Category: DNA General

Posted on

Part 2 of My Revolutionary War Soldier Ancestors

In my previous Blog, I looked at 4 of my ancestral lines with potential Revolutionary War Soldiers. One who was Nathaniel Hatch from Falmouth, Massachusetts. He probably served the least time at 3 days, but those were important days, including April 19, 1775.

The Ancestors

  • The younger Anthony Snell served. The elder Anthony died before the War
  • Like Anthony, he was from Dighton, Massachusetts. He served locally and in Rhode Island. He also served 3 months in support of the Continental Army. The appears to be a younger Benjamin Luther from the same area who also served.
  • William Parker had extensive service including fighting at Fort Ticonderoga. He got sick during the war and died not long after his service. I am not sure if his son Isaac served or not, there were a lot of Isaac Parkers from his area who apparently served. There appears to be an Isaac Parker of Barnstable and one of Falmouth, but I believe that my Isaac was living in Nantucket when the other two Isaac’s had legal papers filed for Pensions.
  • Nathaniel Hatch was serving April 19, 1775. Perhaps he never went to Lexington or Concord but was there for backup.

Bradford

My ancestor Samuel Bradford of Plymouth, Massachusetts was born in 1755, so of an age where he could have been involved. However, my Bradford web pages have him born 1761, so the same age as Anthony Snell who served in the Revolutionary War from Dighton.

I see that in the definitive book on Bradford from the Mayflower Society, there is no birth date for Samuel, but he is listed between Josiah born in 1754 and Charles born 1756. If the birth order is correct, it is likely that he was indeed born in 1755. Unfortunately, the main line in the Mayflower Book stops with Samuel’s father Josiah who died in 1777.

Here is a guess:.

However, there are many Soldiers listed in the Massachusetts book of Soldiers and Sailors in the Revolutionary War. In addition, if my ancestor Samuel Bradford was born in 1755, he would have been 25 in 1780. Perhaps he was born in 1761, or that there was another Samuel Bradford born in 1761. I also note that Samuel’s father Josiah was listed as a mariner from Plymouth in 1770. Much earlier in his life, he was listed as a cordwainer.

I have looked through the Mayflower Families Bradford Book and did not see any obvious Samuel Bradford born around 1761 from Plymouth, so that is a bit confusing. The closest that I could find was a Samuel Bradford born 9 August 1761 in Duxbury and baptized at New North Church, Boston. His father was a Captain of a schooner. However, the Revolutionary War Soldiers and Sailors mentions that Samuel Bradford was from Plymouth. One possibility is that Samuel, son of Job went off to live on his own and moved to Plymouth. I am thinking that I assumed that he was the seaman listed above and that is where I got the birth date of 1761. Bottom line is that now I am not sure that this is our man or not.

Stephen Churchill Born 1743

This is likely my ancestor Stephen Churchill:

That first statement is quite interesting: “Lieutenant, in command of a company of Minutemen, which marched April 20, 1775, in response to the alarm of April 19, 1775, to Marshfield.” Based on a recent talk I heard at my local historical society, this is what happened. There were some loyalists in Marshfield and some British troops were sent there to protect them. A ton of American troops marched up to Marshfield and the greatly outnumbered British troops fled.

Here is an AI overview which is concise but clumsily worded in sections:

On April 20, 1775, one day after the battles of Lexington and Concord, British troops stationed in Marshfield, MA, evacuated by boat, avoiding an “almost-battle” with gathering local militia. Over 600 patriot militiamen from nearby towns had gathered to confront the ~100 British soldiers of the 4th Regiment (King’s Own) stationed to protect Loyalists.

      • The Evacuation: British troops, under Captain Balfour, had been in town for weeks. Knowing the patriots were mobilizing, they successfully escaped by boats up the Green Harbor River on April 20 to return to Boston, preventing a direct confrontation, say and.
      • The Alarm: On April 20th, Patriot militia in Marshfield signaled a full-scale mobilization, with Capt. William Thomas firing a pre-arranged alarm gun three times.
      • The Context: Marshfield was a Loyalist stronghold and one of the only towns other than Boston occupied by British forces.
      • The Aftermath: By April 21, hundreds of Patriot militiamen from Plymouth County had taken control of the town, but the British were already gone, resulting in the “almost-battle” described by.

I think that this is a different Stephen Churchill, but I am not sure:

I found this record:

This is confusing as I have Stephen born in Plymouth. Here is a different record or abstract:

David Hathaway Born 1744

Ancestry has a record for the Sons of the American Revolution (SAR) for this David:

However, I think this is mistaken as the Soldiers and Sailors Book of the American Revolution has that David Hathaway as being from Dartmouth:

It is possible that my David Hathawy ancestor from Wareham could have been a Quaker. I do not see a military record for him from the Revolutionary War. I’ll remove the SAR reference from my Hathaway Ancestor.

