns out that there is a marriage record for Abraham Brandon which is helpful:

This brings us back a generation:

Dianna’s ancestors got added as living, so I need to change that. The death record for Kathleen (or Catherine) gives her parents’ names:

This record mentions Ireland, so that puts us in the right part of the World. This is as far as I got with Dianna’s tree:

Many of these ancestors seemed to be from Northern Ireland. I was getting to the point of diminishing returns, so I may come back to this tree later.

Shared Matches Between John and My Siblings

Shared matches between John and my siblings may give more clues. On one sibling’s shared matches, I saw a Johnston in a tree. I don’t know if I am related, but Johnstons did marry Frazers in the area of Ireland where my Frazers came from.

My sister Lori has a much larger DNA match with John compared to me. Lori matches John at 95 cM. Lori shares a match with John and Glen. Ancestry shows that Glen has two Frazers in his direct ancestry:

That saves me building out Glen’s tree. Glen has Maggie from Scotland and Australia:

Here is what I have in my tree:

This Richard Frazer was born in Ireland and died in Glasgow. Glen’s Maggie was from Glasgow. Glen and I share a DNA match with Jane. Here is Jane on my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Chart:

I got in touch with Jane and she has that Margaret Frazer was the daughter of Archibald Frazer and Winifred Conlon. That came out as Winifred Collins on Margaret’s death certificate. This record is from Jane’s tree:

Also from Jane, here is Margaret’s baptismal record:

I’ll add Glen to my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Tree:

That brings us out to 5th cousins through Richard Frazer and an unknown wife.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was glad to figure out a Frazer match based on the tree of his administrator.
  • That gives me a hint to try other matches I’m not aware of based on the administrator’s tree
  • Checking into shared DNA matches is always a good idea as it may bring up new connections
  • John fills in a gap in my DNA/Genealogy tree – especially with respect to AncestryDNA matches as I tested his first cousin at FTDNA.
  • Thanks to imput from Cousin Jane, I was able to add my 5th cousin Glen (and shared match with John) to my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Chart.
Posted on

My Frazer Relative and DNA Match Faye

I check my AncestryDNA matches from time to time and find a lot of matches, but not a lot of matches where I can connect the genealogy. With Faye, I was able to do both. Faye matches me on 5 segments and 59 cM at AncestryDNA. Faye was nice enough to answer my message at Ancestry and it was not too long before we figured out the connection. Here is how the connection looks like at Ancestry:

Here is Faye’s great-grandmother Susan:

Susan is the one with the light colored dress on the right. My great-grandfather James Archibald Frazer had gone to Boston by this time with some of his brothers. In fact, if I have my dates right, James came to Boston on  October 8, 1887 and Susan was born October 27, 1887. I don’t know if the two ever met.

Faye’s DNA Matches at Ancestry

Faye has shared matches with my four siblings who have tested at AncestryDNA. She also matches my daughter but not my son as a shared match. In order to have a shared match, you must have a match of at least 20cM. My son matches Faye by 16cM.

Rebecca

Rebecca matches both me and Faye. Rebecca is also a third cousin with Faye and myself:

This is a tree of people who descend from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster who have taken DNA tests. I recently added Faye to the chart as the first match that I know about who descends from Susan Jane Frazer. Also, I wrote a Blog on Rebecca here and she has different ways that she descends from the McMaster family.

Whitney and Stephen

Whitney descends from Richard Frazer and is a 3rd cousin once removed. There is also a Stephen who must be from the same line aslo, but he doesn’t have his family tree at Ancestry, so I’m not sure exactly how he fits in.

Michael

Michael is a shared match between Faye and some of my siblings at Ancestry. Michael is a Frazer relative going back two generations:

 

Michael is a 4th cousin once removed to Faye and my family. I haven’t added Faye onto this tree yet. The relationships are complicated as Violet Frazer above married James Frazer from what I can figure out.

Faye and Gedmatch

Faye uploaded her DNA results from AncestryDNA to Gedmatch. This is important because AncestryDNA, unlike most other DNA testing companies, does not provide a Chromosome Browser. Here is how Faye matches me at Gedmatch:

This may not look too exciting, but it shows on which Chromosomes Faye and I match, where on each chromosome we match (by position) and gives an amount that we match in Centimorgans.

My Match with Faye at DNAPainter

It is easier to see the matches using DNA Painter. Here is what my DNA Painter map looks like right now:

The paternal copy of each chromosome is on the top and maternal on the bottom. The matches with Frazer/McMaster are in a sort of maroon color. I was able to split the DNA out for this couple in a few cases, so I have individual listings for the couple also. Overall, I am 51% painted or mapped.

