Category: Hartley

Posted on

Looking for Pilling Clusters at Ancestry

In this Blog, I would like to look for Pilling matches. I have a motive for this. Those who are descended just from Pilling will not be descended from Hartley. Theoretically, I could eliminate some of my matches from my Hartley ancestor search. As it is, when I look at many of my Hartley DNA matches, it seems like some of them could be Pilling relatives.

So as I think of the matches, it occurs to me that going forward in time from Mary Pilling, there would be matches that descend from Mary Pilling. However, going back from Mary Pilling, there should be no Hartley descendants that match us unless it is by coincidence. Hmmm…

Pilling Genealogy and ThruLines

I believe that my genealogy is right for Mary Pilling:

However, when I look at the ThruLines for my father’s 1st cousin Joyce, I see this:

This shows Horsfall coming from Robert. Robert died in 1835. May Pilling Hartley remarries Robert Wilkinson and has more children. I thought that the ThruLines were more messed up than they are. When I look at Joyce’s ThruLines for Mary Pilling, it looks correct:

That means that Ruth would be a great person of interest in looking at Pilling Clusters.

When I look at another of my father’s first cousins’ ThruLines, I see this:

Derek has an even larger match with Maury at 42 cM.

Maury’s Pilling Clusters

Maybe my chances of finding Pilling Clusters would be better with Maury than with Joyce.

I was thinking I should see an overall cluster, but I don’t see it.

The first group is the closest group of matches:

EB has a private tree, but according to shared matches, he is a nephew of Derek.

Cluster 2 includes two people from the Wilkinson Line:

Cluster 3

This seems to expand past the children of John Pillng born 1822 for the first three matches of this cluster. This tells me that there are two different groups, but Norman appears to be matched to both. This appears to be where the matches have gone from the known (Pilling and Wilkinson) to the unknown.

Cluster 4

Now that I have not figured out Cluster 3, I will move on to Cluster 4:

This represents the ultimate representation of Pilling clusters that I am aware of on my side’s matches. This would be one interpretation:

I was thinking that the first cluster were people who descended from Mary Pilling. However, George is a new match.

When I look at George’s shared matches, he comes out close to the Wilkinson side. Perhaps I can fit him in. George has an unlinked tree:

George’s mother is from Massachusetts. Perhaps that is a clue.

I don’t know if I have a better Pilling DNA tree, but this one looks like it could use some updating – especially on the Wilkinson side:

I’ll add George to my tree as a floating tree.

I’ll go with the findagrave hint at Ancestry for Barbara – Geoge’s mother:

In 1950 George Nelson is a Taxi Driver living in New Bedford:

His sister Barbara A Nelson is listed in the same household on the next page:

The house is in the Sassaquin neighborhood of New Bedford:

Here is Barbara in one tree at Ancestry:

That same tree has father George Nelson dying before 1930. However, if that is the case, how can he be the father of Barbara Ann Nelson born 1931? This appears to indicate that George died in 1930:

Here is the family in 1940, but where is Barbara? She should have been about 8 or 9 at the time.

It appears that it is not easy for me to trace this match back to Wilkinson and Pilling.

More on William Wilkinson

Shared matches seem to indicate that the George match above could be a 2nd cousin to Richard and Paul:

That could mean that they both descend from William Wilkinson born in 1879. Here is Willia a death certificate for Wilkinson in 1936:

At the time, he was living at Lindsey Street, New Bedford:

Lindsey runs between North Street and Court Street. That confirms that this must be William in the 1930 Census:

According to Paul’s Tree at Ancestry, William had a second wife:

Back to the Clusters

George is somehow connected to the Wilkinson side, but I do not know how exactly. The next cluster is from from Ann Hartley. She was the daughter of Greenwood Hartley who was the son of Mary Pilling.

The Third Cluster

  1. Elliot
  2. Talia
  3. Jane
  4. Catherine

Jane and Catherine are in the order of 1st cousins to Maurey.

They descend from James Hartley. Cluster 2 descend from James’ sister Ann Hartley Burrows.

Elliot and Talia

Elliot’s family appears to be from Tasmania:

As Elliot’s tree only goes to about the year 1900, it would take quite a bit of work to trace it back to the Pilling family.

Cluster 4

The last person in the last cluster has this possible connection:

Victoria fits in with the theory that these should be Pilling clusters. However, the tree goes back quite far. The further a tree goes back, there are more possible ways that something could have gone wrong. Here is the earliest Howorth that Victoria has:

The information looks a little vague. I don’t mind trying a quick tree to see what I get. It looks like I already checked this out in 2019:

I have Edmund’s son Edmund born in Bacup. This is interesting as this is where the Emmet side of family lived. After a quick look at the ThruLines, I do not see an easy connection.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Looking at the Pilling Clusters gave me a different perspective on this family and their descendants
  • The largest result gave me four clusters. These were: Pilling/Wilkinson, Descendants of Ann Hartley Burrows, descendants of James Hartley her brother and a fourth presumably earlier group of Pillings.
  • My assumption was that I would get a list of Pilling descendants that I could eliminate from my list of earlier Hartley descendants. It did not seem to work out that way and/or I did not look at a list to subtract them from
  • I found an interesting match to the Wilkinson line, but could not figure out how he is connected.

 

Posted on

Hartley Genealogy and Playing with Ancestry’s Custom Clusters

Quite a while back, I took a sample from my father’s cousin to get a better representative sample of Hartley DNA. I will look at Joyce’s custom clusters. In the past, I have built a Hartley/Bracewell Tree on the assumption that that could be the correct genealogy:

The tree looks promising in that it is large, but I have trouble proving the genealogy. The part that is proved is on the Burrows > Rasmussin Line:

This gets the common ancestors back to Hartley and Emmet. The common matches also filter out the large number of Snell relatives. Kristen has a good match to Joyce, so would be a good pick for custom clusters:

A Custom Cluster between Joyce and Kristen

There are 4 small clusters. The first cluster:

This has Kristen and Emily who have been identified, but also Jennifer who I have been unable to place. The next cluster:

Zachary and Rachael are related to Jennifer. They are niece and nephew. I do see from previous correspondence that Jennifer’s father was John Williams:

Jennifer’s father or grandfather could be the John B Williams born in 1906. Here is the family in 1906 in Fall River:

But perhaps that is the wrong family. This is John A. Here is John B. Williams in 1940:

This could be the same family if John Williams remarried. This is John Burroughs Williams in October, 1940:

Here is 291 Maple Street:

Earlier in the year, the family lived here:

I won’t clear up where Jennifer fits in, but it is clear it is part of the Williams’ family.

Here is the next Cluster:

Kristen is the match in common with the others.  Ruth fits in on the Pilling family:

Mary was a single mother, so that means I do not know who the father of John Pilling was. Perhaps that adds some uncertainty to the Cluster. [Actually, it would not, as I do not desend from the unknown father of John Pilling.]