Seth Cowing Born 1834 Rochester

Again, I have an SAR application record:

Here is another record:

This cemetery looks to be off the beaten path.

The Soliders and Sailors book seems to agree with the SAR application:

Summary and Conclusions

  • Of the eight lines I looked at some Revolutionary War service was normal.
  • The only line which apparently did not serve in my ancestry was Hathaway. This may have been due to religious beliefs.
  • Some service was difficult to determine due to similar names living in similar areas.
  • I would assume that those who served in the military were indeed convinced that they were doing the right thing.

 

Posted on

Looking for My Revolutionary Soldier Ancestors

I recently joined the Historical Society for the Town I grew up in and there was a talk that night on Revolutionary War ancestors. Or in this case, one of the local ancestors of the President of the Historical Society. I know that I have at least one ancestor who served in the Revolutionary war and he lived in the Dighton, Massachusetts area. He was Anthony Snell and his story can be found here.

Some Potential Revolutionary War Soldiers

I did not highlight the elder Anthony Snell as I have that he died fairly young on my web site. A source at Ancestry has his death in 1767.  I am not sure why I did not highlight Stephen Churchill.

Anthony Snell and DNA

I am not highlighting Anthony Snell here but I would like to mention his DNA as this is a DNA and Genealogy Blog. At a family reunion, I got the DNA from one of my father’s many 1st cousins. Here is Joyce’s connection to Anthony Snell according to ThruLines at Ancestry:

Let’s look at my Snell DNA/Genealogy tree to see how that compares:

It looks like I am a little light on the Anthony son of Anthony line.

Next, I looked at my own ThruLines:

It looks like I could improve my Snell family tree if these are correct. Here is Horace’s tree at Ancestry:

It looks like I already have Stephen Snell in my Ancestry tree:

The best way to add Horace is to add him as a floating tree and then attach him to my tree if it works out. This must be Horace’s draft card:

Here is Horace’s birth record:

Horace’s obituary summary gives some more information:

This shows that Horace ended up in Missouri.

Viola’s wedding record shows that her father was a fisherman:

Horace father and son) were farmers.

Next I just need to connect Arthur E Snell to Stephen Snell:

Here is Arthur and family in 1910:

According to this, Arthur was quite a bit older than his wife Nellie. The couple married in 1894 in Tiverton:

Next, I connect Horace’s line with my Ancestry tree to make it match what is shown on the ThurLines. All this to say that it is very likely that Horace and I share common DNA from Anthony Snell (or his wife Betsy Luther). I have pretty old DNA!

Here is the family in New Bedford in 1865:

This tells a potentially sad story. I believe that Stephen’s father Anthony died earlier in 1865 so is not shown. Elizabeth would be Stepen’s mother. I see no wife for Stephen, so she likely had passed away at this point.

I can also add Horace to my Snell DNA/Genealogy Tree:

Benjamin Luther

I have this information at my Luther Web Page:

According to the Luther Genealogy, “Benjamin Luther resided in Dighton, was of a family of seamen, and had four master mariners in his family. He was said to have always been spoken of as ‘Captain Benjamin of Dighton.’ He was a Revolutionary soldier, enlisting in Capt. Ephraim Hathaway’s Co., Co. Popes’ Reg’t., on the Alarms of Dec. 8, 1776 and Aug. 1780.”

I see this reference in the Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolutionary War:

I don’t have much more on this Benjamin Luther. He died in 1834. Apparently there was another Revolutionary War Veteran named Benjamin Luther that lived longer.

This 1835 Pension Roll Call is apparently my ancestor based on his age at the time – even though he died in 1834, this probably went to publication before they had knowledge of his death.

This appears to be where the church is:

Here is my Luther DNA Tree:

There is some connection here as Betsy Luther married Anthony Snell. I have a match to Lynn at Ancestry.

Parker

This family was from Falmouth. Theoretically William and Isaac could have served in the Revolutionary War. However, he died in 1778 at age 49. This must be William:

I have that William fought at Fort Ticonderoga:

It looks like William was a Patriot and gave the last years of his life for his country – even when ill. I am curious as to how and where he died. This adds a lot of information as I knew very little about William Parker. I see that in 1772, his father Thomas left him one dollar in his will:

William’s father Thomas was quite wealthy. I wonder what a dollar would have meant at this time as the currency was in British Pounds. According to the internet:

    • The Spanish Piece-of-Eight: The most common “dollar” was the Spanish dollar, which served as the unofficial, widely accepted currency. It held consistent value due to its silver content, unlike local, often depreciated, paper money.
    • Value in Shillings: While England used pounds, Massachusetts used a local pound system. Often, one Spanish dollar was valued at 6 shillings in Massachusetts.