Here is my paternal side where I am 58% mapped:

Note that I have nothing mapped on the X Chromosome as men don’t get any X Chromosome from their paternal side.

I can drill down one more layer to the maroon Frazer/McMaster level:

This shows I have some DNA matches on 10 of my 22 Chromosomes. These are from 6 third cousin level matches. Now recall above, that Faye matched me on Chromosomes 1, 6, 18 and 19. That means that her match with me on Chromosome 18 is new.

Next, I’ll add Faye to the mix. Faye brings up my mapped percentages by 1% on my paternal side and overall.

Chromosome 1

I don’t have much room for Frazer DNA due to my inheritance of a lot of Hartley DNA on this Chromosome. Faye ovelaps with Susan and Katherine here. These matches can also be represented this way:

This represents triangulated matches. That means that the DNA from this portion of our Chromosomes 1 came from either George Frazer or Margaret McMaster. However, without other matches further back, we don’t know from which person the DNA came from.

Chromosome 6

Chromosome 6 gives some more information:

Because Brenda overlapped with Doreen and Ken and the match with Doreen and Ken go back to the Frazer side one generation before George Frazer, that means that the DNA from Brenda and Stan came from George Frazer. I changed the color for Brenda’s match, but didn’t bother for Stan. Faye’s DNA match with me doesn’t appear to overlap my match with Doreen and Ken, but it overlaps with Brenda’s match, so that DNA is probably from George Frazer also.

Chromosome 18

Here is where Faye adds the most to where I had missing information:

Faye adds a chunk of DNA to the right of Emily, Gladys, Doreen and Susan. Again, I assigned Emily’s match to George Frazer due to the blue matches of a generation earlier. Faye may represent what I call a crossover here. That is what I give to the phenomenon when ancestral DNA crossover over from one ancestor to the spouse of that ancestor. We know the yellow match represents George Frazer, so Faye’s match with me may represent Margaret McMaster. This could be confirmed if we find more McMaster matches with Faye in that region where I match her.

Chromosome 19

Chromosome 19 is also a little difficult to interpret for Faye’s match with me:

Keith has McMaster DNA, so the match with Susan is for Magaret McMaster. The match with BV is complicated as there is a McMaster and Frazer side. However, I know where the McMaster side fits in, so the match with Emily is probably Margaret Mcmaster. I can’t tell which side Faye’s match is on.

Faye and Heidi

I administer different DNA kits at Gedmatch. One is for my sister Heidi. Here is how Faye matches Heidi:

Faye’s estimated number of generations to MRCA is 3.8. The actual is 4.0 generations, so she shares a bit more DNA with Heidi than average. I’ll add Faye onto Heidi’s DNAPainter Map:

I haven’t been as diligent in mapping Heidi’s DNA as I have with my own. Faye upped Heidi’s over all and paternal percentages by 1% also to 36 and 43%. Faye adds new information to Chromosomes 15, 18 and 19:

On Chromosome 15, Faye points out a crossover in Heidi’s DNA:

This is the crossover between yellow Frazer and blue Hartley or the crossover between my Frazer grandmother and Hartley grandfather.

Faye and Paul

Faye’s third largest match at Gedmatch is with her (and my) 2nd cousin once removed Paul. I also manage Paul’s DNA kit. Here is the match:

The estimated number of generations to Paul and Faye’s common ancestors are 3.6. That means that Faye and Paul share slightly less DNA than expected for 2nd cousins once removed. I have only mapped out Paul’s paternal side. And I am only interested in half of his paternal side:

Paul is 23% mapped right now. George Frazer and Margaret McMaster are in green on his map. Adding Faye brings Paul up to 25% mapped on his paternal side:

Faye’s contributions to new Frazer DNA matching for Paul are on their Chromosomes 6 and 8. Faye’s DNA under Susan and Doreen is from George Frazer. Faye’s other Chromosome 8 match to Paul may be McMaster DNA due to the crossover effect I mentioned earlier.

Faye and Michael

One chunk of DNA came down from one of the common ancestors between Michael and Faye:

Here is the connection from the viewpoint of Michael:

We don’t really know when Richard Frazer was born, but we think that it was around the year 1777. We also don’t know the name of his wife. One guess from Ancestry is Mary Patterson.

Faye and Stephen – McMaster Side

I match Stephen who tested at 23andMe. He also uploaded to Gedmatch at my request.