Here is the last cluster:

I guess that Emily down and to the right is a Pilling Cluster. That means that Sheryl up and to the left could be a Hartley Cluster. Interestingly, Sheryl’s match shows this:

In this Blog, I questioned the connetion shown above. That leaves me with confusing DNA and confusing genealogy.

Maurey and Kristen

Another of my father’s cousins has tested his DNA at Ancestry. I can try the same shared clusters with Kristen as I did for Joyce. This resulted in three clusters. I’ll skip to the third:

Derek and Ruth are on the Pilling Line. Jane and Catherine are related on the more recent Hartley/Snell Lines.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Questions on Jennifer’s ancestry lead me to previous enquiries which revealed that Jennifer is the daughter of John Williams. However, is this the John born in 1906? There is some confusion on the genealogy in that line.
  • I have questions on Hartley genealogy and DNA. How do the Pilling and
    Emmet Lines fit in as well as Hartleys.
  • There are other lines in there that should fit in but cannot be placed.
  • Overall, it is helpful to observe to observe the arrangement of families in the clusters. This may result in some fresh thinking on the problems in the genealogy.

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Ancestry Clusters

Ancestry Clusters is a new feature for those who have Pro Tools. According to Ancestry:

DNA matches sharing between 65 and 1300 cM of DNA are grouped into grids as shown below (if you have more than 100 clustered matches, you will not see this grid view). Each group or cluster represents DNA matches that are shared with each other, and represent a branch of your family tree. 

My Clusters

I have four Clusters:

The large one is my Hartley side Cluster. My great-grandparents had 13 children, so I have a lot of relatives in that one. The next three Clusters are on my mother’s side.

I have left out the names on the left side of the clusters. RB is my first cousin Rusty. I know that the purple cluster is my mother’s Rathfelder side. That is due to CW and DD who are Rathfelder cousins from England. That leaves the orange and dark grey clusters. These are Nicholson or Lentz.

These clusters did not pick up my Frazer ancestors. Additionally, it is difficult to tell which cluster is Nicholson and which is Lentz.

My Mother’s Clusters

My mother only has maternal clusters.

This is odd as my own clusters picked up her paternal Rathfelder side and my mom’s clusters did not pick that up.

BL is in the coral colored cluster. He has Nicholson only ancestry. My guess is that the orange cluster is Lentz (but includes Nicholson). I further suppose that the coral and purple clusters represent Nicholson but further break it down between Nicholson and Ellis:

However, as the matches are both Nicholson and Ellis through Nicholson, it is not possible to tell which matches are more Ellis versus more Nicholson. Furthermore, it appears that all the orange Lentz matches have Nicholson in their heritage also.

My Father’s Cousin Joyce

This is a more detailed view of my large orange cluster.

I only show Joyce’s maternal side as that is the Hartley side where I am related to her. Here is the genealogy:

One theory is that the four clusters could represent Hartley, Emmet, Snell and Bradford. I do know that the blue cluster represents Snell. Here is CH from that Cluster:

Making an Educated Guess for Joyce’s’ First Three Maternal Clusters

Here is how Joyce is related to some of the Bradford descendants:

Joyce has a higher match to Pat as she is a Hartley also. Here is Pat  in Joyce’s second cluster:

Therefor, my assumption is that the second cluster favors Bradford. I would not like to guess about the other two clusters. However, I do know that I have a lot of matches to Hathaway descendants.

My Sister Heidi’s Clusters

Where I have four clusters, my sister Heidi has 6. The first two are paternal and the last 4 are maternal. The paternal clusters are on the 2nd cousin level. I can only assume that these are Hartley and Snell clusters, but I cannot tell which is which.

Heidi’s Maternal Clusters

Here is what I think:

  • Purple is clearly Rathfelder
  • Teal is Nicholson or perhaps Ellis
  • Red and blue are either Lentz or Nicholson

My Brother Jon’s Clusters

Jon’s Clusters are halfway between mine and my sister Heidi’s. The first match in the second cluster has Frazer ancestry as she is Aimee, a first cousin once removed. But because the other matches are from the Hartley side, this must be a Hartley paternal cluster. The purple cluster is Rathfelder. Blue is Nicholson and pink is Lentz/Nicholson.

Sister Lori’s Clusters

All Clusters are listed from largest to smallest. Lori’s largest and smallest cluster are both paternal and the other three are maternal. Aimee is is the first match in the fifth cluster. My assumption is that this Cluster is the first Frazer Cluster.

Loris’s Frazer Cluster

Here are the details from the Cluster:

Although John does not have a searchable tree, I have figured out who is on the Frazer tree.

Lori is John’s second cousin once removed. Aimee is John’s second cousin twice removed.  I need to add Aimee to my chart as she is an important match:

Matthew

That leaves Matthew in the Frazer Cluster. Shared matches shows that he is related on the Hubert Frazer Line:

John’s father was born in 1919, so my guess is that he is Matthew’s granduncle.

I’ll add Matthew to my Ancestry Tree as a floating tree. Here is what Matthew has:

Matthew has followed his paternal grandmother’s line. I assume that the connection is not on that line. I found this information at Ancestry:

From an obituary index, I see that Matthew’s mother was a Frazer. that means I am getting close to figuring out where Matthew fits in.

Next, I look in my tree and find a perso with the same name as Matthew’s mother. I’ll take that to be the same person. Here is tree I already have for Matthew’s mother:

I merged the two people that I have which should also add Matthew to my tree. Next, I need to add Matthew to my Frazer DNA Tree.

This now describes Lori’s smallest cluster. It turns out I already had MatthewI on my Frazer DNA tree. It also turns out that John and Matthew are first cousins once removed.

My Sister Sharon’s Clusters

Sharon has three simple clusters:

  1. Hartley
  2. Lentz/Nicholson
  3. Rathfelder

My Daughter’s Clusters

These would make more sense if they were sorted by Paternal and Maternal instead of by size. When I look at the names, I see that Clusters 1 and three are paternal and 2 and 4 are maternal. Cluster 1 is Hartley and Cluster 3 is Lentz/Nicholson.

My daughter’s mother was a Jarek, so that would account for Clusters 2 and 4. Here is Heather’s mother’s tree:

Here are my daughter’s maternal clusters:

The second cluster has a match to a man named Matusik. His common ancestor with my daughter is Jarek/Ras. I would say that the first cluster represents Jarek/Wozniak and the second could represent a generation old: Jarek/Ras.

My Son’s Clusters

I suspect they should be similar.

The difference is that JJ also has some Rathfelder mixed in with his Lentz/Nicholson in Cluster #3. That explains the gap in matches in Cluster #3 as the Rathfelders and Lentz families are not related. Also JJ has a Snell not related to Hartley in Cluster #1. JJ’s match with Matusik is in Cluster #3 indicating an older connection to the Jarek line.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Ancestry has a new Cluster feature which is at a basic level of 65 cM for now. At this level there should be no surprises. These will be the lines with the best level of DNA matches
  • My sister Lori had the only Frazer Cluster, so she should be the best person to check for Frazer matches.
  • It is interesting how the clusters represent some lines well and others not at all well. I assume that this has to do with the number of desendants there is in a given line and how many of those descendants took DNA tests at Ancestry.