This seems strange to leave your eldest son such a small amount as his estate was worth over 1300 pounds.

I see here the family connection with Rochester as Thomas owned a cedar swamp lot there.

Did William’s Son Isaac Serve in the Revolutionary War?

This is a difficult one. There are many Isaac Parkers listed in the American Soldiers and Sailors book. These seem to be two different Isaac Parkers:

 

There are many other Isaac Parkers listed in the Revolutionary Soldier Book, but the above seem to be the most likely. It is possible that Isaac stayed behind while his father fought in the war.

My father’s cousin Joyce has four matches with these likely descendants of Thomas Parker:

 

The two from Thomas Landers are closer matches on other lines:

Nathaniel Hatch Jr.

 

Nathaniel was Isaac Parker’s father-in-law.

As Nathaniel was from Falmouth, this seems promising. I see that Nathaniel was busy having children during this time:

I am not sure if this is the same person:

Here are some Hatch DNA connections:

I will look at more potential Revolutionary War soldier ancestors in an upcoming Blog.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I am surprised that I have never highlighted my Revolutionary War ancestors before. The 250th anniversary of our nation has helped me focus on the topic
  • Each of the four lines that I looked at had at least some Revolutionary War experience. My Hatch ancestor appears to have had as little as 3 days service.
  • We know so little about our ancestors at this time, the service in the War gives us at least a glimpse into what they were doing in support of our Country.
  • There appears to be DNA connection to each of my four lines that served in the Revolutionary War. Those lines being Snell, Luther, Parker and Hatch.
  • Looking at these lines has helped me to add to, update and correct my family tree at Ancestry
Posted on

More of My Sister Heidi’s Common Ancestors at Ancestry

In my previous post, I had good luck at looking at one of my sister Heidi’s DNA matches with a proposed common ancestor at Ancestry. Heidi and Sonja went back to Nicholson ancestry. Sonja’s Nicholson ancestor moved to Hartford while my her ancestor’s brother, my ancestor moved to Philadelphia.

Heidi and Thelma

Going down the list of Heidi’s unviewed distant relatives with proposed common ancestors at Ancestry, I see:

Here is the proposal:

Based on a new theory, I have suggested that my ancestor Robert Hartley could have been an Ann. This has turned up some Halstead genealogy. Here is Thelma’s tree:

Thelma has Alice Halstead from Didsbury:

I think that this is the place:

Another tree has this:

Heidi and Mike

This connection also leads to a possible Halstead connection:

This connection leads to two Halstead families on Mike’s tree:

There seems to be something going on with this Halstead connection. However, I would prefer to look at this in a separate Blog.

Heidi and Mr

MR has a private tree with 4 people in it. Shared matches between MR and Heidi are inconclusive. However, MR’s mother is in the shared match list. MR’s mother has a shared match with Carolyn who is a known relative on the Nicholson side:

Further, it appears that the proposed John Nicholson in Ancestry’s common ancestor tree was living right next to his sister in 1860 Hartford. I talked about her in my previous Blog:

John and his brother-in-law Thomas were both hardware dealers at the time. Sarah A is likely Sarah Ann Nicholson Hield. Interesting. That means that the Mary shown above could be the Mary in the Ancestry Common Ancestor Tree. However, if this is right, then my tree may be inaccurate:

I have John marrying Margaret Reaney.

Ancestry suggests this for the 1851 Census in Sheffield:

Mary was born outside Yorkshire. It appears that this is the correct marriage record:

Here is my corrected tree:

It appears that the elder John Nicholson died young in 1863:

I won’t go through all the genealogy, but I expect that this connection should work out. Here is a Social Security extract:

Heidi and Robert

Here is another potential Halstead connection:

My Nicholson DNA Tree

I’ll just update this tree:

This is a large tree and above is only part of it. Actually, I need to go up a generation:

This Matthew Nicholson had a lot of children and died at the age of 41:

My DNA Tree above only represents three of these children.