I am related to Stephen as a 5th cousin – which is quite distant. I am more closely related to Keith, but I think that his results are no longer at Gedmatch. Faye would be in the same bottom row as Stephen and me, but I have not added her in yet. Here is Stephen’s match with Faye:

On my Paternal side Chromosome 13, I inherited Hartley DNA and not Frazer. However, my sister Lori inherited some Frazer DNA on her Chromosome 13:

Here Lori has Hartley DNA in blue, then Frazer side in green and pink, then more Hartley hidden by the Key. Now Lori and my family are related to Stephen and Ronald more closely on the Clarke side, but more distantly on the McMaster side. I should have changed Lori’s pink matches to red. Also Emily is not related on the Clarke side. The area where Ronald and Stephen match Lori and the area where Faye matches Stephen start at about the same location.

I’ll just change Ronald and Stephen to red on Lori’s Chromosome 13 and add Faye to Lori’s map.

Also, technically, I could change the green matches for Emily and Faye, as I now know that DNA came specifically from Margaret McMaster. I note that there is something stopping the matches for Lori on the right side of Faye, Ronald and Stephen. This could be a crossover where her inherited DNA goes from Frazer to Hartley.

Emily and Faye

Gedmatch has a free uitility called People who match both kits, or 1 of 2 kits. When I run this between Emily and Faye I get a list of common matches:

Heather at the bottom of the list that I copied didn’t sound familiar. That is because she is a match on Chromosome 13 where I don’t have Frazer DNA, but my sister Lori does.

Margery is the one I have as the wiffe of Abraham McMaster. This match goes back to the 1700’s. Faye has a good match with Heather at Gedmatch:

Here is how the ThruLines look at Ancestry:

It’s a little messed up as it has James McMaster twice. Faye is under the second James for Lori’s ThruLines:

There are many more comparisons that could have been made. Here is a list of Frazer relatives I am tracking (mostly) at Gedmatch:

Summary and Conclusions

  • I could have done much more analysis on Faye’s DNA using Tier One Tools, but I would have to sign up at $10 a month.
  • Between AncestryDNA and Gedmatch, you can do a lot with your DNA test.
  • Ancestry’s ThruLines are not always perfect as they are based on imperfect trees. However, they often give confirmation of tree that you may not be sure of due to the age of the genealogy and scarceness of records.
  • I was glad to hear from Faye and find out why her family left County Roscommon
Posted on

A New Addition to the R1a Frazer BigY Tree

I wa s surprised to find a 111 STR match to our R1a Frazers of Roscommon last Summer. I wrote one Blog which wrongly supposed that Dingman’s common ancestor with our Frazers predated our common Frazer ancestor who we believe to be Archibald Frazer born in 1690 and probably lived in North Roscomon County, Ireland. Working with Frazer genealogist Joanna, we put together a tree for Dingman. I wrote another Blog on August 4, 2021.

Part of the reason (aside from the apparent genealogy) that I put Dingman in the Archibald Frazer Branch was his value of DYS710. I made a STR tree in that same Blog:

Here, I supposed that DYS710 = 33 was ancestral and that a value of 34 defined the Archibald Line and that a value of 32 defined the Frazier Line. Here are some values for DYS710 at the FTDNA R1a Project near the Frazers within a green grouping:

.The values in the boxes are Max, Mode, Minimum numbers. It looks like I went too far as the last three numbers are under an orange group.

  • 31 – 2
  • 32 – 2
  • 33 – 5
  • 34 – 6

This shows that the value of 34 appears most often, so would be the mode. However, I still like my STR tree. I believe that there is something called the rule of parsimony when building these trees. That means that you shouldn’t build these trees in a more complicated way than you have to.

Dingman and the Current R1a Roscommon Frazer BigY Block Tree

That is quite a mouthful. I am represented by my 2nd cousin once removed Paul, so I will look at the Frazer Block tree from his viewpoint:

My Previous Prediction for DIngman

In my previous Blog on DIngman, I wrote:

Assuming the chart above is correct, Dingman will be positive for FT421618 as he descends from Archibald Frazer born 1690. He will be negative for Y151390 which is in the James Frazer Line.  We don’t know if  Dingman will be positive for Y58652 even though he is from the Archibald Frazer Line

In the reference above to the chart, I meant my STR tree. It’s fun to predict how BigY testers will turn out. My prediction was right. Dingman was neither Y151390 (James Frazer Line) nor Y85652.

What Else May We Gather from the Frazer Block Tree?