 

Posted on

Looking for Parents for Robert Hartley born in Colne Parish 1803-1804: Part 2

A few Blogs ago, I had shown the possible births of my ancestor Robert Hartley:

  1. Betty was my choice on my Hartley web page. I had also guessed that Betty Baldwin was the Betty. On the plus side the couple was from Trawden. However, the Betty name did not get passed down in the family. Perhaps because she died young?
  2. This Robert lived in Reedy Moor.

The faint red arrow near the word ‘Tunnel’ is where Reedy Moor Line. This is a little way from Trawden. However, the name Ann comes down in the family as the only daughter of Robert Hartley

3. Bough Gap is in an area near Trawden.

In order to give this Robert a chance, I will have to change his birth date and place in my Ancestry Tree. This is what I currently have:

I was a little unsure as to how to enter Bough Gap as it appearst to be part of Winewall which is part of Trawden.

Next, I wait to see if any ThruLines appear. My mistake in my earlier Blog, was that I did not change the birth of Robert Hartley on my family tree. I also need to remove the old birth reference that I had:

Re-Playing Out the James and Mary Scenario

Here are potential marriages for James Hartley and Mary

  • Mary Holmes would be around 44 when she had Robert if she was 20 when she married
  • The James Mary Stansfield married was a weaver. However, I suppose there were many Hartley weavers
  • The James that Mary Berry married was a widower
  • A witness for the marriage of Mary Robinson was John Shackleton. Mary Pilling’s mother was a Shackleton. Mary Pilling’s grandfather was named John Shackleton.

Based on the above, I am leaning toward Mary Robinson in this scenario. Here are some baptisms for Mary Robinson:

None of these place names sound familiar. Here is Barrowford:

I must say that ‘ye Call’ and other locations sound mysterious, but I do not know where that is.

Bough Gap Robert, Son of James and Mary Hartley

I think I now have what I was trying to achieve in my previous Blog:

It looks like it took a while to baptize this Robert. He was born in May and baptized in July:

I have left Robert’s mother vagues in my Tree as just Mary and the father is James Hartley.

ThruLines Compared

I can only look at ThruLines for DNA testers that I have access to. An important testers is my father’s cousin Joyce.

Joyce has only one ThruLine for Helen and that is through William who I supposed would be a son of James and Betty, so that doesn’t really count.

However another of my father’s cousins who has a tree showing Betty Baldwin as the mother of Robert fares no better:

Here the extra Robert Hartley Line should be a Pilling Line.

MM’s ThruLines do better a generation earlier where the tree has John Hartley as the father of James:

Here MM has four ThruLines. This could mean that:

  • John is right, but Betty Baldwin is wrong
  • James and Betty Baldwin had few children
  • Going back a generation gives the chance of there being more Hartleys to have ThruLines for even though they are wrong.

The other two ThruLies are Brian and Sue:

I like the chances of John Hartley being a Hartley ancestor based on the DNA matches of my father’s cousin Maury.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Due to the number of Robert Hartleys from the area of Trawden around the birth of my ancestor Robert Hartley in about 1803, it is difficult to try to find out which Robert is which.
  • My father’s cousin Maury’s DNA administered by his daughter has a genealogy which includes John Hartley and Ann or Anna Bracewell.
  • This couple appears to have a good series of DNA matches.
  • If this John Hartley is indeed my ancestor and had a large family, that could account for the number of DNA matches.
  • If this John had a son James who had a small family or a smaller number of descendants who had their DNA tested, this could account for a smaller number of descendant DNA matches.
  • It may make sense to try to start with John Hartley and Anna Bracewell as the grandparents of Robert Hartley and try to fill in the middle with a likely son James being the father of Robert Hartley.

 

Posted on

Mawdsley, Holland and Hartley YDNA

I recently got an email that there was a new YDNA BigY test on the Mawdsley Line. From previous testing it would appear that Mawdsley broke off from Hartley not too long before the appearance of surnames in England. Here is the new test from my perspective on the Block Tree:

Going from right to left would be more chronological.

  • Smith is in the oldest group and has no matches
  • A11132 is empty but all those below it are A11132 historically speaking.
  • Holland and Mawdsely are a branch under A11132 called R-FTB95522.
  • R-A11134 – There are three Hartleys under this branch with no further branching. My assumption that all that are under A11134 are Hartleys and this SNP came out after the advent of the Hartley surname.
  • R-FTE2655 – There are two Channon testers under this branch. This name was historically associated with the Nutter surname. However, the assumption is that before Nutter the surname should have been Hartley.
  • R-A16717 – This SNP is associated with an early Quaker Hartley branch that fled religious persecution around the year 1700 and reloacted to Pennsylvania. This branch appears to have the oldest verified genealogy of the Hartley Branches that are on this Block Tree.
  • R-FT225247 – This branch contains the largest number of SNPs. My brother and I are in this branch.

Why is This Test Important to the Hartley Branch?

If I am right, then the boundary between Mawdsley/Holland and Hartley should start the dating for when the Hartleys began as a surname. Here is the Time Tree:

This still needs updating as it shows Mawdsley and Holland under A11132. A11132 is dated on this tree at around 1163 CE.

How Old is R-FTB95522?

When I was notified of the new SNP, there was no date on FTDNA or SNP Tracker. I tried FTDNA and the web site was not working well. I see this from SNP Tracker:

Here are some details from SNP Tracker:

Where the date represents the tMRCA date. That means that the common ancestor between Hartley and Mawdsley/Holland is around the year 1160. To put that into perspective, the Magna Carta was signed in the year 1215. The orange color represents the Medieval Period. However, a quick look at the the internet suggests that the Medieval Period could have ended around 1500. At any rate, this should surely be within the period of surnames in England. The problem is that the two testers have different names: Mawdsley and Holland. As I am not familiar with these two genealogies, I am not sure which name may be more likely for the common ancestor. SNP Tracker further shows 12 testers under A11132 which corresponds to the BigY testers listed at FTDNA.

FTDNA is working better now and I see this note on the Match Tree feature:

More from FTDNA

When FTDNA was not working right, I could not find the Private Variants. Now they are back:

The greenish block shows that Private Variants. Mawdsley and Holland have an average of 7 private variants which suggests that their connection could be quite old. Above, from SNP Tracker, the tMRCA for FTB95522 is the year 1590. Visually, the Private SNPs from Mawdsley/Holland fit in between the long list of SNPs from my branch and the short list of SNPs directly to the left of Mawdsley/Holland. I still believe that A11134 and below are all Hartley and that FTB95522 is the split for non-Hartleys. In other words, Hartley and Mawdsley/Holland appear to have a common ancestor which predates the advent of surnames.