Here are my sister Heidi’s ThruLines:

That means I need to add the John and Sarah Lines. Here is the John Line:

MR’s great-grandmother was Ruah which is an interesting name. Apparently her son moved to Little Rock, Arkansas:

The Sarah Ann Line

Sonja was the subject of my previous Blog. Here the two Connecticut Nicholson Lines are added:

I was previously unaware of these two Lines coming forward. I probably would have otherwise assumed that these families remained in England.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I found a few of my sister Heidi’s DNA matches with proposed common ancestors
  • Those ancestors were Nicholson and Halstead
  • Halstead is more problematic as this is based on a new theory. I decided to wait on those matches.
  • The Nicholson match was interesting as two siblings of my Nicholson 2nd great-grandfather were living next door to each other in Hartford, CT in the 1860 Census
  • I added the two lines descending from the two siblings of my Nicholson 2nd great-grandfather to my Nicholson DNA Tree

 

 

 

 

Posted on

A Nicholson Line Connected by Ancestry’s Common Ancestors

Right now I am looking at my sister Heidi’s DNA matches with Common Ancestors.

These 7 matches could keep me busy for a while. Three maternal. Three paternal and one unassigned. These are all listed under distant relatives.

Heidi and Sonja:

Sonja has her Hield ancestor as being from Connecticut, so no obvious connection there. I need to know if Sarah married a HIeld and moved to Connecticut. I do know that Sarah was living in Sheffiled in 1851:

Sarah’s father had died young and her mother was a beerhouse keeper to make ends meet. Here is Sarah Hield in Hartford, Connecticut in 1860:

We can see that Sarah’s daughter Sarah was born in Connecticut, so that puts the move from England between 1855 and 1858. Sonja has that Esther was born in 1861 so that explains why she does not appear on the 1860 Census.

Here is the possible marriage:

Unfortunately, the father’s name were “dead” which is not very helpful. However, I do know that ‘my’ Sarah’s father was dead. Here is PIttlsmoor:

Sonja’s DNA Connection: Shared Matches

Here are some of Sonja and Heidi’s shared matches:

Melinda is my maternal 1st cousin’s daughter. Carolyn is my mother’s second cousin on the Nicholson side. The other matches seem to be related on the Nicholson side or Clayton side. The DNA indicates that the Common Ancestor clue from Ancestry is probably right. This gives encouragement to continue along the lines of the Common Ancestor match.

Nicholson ThruLines

Here are Heidi’s ThruLines:

Back to the Genealogy

The Hield family seem to move around a bit. The first son, John William, was born in the Wicker, Sheffleld:

The name John Willam also gives circumstantial evidence to relation to the Nicholson family:

William was Sarah’s younger brother. John was her grandfather. We are not sure of Thomas Hield’s ancestry, but Sarah’s second son was named Thomas. As a guess, Esther could have been Thomas’ mother:

Let’s look at the proposed timing.

  • Sarah Ann marries Thomas Hield in 1852
  • They have children and move to Hartford, CT around 1856 or 1857
  • Sarah’s younger brother William arrives in the US about 1868 with his family and settles in Philadelphia.

I’ll add Sonja to my tree as floating tree and likely connect her later.

Sonja’s great-grandfather was an interior decorator in 1920 in West Hartford, CT.

Here is the family in 1900. There were a lot of Russels:

This Russel was a stock broker. However, at this point, it is Esther that I am interested in. From the Census, it appears that Esther married about 1880.

Here is ab obituary from August 11, 1928:

Recall above that Esther had a brother named Thomas. Circumstantial evidence again. This leads us back to Brooklyn:

Sarah A HIeld is 39 in 1870 which means she was born about 1861.

Here is the Sarah Ann in my tree:

I’ll say that is close enough for a match. I just need to merge the two trees. Here is part of my new tree:

My ancestor William Nicholson was about 5 years younger than Sarah Ann. I wonder if William and Sarah Ann ever connected in the US.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I started at looking at my sister Heidi’s unviewed Common Ancestors at Ancestry
  • Heidi’s first match with possible common ancestors was Sonja
  • Sonja’s tree went back to Connecticut with her ancestor Esther Hield
  • Ancestry suggested that Esther Hield’s mother was Sarah Ann Nicholson, the sister of one of my Nicholson ancestors
  • Based on Shared DNA matches between Heidi and Sonja, as well as genealogical clues, the match appeared to be right
  • It would still be nice to find the smoking gun genealogical clear evidence, but the inferred evidence from the DNA and genealogy was enough for me to agree that Ancestry’s proposed common ancestors were correct.
  • That leaves 6 other proposed comon ancestors that Heidi has at Ancestry to investigate

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Theories on My Mother’s (Rathfelder) Side

I started looking at my mother’s MyHeritage Theories in my previous post and will continue here.