One thing that I gather by the placement of the Frazier tester is that the Frazer name is old and that our Frazer name has likely come down through the ages relatively unaltered. Assuming that the line above the five Frazer testers is 1690, the connection to Frazier goes back an additional three SNPs. If we take a SNP to represent 83 years, then that would go back to the year 1441. Then there are three SNPs above Frazier. At that time, there are many different surnames that match our Frazers. However, these surnames seem to be located around Inverness in Scotland. This brings us back to around the year 1192. At that time most people only went by their first name. That means that our match with Frazier is fortunate as it could represent close to the beginning of the use by our ancestors of the Frazer surname.

One way to check my dates is by using SNP Tracker:

This is the map for the James Frazer Line. Here are some of the dates from SNP Tracker:

These are close to the dates I came up with.

How Does Dingman Fit In?

I can re-draw the genealogical chart with the SNPs added on:

Here is what I gather from this tree:

  • Although it appeard that Y85652 defined the Archibald Line of the Frazers, it only really defines the Philip Frazer or James Frazer Line (born abut 1804).
  • In this case, the Archibald Frazer Line is better defined by the STR DYS710 = 34. This STR mutation must have first appeared in Archibald Frazer born about 1715 or his son Archibald born about 1743.
  • Dingman’s line is defined by his four Private Variants. These formed in his line between John or Richard Frazer and Dingman. These could be defined if Dingman tests a close relative for the BigY. It would interesting information. However, it is probably not necessary.
  • On the James Line, R-151390 formed sometime between James Frazer born about 1720 and Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836
  • Dingman is a welcome addition to the Frazer of Roscommon BigY tree and provides the earlies branching so far on the Archibald Line of North Roscommon Frazers.

 

Posted on

My New Clarke/McMaster DNA Match at 23andMe

I get notifications from time to time from 23andMe about new DNA matches and I don’t usually know how we match up. Recently I had such a notice of a potential 3rd cousin and I did know how we match.

How Zoë and I Match by Genealogy on the Clarke Side

Zoë and I match by McMaster and I later found out Clarke. I’ll start with the Clarke side. This is the tree that I have so far of DNA relatives on my Clarke side:

Zoë descends from Catherine Clarke and William McMaster on the right side of the tree where I am. It turns out that this is an important DNA match, as I have one DNA match on that side who is Melissa. However, she tested at Ancestry which does not show detailed DNA information like 23andMe does. Zoë  tells me that Violet McMaster is a many times great grandmother to her, so I’ll build down her tree from there.

From what I can figure out this is how we connect:

So it turns out that we are third cousins, but it looks like third cousins twice removed. Our common ancestors are Thomas Clarke and Jane Spratt. When I look at my common DNA relatives with Zoë, Stephen shows up from the left side of the tree. He tested at 23andMe also. Ron from the left side of the tree shows up at MyHeritage.

These two are Zoë’s ancestors William McMaster and Catherine Clarke:

Probably taken around 1882. Reverse of picture indicates that they were engaged “about 1881” and married October 5, 1882.

How Zoë and I Match by McMaster Tree

Here is my existing McMaster DNA Tree:

This tree is larger and needs a road map. I don’t need the left side of this tree for Zoë. The left side of the tree is for a branch of the McMaster family that ended up in Canada. The down arrow is where I need to add Zoë’s ancestor William McMaster.

Zoë and I are at opposite ends of this DNA McMaster tree. We appear to be 4th cousins once removed. Our common ancestors are Fanny McMaster and James McMaster. That means that I am related to Zoë by four ancestors and three out of those four ancestors are McMasters.

Adding Zoë to My DNA Painter Profile

This is my DNA map of known matches:

This shows that I have identified 51% of the available spaces on the two copies of my chromosomes (paternal and maternal). Here is my paternal side where I match Zoë:

On this side I am 57% painted or identified. I’ve checked ahead and saw that Zoë adds new information to this map. That is probably because she represents a new relative on my family trees also.

Here is how I match Zoë at 23andMe:

We match on Chromosomes 3 and 17 and twice on Chromosome 7. the question now is which DNA goes with which pair of ancestors? Chances are slightly higher that I match Zoë by Clarke and McMaster than the second McMaster and McMaster relationship. It is also possible that each of the four DNA segments could represent one of our four common ancestors. The easiest way to identify all the DNA would be to create a new category on my DNA map called Clarke 1823 or Mcmaster 1829.

Here is how Zoë shows up on my Chromosome Map on Chromosomes 3 and 7:

On Chromosome 3, Zoë is a new match. On Chromosome 7, she overlaps with Ron. On Chromosome 3, my match with Zoë has no overlap with other matches. Here is my phased map of Chromosome 3:

This is the portion of my Chromosome I got from my Frazer grandmother shown by the red arrow above. She is the one with Clarke and McMaster ancestors. So it would make sense that I would match Zoë on the right side of the paternal copy of Chromosome 3.