Another point from the Block tree above: FTB95522 did not split off the 8 SNP block which is called A11132. FTB95522 was apparently a private Variant of Mawdsley until Holland tested and that became their new Branch of the YDNA tree of mankind. Also, Mawdsley was previously A11132 which is now vacant. His tMCRA has moved, according to SNP Tracker, from 1160 to 1590.

Some Variant Information

Holland is my 10th match out of 14:

I do not know if 5/20/2025 was when the Holland BigY test finalized. If so, it has taken a while to get the new SNP onto the FTDNA Time Tree. Holland and I have 23 non-matching Variants.

Nine of the non-matching variants are numbers, so are likely to be the private variants for Holland.

These are the SNPs under A11134:

That appears to account for two of the non-matching variants:

Here are the 7 SNPs my brother and I have:

This accounts for 6 non-matching variants:

I should have included A11136, so that accounts for all 7 of the SNPs in the branch my brother and I are in.

That means that I have not accounted for the following non-matching variants:

A11136 should not be on the list.

FGC6800

This appears to be a SNP that my brother and I have. This is how it appears at YBrowse:

This appears to be under I2a rather than R where I am, so there is some confusion about this SNP:

I would think that this should be given another name for my branch of the YDNA tree, but I’m not in charge of these things.

BY26739

I also show this as a non-matching variant between myself and my brother. That means that it is likely I have this variant and my brother does not, making it a new variant. Here is what YBrowse shows:

This has a date of 2018. It is unclear where this appears on the YDNA tree. There is also a strand. I do not know what a strand means. I ordered my BigY500 in 2016 and my BigY700 in 2019. So the date of this SNP does not match up with my two BigY dates.

BY28775

It appears that only Holland has this SNP:

YBrowse results are similar to the previoius SNP I looked at:

FT27444

This is a SNP that I have, but the reads were low quality.

When I check Mawdsley for FT27444, there are some positive reads, negative ones and lower quality reads. When I check Mawdsley for this SNP, the readings seem to be inconclusive:

FTB95522

This SNP is about three years old:

This actually was accounted for as this is the new Branch for Mawdsley and Holland. This was formerly a private SNP of Mawdsley and when Holland tested, it formed a new group.

FTDNA Update

A date of 1386 is earlier than the estimate at SNP Tracker of 1590. If SNP tracker is right, then it is likely that Mawdsley and Holland descend from the same surname. If FTDNA is right, then the Mawdsley and Holland surnames could be on separate parallel tracks. I prefer the FTDNA rendition as it gives the most recent common ancestor of Holland and Mawdsley as before A11134 which I believe to be reserved for Hartleys. Here are some names and dates:

Mawdsley/Holland represents the first non-Hartley branch under A11132:

 

It appears the the new test has pushed back A11132 a little. Here is a screen shot from a Blog I wrote last February:

Summary and Conclusions

  • The new Holland BigY is good for Mawdsley as it gives the two a new Haplogroup
  • Before we suspected that Mawdsley was pre-Hartley. This new test further supports that.
  • The new test pushes back A11132 by 75 years.
  • The new test aslo pushes back the Hartley SNP of A11134 by 10 years.
  • I also looked at some of the non-matching variants between myself and Holland.

 

 

 

 

Posted on

A Sketch of Ann Hartley Cockrill Born 1835

I have not looked into the life of Ann Hartley Cockrill for some time. This is what I have on my Hartley Web Page:

Sadly, Ann’s father Robert dies before she is born.

Here is the burial record for her father Robert:

Interestingly, at the time of Ann’s birth her father’s occupation is given as weaver even though he was already dead. Ann may have been named for Mary Pilling’s mother Nancy or possibly from Robert’s mother. However, Robert’s mother has not yet been nailed down.

In 1837, Mary Pilling Hartley and her son John get baptized at the Weslyan Weslyan Chapel in Trawden:

Greenwood and Ann were been baptized at the Colne Church, so no need for them to be re-baptized in 1837. I believe that the Weslyan Chapel is also known as Skipton Road Weslyan Methodist:

This photo is from Genuki:

A little less than 2 years later, Mary Pilling Hartley marries Robert Wilkinson, a widower.

This results in a large blended family as Mary had a child before marrying Robert Hartley. Here is the 1841 Census for Trawden:

As the Census was held on June 6, Ann would not have technically been 6 yet. This shows that Ann had a half sister Mary who was her same age. At this point, Mary Pilling Hartley Wilkinson has 5 children of her own and 5 step children. Here is Hollin Hall where the blended family lived from a book by Jack Greenwood:

In 1851, 10 years later, the family is living at Underbank, Bacup:

Ann and her older brother Greenwood were power loom weavers as was their step father Robert Wilkinson.

Now it is time for Ann Hartley to get married. I have that she married at Christ Church Bacup on 26 June 1858. The couple were living at Underbank, Bacup in 1861:

Ann has two sons:

Joseph is baptized at Bacup, Wesley Place Methodist Chapel:

I see his birth place as Scarbottom also known as Scar End Hey. This location appears to be in Weir:

This is just North of Underbank:

Underbank is below Broad Clough on the right side of the red road which runs North and South.

In 1873, a second son is born:

He carries the name of Ann’s brother who has left for Massachusetts with his family about 4 years prior to this time. Here is where the Church was:

Here is the family in 1881:

The Census appears to say they live at Newline. That must be this street:

Here is some specific burial information for Ann:

When I look up Bacup Cemetery:

This could be a future destination:

I assume that Ann would be in the Church of England Section D. However, the record above mentions Unconsecrated Ground, so perhaps she was in General D. According to the internet:

People paying for 1st and 2nd class areas for their burial were able to choose the specific plot they wanted. The 3rd class had no choice where they were allocated. There are usually fewer headstones in the third class area because people could not afford to pay for them.

So there may not be much to see if I were to visit there.

Life After Ann for the Cockrill Family and an Ulterior Motive

The ulterior motive is that it would be nice to find a descendant of Ann Hartley Cockrill who has tested for DNA.  In the light of this motive, I did a search for Elijah Cockrill in Ancestry trees. I found this one which was interesting:

This tree was for Roland and he shows Cockerell on his maternal side. However, I do not have a record of Elijah and Ann having a daughter born. This Alice would have been born 4 years before the couple married and does not show up on the Census. Although there are 25 trees with Elijah Cockrill, some appear wrong, for people I already know about who are related in other ways (such as Pilling only) or they have Elijah on collateral lines.

Elijah Cockrill After Ann

Here is Elijah in 1891:

Elijah has a new wife, Mary from Stockport in Chesire. The first three in the family are listed as cotton weavers and William is a woolen weaver. They are living on Westmoreland Street in Great and Little Marsden, Nelson, Lancashire. Here is what Google shows for that location if I have it right:

The door on the right is 37, so I assume that #35 is to the left of that door.