Hannah

I would say the Theory between my mother and Hannah cannot be correct:

For one thing, there are 112 years difference between first cousins Johnn and Ottilie. I was able to find Hannah’s Ancestry tree:

One way to check this is by my Gangnus genealogy book by Gustav Gangnus published in 2003. As far as I can see, Hannah’s tree checks out. That would add a line her on my Gangnus DNA Tree:

Here I have added in Hannah:

Hannah shows as my mother’s 4th cousin three times removed. This makes more sense than the MyHeritage Theory.

Hannah at DNA Painter

Hannah’s match tells us something about a different match:

Notice that Hannah’s DNA match overlaps with Otis. Otis matches my mom in several ways. However, for this segment, the match must be on the Gangnus side. So while the blue segment says Schwechheimer/Gangnus this match is really through Gangnus or specifically through Anna Charlotte Maria Gangnus born 1780:

Hanni

This Theory does not look familiar:

MyHeritage proposes that Hanni from Germany is a third cousin twice removed.

Hanni’s tree has two Gangnus Lines:

Hanni is in another Theory which does not make sense:

Under this Theory, Johann Lutz has a daugther when he is one year old. I’ll skip this one. Theory one is wrong also as the father of Lutke in my mom’s line was Lutke. That means I’m on my own.

Genealogy for Hanni

I will add Hanani to my tree and see if I can connect her. Hanni has her mother born in Hirschenhof which is interesting:

I see in Hanni’s tree that Lydia’s mother should actually be Alide Gangnus.I see several entries for Alide in the 2003 Gangnus Genealogy Book. One of the most interesting is on page 57. This page shows three Gangnus lines. It appears to trace the farms that they lived on in HIrschenhof. Alide shows ther born in 1905 married to Stahl.

Page 129 of the Gangnus Genealogy book shows Alide as the last child of of Johann Conrad Gangnus and Marie Whilhelmie Gangnus. From here is should be easy to trace Hanni’s Gangnus heritage. The first Gagnus to connect with one of my mother’s Gangnus ancestors wins the prize.

So far, my tree is following Hanni’s:

I also have three out of four in the last column with hints at Ancestry. Unfortunately, Johann Georg Gangnus was a very popular name in Hirschenhof:

Actually, I now see where Hanni fits in on my Gangnus DNA Tree:

I see that Philipp Gustave Gangnus is already in my tree, so I can link Hanni’s tree to him. It took a while to fix my Ancestry Gangnus Tree, but I think I have it right now.

Hanni Added to the Gangnus DNA Tree

She and Michael are 4th cousins twice removed to my late mother.

What About Gustav?

I still need to fill in parents for Gustav born in 1809. I do not have to go far to find his father:

Gustav’s father is Johann Georg Gangnus born in 1781. However, Gustav is the son of Johann Georg’s second wife Maria Magdalena Gagnus.

The good news is that the common ancestors are the same:

That means that Hanni and Gladys are 2 times fourth cousins twice removed.

Hanni on My Mom’s DNA Painter Profile

Hanni’s match overlaps with Ruta’s on Chromosome 11. I had trouble figuring out exactly where Ruta fit in as she descends from Gangnus/Muller and Gangnus/Niclas. This tells us that this match with Ruta must be from Gangnus/Niclas. Not that it probably matters, but it is interesting that we can know that from the DNA match.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I looked at Hannah and Hanni. They both descend from Gangnus LInes
  • I was able to fit both of them into my mother’s (hence my) Ancestry Tree as well as into my Gangnus DNA Tree
  • The Gangnus family was prolific. In addition there was a lot of intermarriage of these Gangnus Lines in Hirschenhof. That adds up to a lot of potential for DNA matches and criss-crossing genealogcial trees
  • It is possible to sort out which DNA matches are associated with which Gangnus Lines if we get matches that overlap on a particular segmant on the chromosome.

 

 

 

Posted on

Ancestry Frazer and McMaster Clusters with My Two Younger Sisters

I have already looked at some of my own clusters and those with my older sister and brother. To finish the cycle, I will look at Lori and Sharon’s Clusters at Ancestry.

Lori and Mabel

Lori and Mabel are 2nd cousins once removed. Their common ancestors are George Frazer and Margaret McMaster:

They have quite a few clusters together:

One thing that is unusual is that they have two clusters with exactly the same number of matches. I don’t recall seeing that before.

9 Match Cluster

This must be a McMaster Cluster as Keith has no known Frazer ancestry:

Actually, Keith has this Frazer ancestor:

James McMaster married Fanny McMaster and I have her mother is Margaret Frazer.

Cluster of 10 Matches

This tree adds Brad. I do not know exactly how he fits in. Ancestry thinks that John could be his great uncle:

Based on Brad’s last name, he must descend from John’s sister.