On Chromosome 7, I match Zoë in two areas that are close to each other. The first segment overlaps with a match with Ron. Ron also has Clarke and McMaster Ancestry. It is my guess that that segment triangulates between Zoë, Ron and me:

One More Scenario and Another McMaster Tree

Ron is also related to Zoë and me on the McMaster side, but that brings up another McMaster tree:

I must have planned on meeting Zoë or one of her relatives as I left a space (outlined in an orange box). Here I have added in Zoë:

This connection goes back 7 generations for Zoë. So while this connection is less likely than the Clarke connection, it is still a possible connection. I have a quick fix:

I added 1764 to the possible place that this DNA could have come from. Even that designation is not totally correct as the triangulated  match with Ron could not be from the McMaster born in 1829. Even these designations are simplifications as the DNA could have come from the wives of these two McMasters and one Clarke.

Finally Chromosome 17

Zoë’s match is interesting here:

 

The place where the DNA changes from Barry to Zoe appears to indicate an old crossover from Barry. A crossover is where your DNA changes from one family to another. The simple explanation woudl be that this is a crossover from the Frazer DNA I got from Barry to the Clarke DNA that I got represented from the match with Zoë.

Here is where that split appears in my tree (see above). With the addition of Zoë’s matches:

That put me up 1% on the paternal side. Overall, I am still at 51% ‘painted’.

Summary and Conclusions

  • The ancestors that Zoë and I share belonged to the minority Church of Ireland in  Roman Catholic Ireland. They tended to marry within their faith, but that resulted in the intermarriage of lines.
  • The Clarke line was not related to McMaster as far as I know in Ireland. However, one Clarke sister married a McMaster in Boston (Zoë’s ancestors) and another Clarke sister married that McMaster’s nephew who was a Frazer (my ancestors).
  • I mapped out the different relationships in one Clarke tree and two McMaster trees
  • Due to the relationships involved, the assigning of the DNA to a patricular couple was not easy. There were a possible three couples that this DNA could represent except for the case where the DNA overlapped with Ron. In that case, the DNA could only be from a possible two couples.

 

Posted on

Looking at AncestryDNA Match Jeff on the Frazer Line

I match Jeff at AncestryDNA by a small amount of DNA (8 cM).

Ancestry shows we have a common ancestor in James Frazer going back to about 1804. Here is the maternal side of Jeff’s tree where Ancestry thinks we should match up:

There appears to be a discrpancy already as Ancestry has Phylis Bowman and Jeff’s tree has Phylis Anderson. That is apparently from this Ancestry Tree which has Phylis married to a Kenneth Anderson presumably before or after she married Keith Huckle.

Adding a Suggested Frazer to Jeff’s Tree

Ancestry suggested that Teresa Frazer was the mother of Philis Bowman, so I added her in:

There are hints for Teresa. A good one is her marriage record:

This 1921 record has lots of information on it. Now the tree looks like this:

It is tempting to accept the hints, but I won’t unless I have to.  This appears to be the family in 1901 in Kinloss, Ontario:

However, if that is the case, Susan M must be the same as Teresa or Tressia May.

John Frazer Born in Ontario

Here is John in 1881 in Kinloss, Ontario – apparently with his parents:

Here, John’s father William says he was from Scotland and his mother from Ireland. This tells me also tha John married later in life.

William Frazer

William Frazer is a critical connection in Ancestry’s common ancestor depiction. That common ancestor tree has William as the son of James Frazer born in 1819. Here are the children I have for James Frazer and Violet Frazer:

If William was born in 1819, then Violet would have been 16 at his birth. I had that this couple was married on 23 January 1828. This tells me that there is something wrong with Ancestry common ancestry tree. Nonetheless, here is an interesting story of William’s life from Findagrave.com from 1884:

Other DNA Matches to Jeff?

At this point, it would be interesting to see if others have DNA matches to Jeff. I was unable to find any with my four siblings who have tested at Ancestry. I would say that, based on no other DNA matches and problems connecting the genealogy, that something is wrong with Ancestry’s common ancestor tree.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It appears that, although I have a small DNA match to Jeff, that match is not through my ancestors James Frazer and Violet Frazer.
  • It would have saved time if I had started with James and Violet Frazer and looked at the proposed connection to William.
  • I now know more about Jeff’s ancestry than I need to know!