This was not far from Colne and Trawden.

This marriage record must be correct:

This appears to say that Elijah’s father was a gentleman. I do not think that is correct. Here is Elijah’s burial record:

He apparently died at the location in the Google Map Photo above and was buried at the same Section and number as his former wife Ann Hartley.

I see also his name is spelled a bit differently in the burial record.

Joseph Cockrill Born 1870

Here is a summary of his life up to his marriage:

Here are the couple on Gordon Road, Nelson in 1901:

Perhaps coincidentally, in the previous listing is a John Wilkinson from Trawden. Josesph is on 13 Gordon Road, not far from Westmoreland Street:

This is Gordon Road in current times:

I can fill this out a bit:

The 1921 Census reveals a problem:

Ada has passed away and Joseph and Alec are living with Ada’s brother. I could not find a 41 Whitchall Street in Nelson, but there is a listing for Whitehall Street:

It looks like both Joseph and his brother were in the wood business, but also may have been out of work. Interestingly, Joseph had worked for H Hartley.

Here is Joseph in 1939:

I think this is Henley to the West of London:

Alec Llewellyn Cockrill Born 1907

I have not found any evidence that Alec had any children.

He appears to be living with one of his wife’s relatives in 1939:

William Greenwood Cockrill Born 1873

Ann perhaps missed her brother Greenwood who had been gone for 4 years at this time. William had a shorter life than Alec:

Here is where William passed away in 1929:

William has two children, so more chances of descendants. I wonder if there is any significance in the name William. Traditionally, the mother’s second son could reflect her father’s heritage. Elijah’s father was William, so that name was probably for Elijah’s father and Greenwood for Ann’s paternal side. Which makes me wonder where the first born Joseph’s name came from.

Tom Widdup Cockrill Born 1905

Here is a nice photo from Ancestry:

Here is the 1921 Census:

One tree I found shows this:

Tom has three daughters who marry and have offspring. This appears to be a good place to look for DNA matches.

Vesta Irene Cockrill Born 1909

From what little information I have, it appears that Vesta ended up in Australia:

She apparently marries Harold Howarth:

Here father has passed away but her brother Tom is a witness.

In 1939, Harold is a tobaccanist dealer in Rochdale, Lancashire:

Harold dies in 1951:

It is unclear why Vesta moves to Australia. Perhaps because of her son? Here is Vesta in 1977:

Frank is possibly a son?

Here is Rockingham near Perth in Western Australia:

Summary and Conclusions

  • I recommend researching collateral lines. It is interesting in itself, but may also lead to interesting DNA matches.
  • Ann Hartley born 1835 does not appeaer to have many descendants. I have not found any that have taken a DNA test. Those descendants would probably be 4th cousins to me.
  • I found it interesting that Ann Hartley’s husband remarries, but then is buried where Ann was buried in Bacup. It would be nice to visit the Cemetery if I ever get a chance.

 

Posted on

Looking for Parents for Robert Hartley born in Colne Parish 1803-1804

In my last Blog, I was looking at Mary Heap as a possible mother for Robert Hartley born in Colne Parish about 1803-1804. I realized that she was married too early to be a good candidate.

Here is the possible birth for my ancestor Robert Hartley:

This is the possible marriage of the couple above:

I see that I have added possiblilty to possibility, but I have not many choices here. The question is, why would James have married Mary Berry from the Parish of Kildwick?

Joyce and Kildwick

When I choose my father cousin Joyce’s maternal matches and search for ancestors from Kildwick, I get about 68 matches. This seems unusual to me. According to Wickipedia, Kildwick had a population of  194 in 2011. As a comparison, I will check to see how many matches Joyce has with ancestral connections to Trawden. Joyces has 65 matches on her maternal side. However, that includes a lot of closer relatives who know they have Robert Hartley in their ancestry from Trawden. Also Trawden had a 2011 population of 2,765 which is over 10 times that of Kildwick. Either this is a huge coincidence or I may have Kildwick ancestors. However, the actuala Parish of Kildwick was much larger. According to Wikipedia:

Ancient Kildwick Parish was unusually large for it included the townships of Kildwick, Bradley Both, Cononley, Cowling, Holden, Eastburn, Farnhill, Glusburn, Ikornshaw, Silsden, Steeton, Sutton and Stirton and Thorlby.

Here is a map, though it is quite busy:

Genuki further supplies this information:

In 1822, the following places were in
the Parish of Kildwick:

“BRUNTHWAITE, in the township of Silsden, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 5 miles N. of Keighley, 8 from Skipton.”

“CARR HEAD, (the seat of Richard Bradley Wainman, Esq.) in the township of Cowling, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 5 miles from Colne, (Lanc.) 6 from Skipton.”

“CONONLEY, in the township of Farnhill with Cononley, and parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; (Cononley Hall, the seat of John Swires, Esq.) 3 miles S. of Skipton, 6½ from Keighley, 10 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. included in Farnhill.”

“COWLING, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; 5 miles NE. of Colne, (Lancs.) 6 from Skipton, 8 from Keighley. Pop. 1,870.”

“CRINGLES, a hamlet in the township of Silsden, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 5 miles from Skipton and Keighley.”

“CROSSHILLS, in the township of Glusburn, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 5 miles from Keighley and Skipton, 8 from Colne, (Lanc.)”

“EASTBURN, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s Fee; 4 miles NW. of Keighley, 5¾ from Skipton, 10 from Colne. Pop. included in Steeton.”

“EDEN, a hamlet in the township of Sutton in Craven, and parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe; 4 miles from Keighley.”

“FARNHILL, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; 4 miles S. of Skipton, 5½ from Keighley. Pop. including Cononley, 1,350, which being united, form a township.”

“GLUSBURN, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; 5 miles S. of Skipton, 5½ from Keighley, 8 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. 787.”

“HIGH BRADLEY, a hamlet in the townships of Bradleys both, and parish of Kildwick, and liberty of Cliffords-Fee; 3 miles from Skipton. Pop. included in lower Bradley.”

“ICKORNSHAW, (or Cornshaw) in the township of Cowling, and parish of Kildwick, east-division and liberty of Staincliffe; 4 miles from Colne, (Lanc.) 7 from Skipton, 5 from Keighley.”

“KILDWICK GRANGE, a hamlet in the township and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe, 5 miles from Keighley.”

“LOW BRADLEY, in the township of Upper and Lower Bradley, and parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; 3½ miles from Skipton, 6½ from Keighley, 12 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. including Upper Bradley, 506, which being united, form the township usually denominated Bradleys both.”

“MALSIS HALL, a single house in the township of Glusburn, and parish of Kildwick, 5½ miles S. of Skipton and 5 from Keighley.

This was formerly the seat of a family of the name of Copley, and according to Whitaker’s Craven, was considered as the Manor house of Sutton, “for, by inquisition taken 34 Henry VIII. it was found that Alvary Copley was seized of the Manor of Sutton, or Malseyes, held of William Vavasour, Esq. as of his Manor of Addingham.” It is now the residence of Mr. William Spencer.”