12 Match Cluster

Whitney and Stephen are added at the top. They are only the previous Frazer DNA Tree descending from Richard Frazer born 1875. The pink cluster shows how the Frazer and McMaster lines intertwine, I suppose.

The First 13 Match Cluster

Here, BV is added:

BV is an older match going back to William McMaster and Margaret Frazer, so a generation earlier than the common ancestors of Lori and Keith. To confuse things, Margaret McMaster was from the James Frazer Line. Archibald and James were two brothers born in the first half of the 1700’s. I am from both lines, but mostly from the Archibald Line.

The Second 13 Match Cluster

Perhaps Ancestry computers were working overtime on this one. Now BV is gone, so this is not as ancient a connection. It should also be theoretically less confusing. Here Brad is put back in for some reason.

A 14 Match Cluster Bringing Back BV

I feel that BV has a big effect on these clusters:

Ramping Up to a 44 Match Cluster

This is a bit overwhelming:

Here are some possible clusters within these 44 matches that I see:

The first 2 matches are Lucy and Michael. Here is how Lori and Michael are related:

I have been in touch with Michael and Jane who both descend from Richard Frazer:

Here is a new and improved take on this Cluster:

  • The first large cluster descend from Richard Frazer who was born in the later half of the 1700’s
  • Gladys and the small cluster descend from James Frazer and Violet Frazer where Violet is the daughter of Richard Frazer.
  • The next large cluster are descendants of McMasters and Frazers.
  • The cluster within that cluster are Lori’s (therefor miy) more recent relatives descending from George Frazer born about 1836 and Margaret McMaster
  • There should be another box including BV. This is for the more distant connections descending from William McMaster born about 1790 and Margaret Frazer
  • Below BV I see Marshall who has McMaster ancestry. Perhaps he is related on the McMaster side only and not on the Frazer side.
  • Looking at the clusters followin Marshall, they seem to have more affinity to the McMaster or McMaster/Frazer side than the Frazer only side

Lori and Mabel’s 49 Match Cluster

This is a variation of the 44 match cluster:

Here is a simple interpretation:

In between the two clusters is Marshall who I had guessed had only McMaster ancestors without a Frazer connection.

Sharon and Mabel

Sharon is my last sibling tested at Ancestry to Blog about. I also picked her Mabel connection to Cluster:

Where Lori had 8 clusters, Sharon has 6 but of similar size.

As expected, the first cluster has relatives in the 2nd or third cousin range descending from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster:

Correction. Keith is a 3rd cousin once removed on the McMaster side only at that level. That has to make this a McMaster cluster.

10 Match Cluster

Here Whitney and Stephen get added. I believe all these except Keith descend from Frazers:

Stephen is the uncle of Whitney, but I have not added him to my McMaster DNA Tree.

15 Match Cluster

The first cluster is mostly Frazers but descending from the McMaster side based on inclusion of Keith. the second do not have McMaster ancestry and probably descend from James Frazer and Violet Frazer who were born in the first decade of the 1800’s (as were James and Fanny McMaster – the common ancestors between Keith and Sharon).

16 Match Cluster

Very similar to the previous cluster:

47 Match Cluster

Here we have a large leap:

This is a different look. I must not look at Sharon’s results often as some of these names seem new to me. For some reason, with Sharon’s clusters, the Richard Frazer descendant relationships are not highlighted.

Lucas

One interesting match in the first large cluster above is Lucas. He shows this tree:

Lucas shows his paternal line going back to Michael Frazer born 1764. This would be an important connection if true. Here is my great-grandfather’s ancestry:

I have his maternal line going back to Michael Frazer also. My Frazer researcher friend in Scotland also has Lucas in her tree with the same ancestry showing as Lucas. She also shows a DNA match medalion next to his name.

Here is my Frazer DNA Tree for that branch:

If the tree is right, then Lucas should be a close relative to Bonnie. I have access to Bonnie’s results and yes, he does show as her 1st cousin once removed. Based on that, and the DNA connection between Bonnie and Lucas, I will add him in to my Michael Frazer Branch DNA Tree:

It seems a bit random that Lucas would have shown up in this cluster.

I think this is what Sharon and Mabel’s clusters are telling me:

For some reason, Matthew has a lot of matches with all red-boxed clusters.

Mynew

The last match in the cluster group is Mynew:

Here is my Philip DNA Tree:

This seem to be the right connection to my ancestor James Frazer who as I have as the brother of Philip Frazer at the top of the green chart above. I just wish that there were more DNA matches. At the 5th cousin level, it is difficult to get this.

49 Match Cluster

This one is similar but it has LS:

 

However, LS does not show as a match to Mynew. (last match who also descends from Philip Frazer. Based on my green DNA chart above LS and Mynew should be 4th cousins, so there is a good chance that the two may not match each other.

Diane

Diane is also in the cluster with LS. Here is her paternal side tree:

I see she has an Isabella Johnston in her tree This Isabella was born around 1830, lived in Canada, but was born in Ireland. Possibly the relative of an ancestor.

This could be the same Isabella in 1851:

 

Baptiste is possibly her brother – though Baptiste does not seem like an Irish name.

Alannah

Alannah appears as a match just above the cluster that LS is in. Here is Alannah’s tree:

Alannah shows a Frederick Taylor married to a Catherine Johnston from Ireland. In my Philip Frazer Tree I have this:

Philip Frazer at the top who was the son of aonther Philip Frazer who I believe I descend from married a Mary Taylor and/or Gray. Sharon and I could be related to Alanna on either the Johnston or Taylor Line or both.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I looked at the last of my two siblings’ Frazer Clusters at Ancestry
  • I was surprised at how many of the clusters highlighted the Richard Frazer Line except for my sister Sharon. For some reason, her clusters steered clear of this line.
  • it was certainly helpful looking at 5 sets of clusters (mine and my 4 siblings) rather than just one set
  • I was interested in any matches which descended from the Philip Line. This line appeared to marry into the Johnston family and many of the Irish moved to Canada.
  • In some cases it is possible to see in the clusters the familiies of ancestors. In other cases where the families are not easily identifiable, there could be hints as to where the genealogy is going as in the case above with the Johnston and Taylor families of Ireland.
Posted on

Clusters from One of My McMaster and Frazer Lines

From studying Frazer DNA matches, I was able to locate one of my Frazer Branches that was more obscure than my obvious line. Here is the closest way to my Frazer ancestry:

My grandmother was Marion M Frazer and her father was James Archibald Frazer. It appears that James’ father George had two Frazer parents. To confuse things more, James’ mother was a McMaster whose maternal great-grandmother was a Frazer. It is this Frazer/McMaster Line that I would like to look at.

My Match with BV

I have a pretty good match with BV considering that she is a 3rd cousin twice removed. Perhaps because of the different ways we are related. Margaret Frazer was married to William McMaster. The family moved to Ontario from Ireland. However, my ancestor, Fanny remained in Ireland and married yet another McMaster.

My Clusters with BV

Here are the DNA clusters that I have with BV:

Before I get into it, it seems my best DNA tree is on the McMaster side:

A 3 Match Cluster

Sometimes simple is better. Here is Robert:

Robert is from the James McMaster Line I was mentioning above. mt must be Robert’s sister:

Here is part of my McMaster DNA Tree:

I added in mt today.

A 4 Cluster Group between BV and Me

I hope that this cluster will be as easy as the first. ck manages B.V.’s kit and is her daughter. It is not obvious to me how Steven and Alannah fit in. Alannah has a pretty good tree:

Johnston is a name associated with Frazer in Ireland. This could be the connection. I have this connection in my tree:

Catherine could be a daughter of William and Mary or John and Jane.

Moving on to a 20 Match Cluster

Here I see 4 clusters. But clusters three and four overlap on Clif and Cluster 1 and 2 overlap on BV and John. This is not surprising considering the Frazers and McMasters intermarrying in my ancestry.

Cluster 1

This is similar to the 3 match cluster above going back to William McMaster and Margaret Frazer. The difference is the addition of Matthew. I know who Matthew is:

Matthew is my third cousin.

Cluster 2

Matthew gives a hint as to Cluster 2. They should be descended from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. They are all in my Frazer DNA tree already:

I left out my branch, as those matches would be closer than I set the DNA limits.

Some overlap makes sense as we have a McMaster/Frazer cluster next to a Frazer/McMaster cluster.

Cluster 3

I know who Gladys is:

Our connection goes back to two Frazers. Namely, James and Violet:

Kathryn is first cousin or niece to Sandra:

 

It appears that most of the others that I can’t figure out in this Cluster are close relatives to Sandra and Kathryn.

Next is Clif who straddles Cluster 3 and Cluster 4. Here is his tree:

He is also shown as related to Gladys and could be her 1st cousin twice removed. I assume that his connection is on his paternal side which is missing some information.

Clust’er 4

I don’t have a good handle on this cluster. I have been in touch with the administrator for CA’s DNA and she says there is a Frazer connection on her maternal side.

A 26 Match Cluster

These 4 clusters seem someewhat discrete. Cluster 4 does not match with Cluster 3 and Cluster 4 does not match with Cluster 2 except for Clif who I have already mentioned above.