“SILSDEN, (and Silsden Moor) in the parish of Kildwick, east-division and liberty of Staincliffe; 4 miles from Keighley, 7 from Skipton, 12 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. 1,904. The Church is a perpetual curacy, dedicated to St. James, in the deanry of Craven, value, p.r. !£86. Patron, the Earl of Thanet.”

“SILSDEN MOOR, a hamlet in the township of Silsden, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 4 miles from Skipton.”

“STEETON, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division and liberty of Staincliffe; (Steeton Hall, the seat of William Sugden, Esq.) 2 miles NW. of Keighley, 7 from Skipton, 11 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. including Eastburn, 753 which being united, form a township.”

“STONE GAPPE, a single house in the township of Glusburn, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 4½ miles S. of Skipton.”

“STOTT HILL, a hamlet in the township of Cowling, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 5 miles from Colne, (Lanc.)”

“SUTTON IN CRAVEN, in the parish of Kildwick, east-division of Staincliffe, liberty of Clifford’s-Fee; 5 miles NW. of Keighley and Skipton, 9 from Colne, (Lanc.) Pop. 1,092.”

“SWARTHA, (or Swarthey) a hamlet in the township of Silsden, and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 4½ miles N. of Keighley.”

“TOM’S CROSS, in the parish of Kildwick, and wapentake and liberty of Staincliffe; 4 miles NE. of Colne.”

“WOODSIDE, scattered houses in the township and parish of Kildwick, liberty of Staincliffe; 4½ miles from Keighley, 4 miles S. of Skipton.”

I copy this information as it gives the distance from Colne for some of these places.

Here are the top five matches:

Jennifer and R.M. must be related as their trees are the same length. When I check shared matches, R.M. is Jennifer’s daughter. Here is Jennifer’s tree:

Jennifer shows as a second cousin to Jenny in shared matches. Here is Jenny’s tree:

This should narrow down where to look. Further, I See from Jennifer’s tree taht CHarles Bell and Sarah Jones are from Yorkshire. Here are more names along that line from Jennifer’s tree:

Further, the Bell and Caygill lines are the ones in Yorkshire.

Goodby Mary Heap; Hello Mary Berry

I will replace Mary Heap with Mary Berry in my Ancestry Tree, to see if anything shows up on DNA matches:

I gave her a birth date of 1775. That would put her at about 26 when she married James Hartley, widower. There was a Mary Berry born in Colne and baptized in March that year:

This appears to be the best gues for Mary’s birth.

Summary and Conclusions

  • When you don’t know who your ancestors are, you have to make many guesses to see which guesses are most likely
  • I assumed that the parents of my ancestor Robert Hartley were James and Mary of Bough Gap, Colne Parish Lancashire
  • I further assumed that the Mary who married James Hartley was a Mary Berry from Kildwick Parish, Yorkshire, not far from Colne
  • A check of my father’s cousin Joyce’s matches revealsed that many of them had ancestry from Kildwick.
  • The closest match had a very large tree but no Berry names from that area in her ancestry.
  • I have put Mary Berry into my tree, to see if there are many or any DNA matches that show up.
  • Although I am skeptical that Mary Berry is the right ancestor, I think I have a fairly good procedure to check on potential ancestors. That is, whether there are many DNA matches on the ThruLines.

 

 

 

 

Posted on

More Hartley ThruLines

I need to modify my Hartley genealogical tree. My earliest verified ancestor was the widower Robert Hartley who married Mary Pilling, a single mother:

 

This marriage was in 1830. However, finding the father of Robert Hartley has proved to be difficult.

ThruLines Gone Wrong

When I took out my best guess for Robert Hartley’s father, ThruLines or Ancestry added in Moses Wilkinson as the father:

I am quite sure that this does not make sense as Mary Pilling married a Robert Wilkinson after Robert Hartley died. I have that Mary’s second husband Robert Wilkinson had Moses Wilinson and Jane Shaw as his parents.

Adding Robert’s Father Back In

My idea is to add just a father in at this point. Here is Robert Hartley’s burial record:

The best information I have is that Robert was 31 years old when he died in 1835. That means that he could have been born in 1804 or 1803 after August 6th. There were four Robert Hartleys born in Colne Parish in 1803-1804:

All fathers of these Roberts were named James Hartley. That means that I can a great degree of confidence say that Robert’s father was James Hartley. In addition, all these James Hartleys were weavers. I’ll just add in James Hartley as a father to Robert and see what sorts out with the ThruLines.

It may take a while for the ThruLines to recalculate. This is what it looks like now:

Robert Wilkinson was taken out, James Hartley has not been put back in. But because I did not pick a spouse for James Hartley, Jane Shaw is still showing up. I suppose that it would make sense that the Wilkinson family would show up, because I am related to the Wilkinson family – but only because Robert Wilkinson married my ancestor Mary Pilling.

It has now been a few days since I added in James Hartley and now have this:

James has been added but no descendants are connected. Also, ThruLines seems to preferentially chosen Jane Shaw as a potential ancestor.

My Father’s Cousin’s ThruLines

My second cousin has tested her father who is my father’s first cousin. She has a different tree than I have and has these ThruLines:

She has chosen James Hartley and Betty Baldwin as parents of Robert Hartley. It is possible that James and Mary of Bough Gap may be a better choice. Here is a map of Bough Gap and Bough Gap Mill from about 1844:

Also, from a previous Blog, I believe that Robert Hartley’s first wife was Barbara or Barbary Heaton who died in Well Head. I believe that Well Head was in Winewall.

Robert Hartley and Mary

This next step is to find a Robert Hartley who married a Mary:

Here, I have another 4 choices. Unfortunately, a location is not given for these couples other than the Chapelry of Colne. Assuming the couple married in Colne, Mary would have been 24, 30, 32 or 44 when giving birth to Robert.

Here are some children born to James and Mary Hartley:

More were born in Gilbert Clough, but I do not know where this is.

Gilford/Gilbert/Guildford Clough

There appears to be a great amount of confusion as to the spelling of this place. Here is part of a helpful detailed walking tour description from Wycoller to Trawden:

After taking in my fill of comprehensive views from Lad Law I began my descent by following a good path on Bedding Hill Moor towards the Trawden Valley. I was drawn to look at Upper Coldwell Reservoir and Lower Coldwell Reservoir below to my left. Further west I could see the east of Burnley but these views disappeared as I descended further off the moor and were gone completely by the time I reached the first discoveries of Trawden Brook at Gilford Clough. The moor was now behind me as I followed upland pasture in the direction of Hollin Hall and the village of Trawden. Near Alder Hurst End the field path ended and I followed a lane past some lovely rows of cottages to the village.

Here is a map I found that appears to match that description:

This location looks promising. The question is, did James and Mary live in Bough Gap, have Robert and then move to Guildford Clough and have more children? Also notice the mention of Alder Hurst in the walking narrative. I believe that the Pilling family lived there.

1841 Census

There are a James and Mary in the 1841 Census in Winewall:

It is not clear if this is the same James that gave birth to Robert. It is definitely not the same Mary as she is born about 1801. She is possibly a second wife.

The oldest resident of Alderhirstend was John Hartley:

Bough Gap has many Hartleys:

Henry Hartley, 45, may have been a relative of Robert Hartley from Bough Gap? His parents appear to be William and Margaret Hartley.

Adding a Mother for Robert Hartley

I added back James Hartley for Robert’s father. Now I will add in Mary Heap. She is a logical choice, and my cousin already have Betty Baldwin (perhaps from my Hartley Web Page). Having two different mothers may be helpful to compare. Another interesting connection is tha there is a Heap living at Alderhist Head:

Adding Mary Heap will be better than having a Wilkinson wife in my ancestry.

Here is what my ThruLines now show:

However, there are no matches for either person. This could be because I have no birth date for either or because they are the wrong ancestors?

My Cousin’s ThruLines

I mentioned above that my second cousin posted her father’s results at Ancestry. But she used James Hartley and Betty Baldwin as Robert Hartley’s parents.

These ThruLines have 35 matches. Robert Hartley is listed twice, but it sort of makes sense as the second Robert Hartley was not the father of John Pilling Mary Pilling had a child before she married Robert Hartley. The ThruLines get more interesting with what my cousin has for James Hartley’s parents:

Even more matches appear on the Bracewell side:

Going back a generation, there are even more matches:

This seems to indicate that this tree is on the right track – either right or close enough to right that there are a lot of DNA matches.

Give Heap a Chance

Before I add birth dates to James Hartley and Mary Heap, I’ll try something else. I took DNA from another of my father’s cousins named Joyce. I’ll look at her Hartley side and then search for DNA matches with Heap in the ancestry. First I filter on Joyce’s maternal side which is her Hartley side. Then I search for:

The top match is Brian, but his Heap connection is too far back and in the wrong part of England:

He also has Shackleton ancestors, so that may be a more likely connection.

The next match is Andrew:

Accrington seems to be about the same distance as my Hartley ancestors from Colne and my Emmet ancestors from Bacup.

The next Brian has a shared match with a potential  Emmet side common ancestor.

Steve’s Heap ancestor was from Chesire, but he also has Shackleton, Hartley adn Howorth in the mix. I am not seeing a lot of good results for Heap so far.

Maria’s 13 cM match Heap is from Burnley. I do notice the Pollard name showing up in some of these trees.

Abigail’s Heap is from Haslingden.

A Baldwin Experiment

What if I try the same experiment with Baldwin? I proposed Betty Baldwin as an ancestor many years ago:

Again, using Joyce’s maternal matches.

Kristen

Kristen is a known match. She has built a different Hartley tree far out:

Kristen has James Hartley and Elizabeth Taylor as the parents of Robert Hartley. Elizabeth would have been about 39 when giving birth to Robert under this scenario. Kristen’s Baldwin is from the 1600’s.

Cathy

Cathy has a Baldwin from New Jersey in the 1700’s. Shared matches show common ancestors on my Snell side with Massachusetts colonial ancestors.

Dennis

Dennis has a Baldwin ancestor from Connecticut in the 1600’s.

Lee

Lee has been on my radar for a while. He has Baldwin ancestors, Hartley ancestors and ancestors from Trawden.

So this experiment was perhaps more hopeful, but not the best either. Perhaps the most interesting aspect was Kristen’s proposed ancestry tree for Hartley.

The Taylor Tree Scenario

If I were to look for Joyce’s maternal matches with Taylor in the ancestral tree, I fear I would get too many matches. Kristen has this for James Hartley:

This is interesting as I had Betty Baldwin and Kristen has Betty Taylor as Robert’s mother.

Kristen does not provide a marriage date for James and Betty Taylor.

This does not appear to work out well as Betty would have been 59 when she gave birth to Robert. By Kristen’s timeline, she would actually have been 58 when Robert was born:

I would rule out Betty Taylor based on her age. It is interesting, however, that Kristen chose a Betty as the wife of James Hartley. Now that I think of it, Mary Heap would have been quite old had she been the mother of Robert Hartley

Better Choices for Mary

  1. Mary Holmes – perhaps in her mid 40’s giving birth to Robert
  2. Mary Stansfield – this James was a weaver which is probably a plus
  3. Mary Berry – from Kildwick
  4. Mary Robinson – this James is also a weaver. A witness of John Shackleton is interesting.

Here is Kildwick:

At this point, I would like to end the Blog and pick it up in a subsequent Blog. An initial look at my father’s cousin Joyce’s Kilwick matches shows that there are quite a few matches from this area.

Summary and Conclusions

  • When I took away my best guess for Robert Hartley’s parents, ThruLines gave me parents that I knew were wrong.
  • I made a guess that Robert’s parents could have been James and Mary
  • Unfortunately, the Mary I chose was married too early, so I ruled out Mary Heap
  • I then started to look at other Marys that married James Hartley in the right time period to have a Robert Hartley born 1803-1804.
  • As this could take a while, I will start a new Blog.

 

 

 

Posted on

Did ThruLines Find My Hartley Ancestors?

To answer my own question, I believe the answer is no.

A Trimmed Down Hartley Tree

From going through many records, my best guest as to who my ancestors were is on my web page:

With all the Hartleys around it was difficult to establish which was which in the records. The compound matters, my ancestor Robert was a weaver. This makes him somewhat mobile. If he was a farmer, he would have been likely tied to a family farm.

My theory was, that if I took away James Hartley and Betty Baldwin, ThruLines might suggest the correct Hartley ancestor.

My ThruLines Gone Wrong?

Unfortunately, when I used this approach, ThruLines suggested a Wilkinson ancestor.

This would be a good set of ThruLines, but for the fact that it shows my ancestor Robert Hartley to be the son of Moses Wilkinson. I can at least try to give an explanation as to why this happened.

The Pilling/Wilkinson Connection

I do know that Robert Hartley married Mary Pilling who was a single mother. Robert dies young and the widow Mary marries Robert Wilkinson who is a widower. This is perhaps the connection that ThruLines is making, but it is unclear how the widow of Robert Hartley marrying a Wilkinson would connect a dead Robert Hartley to the Wilkinson family. Here is the marriage record for Robert Hartley and Mary Pilling:

The witnesses were John Schofield and John Aldersley. Interestingly, this is likely John Aldersley in the 1841 Census in Holling Hallrow, Trawden:

John was a neighbor to my ancestor Greeonwood hartley at the time. The previous page of the Census shows that Mary Pilling had remarried Robert Wilkinson by this time:

I assume that the young Aldersley was the one who was listed at both of Robert Hartleys weddings. This is probably John’s birth record in 1803:

He was born in Wanless. Here is Wanless on an 1818 map:

 

Here is the marriage record for Mary Pilling and Robert Wilkinson from 1839:

Notice that between 1830 and 1839, a lot more information was included on the marriage record.

Robert Hartley’s First Marriage

When Robert Hartley married Mary Pilling, he was listed as a widower. So, who did he marry first?

I can’t prove it, but there was a Robert Hartley, weaver who married a Barbary or Barbara Heaton. Notice that John Aldersley was a witness to the marriage. There was a Barbara Heaton born in Wycoller in 1802:

Tragically, there was a Barbary Hartley [note the spelling, same as the wedding record] who died in 1829.

Note that in 1829, Barbary and presumably Robert Hartley lived at Wellhead. Barbary is listed as dying at age 27 which also fits very well with the other facts.

Where is Wellhead?

Assuming I have thre right couple, it would be interesting to know where they were living in 1829. A Google search results in this map and arrow:

However, I do not see the words Well head. The location would make sense as it is not far from Hollin Hall where Robert died, not far from Wanless where John Aldersley lived and not far from Wycoller where Barbara was born. A closer view reveals that there is a Wellhead Road which suggests that there was a Wellhead in the area near Winewall:

Who Were Moses Wilkinson and Jane Shaw?

I have them in my tree as the parents of Robert Wilkinson who was Mary Pilling’s second husband. I am confused as to why Ancestry would somehow combine Robert Hartley and Robert Wilkinson just because they both married Mary Pilling. Here is what I have for Robert Wilkinson:

Could the confusion be due to the fact that I have no first wife for Robert Wilkinson? This should be easy to find (I think). This record suggests that the first was was Sarah Cowgill:

Here is a possible marriage:

However, if this is right, Robert would have been only 19 years old at his marriage. I searched for children of Robert Wilkinson and Sarah and found one entry:

Possibly this John died and another child was named John? Or this could be the same John. I would be willing to add Sarah Cowgill as the first wife of Robert to see if this improves my ThruLines.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I took out my best guess for the parents of Robert Hartley to see if ThruLines could come up with a good candidate
  • Instead ThruLines gave the parents of Mary Pilling’s second huband Robert Wilkinson to my ancestor Robert Hartley
  • I added a first wife to Robert Wilkinson to see if this fixes ThruLines
  • The next step is to add in at least a Hartley father (likely a James) to Robert Hartley to correct ThruLines.

 

Posted on

Hartley YDNA and the Time Tree

My last Blog on Hartley YDNA had to do with a Channon test. Channon has known Nutter ancestry and based on YDNA, he must have also had some Hartley ancestry in the past 400 years or so. At that time, the new YDNA Time Tree had not been updated. However, before I get to that, I will give some background.

Hartley YDNA Background

According to Mynamestats.com:

HARTLEY is ranked as the 1027th most popular family name in the United States with an estimated population of 37,550.

Accoring to Forebears.io:

Approximately 87,232 people bear this surname

That seems like a pretty exact number for an approximation.

However, not all branches of Hartleys are related in the genealogical time period. Here is my tribe of Hartleys on the YDNA tree:

Here 17 have tested for STRs or have done the BigY test. All are probably A11134 except for Mawdsley. Mawdsley is one branch upstream of Hartley which was before the genealogical time period. It is difficult to estimate the percentage of Hartleys that this branch represents. I will guess that we represent about 1/3 of the Hartleys worldwide, so roughly 30,000 Hartleys.  say this to suggest that these 16 YDNA tests represents 30,000 Hartleys or so or certainly tens of thousands.

The FTDNA YDNA Time Tree

Here is the current Hartley YDNA Time Tree:

At the top is a scale of years going from 500 to 2000 CE. The first tester is a Smith and the connection to Hartleys goes back to before the year 500 CE. The next is Mawdsley:

I assume that this time of 1170 CE is correct. However, only nobility would have had surnames at this time, so this would be considered to be before the genealogic:

al time period. The previous date given was 1174, so there has not been much of a change.

A11134

So far, it appears that A11134 and the Hartley surname are synonymous.

Prior to the Channon test, this date was 1471, so the fact that the date was pushed back 5 years is interesting but probably not significant. Hartley BigY testers Ethan, John and Steve are R-A11134. This is the general designation of the Tree that represents an estimated 25-30,000 Hartleys worldwide.

FT225247

This is the branch that my brother and I are in. It represents our father:

This has not changed which I suppose makes sense as our branch is independent of the Channon Branch. Interestingly, my father was born in 1918.

A16717

This is a branch of Hartleys who had the Quaker belief and moved from England to Pennsylvania ostensibly to get away from persecution in England.

This changed only one year from a previous 1684. I would tend to think that this SNP is actually older:

Assuming that Edward Hartley had this SNP, this SNP should be no new more recent than 1664. If his father or grandfather also had the SNP, that would move the date further back.

Channon and FTE2655

This test brought the Channon branch up from 1466 to 1905.

Here is the Block Tree:

This represents the 10 A11134 Hartley Branch BigY testers. I do not show up as the tree is from my viewpoint. For some reason my branch has 7 SNPs in it. Perhaps that will be important some day in figuring out my branch’s genealogy. The Channon Branch has two SNPs and the Quaker branch has one. A11134 has three SNPs but they will not likely be separated as they have not been separated so far.

Also the fact that my FT225247 Branch is later than the Channon Branch of FTE2655 may be because there are many more SNPs in my Branch (7) and fewer in the Channon Branch (2).

Here is the Match Time Tree:

Summary and Conclusions

  • The time tree update is the last piece of the new Channon BigY Test
  • The test gave Channon its own branch of the YDNA tree
  • FTDNA shows that there are 6 major Branches of the R-A11134 Hartley YDNA tree. Their common ancestor is still very early at an estimated date of 1466 CE.
  • It would be nice to find out what Hartley YDNA branching occurred in the 1700’s and 1800’s.

Here are some things going on in England in the 1400’s according to metmuseum.org:

At the start of the period, concurrent with the accession of Henry IV (r. 1399–1413), England’s first Lancastrian king, Great Britain and Ireland are rife with internal tensions, including Welsh revolt, a series of baronial rebellions led by the Percy family of Northumberland, and ongoing warfare among the Anglo-Irish nobility. In 1415, Henry V (r. 1413–22) renews the war with France that has continued, with interruptions, for nearly a century. His endeavors are temporarily successful, gaining large territories in France and securing his claim to the French throne. During the reign of his son Henry VI (1422–61; 1470–71), however, the English are expelled from France with the help of Joan of Arc, a French peasant girl, and political turmoil erupts at home when the king’s frequent illnesses place England in the hands of a Protector, Richard, duke of York. By the end of the fifteenth century, civil war between the Yorkists and Lancastrians seriously undermines the power of the monarchy and leaves the nobility fractured and vulnerable to the prevailing Tudor family.