Each cluster seems to go back a generation. Does that mean that Cluster 4 is even older? One common name in that cluster is Acheson. That family lived near my ancestors.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I am still having fun using Ancestry Clusters
  • It is quite helpful being able to choose a person of interest as that focuses the clusters to the area one is interested in.
  • There were no outstanding new revelations, but it is helpful to look at the DNA in a different way
  • There are still other Frazer lines that I may like to cluster.

 

 

Posted on

Mapping My Wife’s French Canadian Side with DNAPainter

In my previous Blog, I wrote about my wife’s French Canadian Clusters at Ancestry using her late Aunt Lorraine’s results. This got me interested in mapping my wife’s French Canadian side using DNA Painter. While Ancestry is very useful, it is not useful in mapping DNA as it has no chromosome browser.
That means that it does not have specific information on what Chromosome your DNA match is on.

Marie’s Dad

Richard’s maternal side or French Canadian side:

Richard is 45% mapped. I would like to get this up to 50%. In my last Blog, I was running into problems due to incorrect trees and intermarriage on the French Canadian side.

I’ll start with FTDNA as that site uses the X Chromosome also. I wonder if I can figure out more about Richard’s X Chromosome. Rejeanne has an X Match with Richard:

I actually found Rejeanne at MyHeritage and there is a Theory for her:

This theory looks plausible. From Richard it goes all the way back on the maternal side. Rejeanne has one man, but that is possible, because he would have received his X Chromosome from his mother and passed it intact to his daughter. For this to work, it appears that Louis Girard would have to have had two wives (or perhaps the genealogy is wrong).

Here is the closest link I could find at Ancestry:

This assumes that Pierre-Louis Girard is the same as Louis Marie Henri Girard. Also Louis Marie Henri would have had to have been about 14 or 16 when he married Emerance. This does not seem likely.

Trying Gedmatch

I can see why I have so little matched as it is difficult to track these matches down. Here is Diane at Gedmatch. She is also at Ancestry:

.

Here is her match at Gedmatch (to Richard).

I can now accept Diane’s connection to Lorraine or see if she fits into my wife’s family tree as suggested. I’ll add Diane to my tree as a floating tree and then connect her if it works out.

 

This is Diane’s mother’s marriage record. Unfortunately, her mother’s mother’s last name is transcribed as Semena. I see Simard, though the i is not dotted.

Here is the marriage record for Virginie;

Everything is going smoothly so far:

Except Ozias and Mathilde should not be living. Next, I am looking for Ozias’ mother. Here is the family in 1861:

Genealogists have to appreciate the maiden name of the mother showing in the Census. I’m coming down the home stretch:

The marriage records are quite helpful:

This couple marries in 1842 in St. Urbain:

Next, I need to connectj Jean Baptiste to Jean Marie Tremblay. The writing for Jean Baptiste’s 1819 marriage record is not all that clear:

I will be happy to take the transcription suggestion:

The writing gets even worse for the marriage of Jean Tremblay and Constance Poitvin:

Time to Paint Donna

Here is Donna on Richard’s Chromosomes 2 and 9:

Dona paints a new area on Chromosome 2.

Here are Chromosomes 16 and 22:

There is some conflict on Chromosome 16 as Christine represents Delisle on the Lefevre side. So it is possible I got that connection wrong or there may be more than one connection.

Here is how my wife’s Aunt Lorraine matches Diane at Gedmatch:

Diane adds to Lorraine’s Chromosome2 and 4:

Diane’s match also overlaps with some more recent Pouliot matches on Chromosome 6.

Diane is consistent with other matches on Chromosome 16 and provides Lorraine’s first maternal match on Chromosome 22.

My Wife’s Aunt Suzy

Suzy’s real name is Virginia, just to add to the confusion.

Suzy has a smaller match with Diane at Gedmatch:

Donna paints new regions of DNA on Suzy’s chart:

I like to have lighter colors for the more recent common ancestors and darker colors for the more distant common ancestors, but this takes a while to work out.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It seems like it should be easy to paint to one’s chromosomes, but when I go to try it, it is quite difficult
  • In the past, the best options have been looking at Gedmatch for someone who has their information at Ancestry. That was the case here also with Diane
  • I may want to try to paint some more on my Hartley side next time.
Posted on

Looking at My Wife’s Side French Canadian Clusters at Ancestry

I’ll start by looking at my wife’s Aunt Lorraine’s Clusters. Lorraine’s mother was French Canadian:

Perhaps we will see some Lefevre, Methot, Pouliot and Fortin Clusters.

Here are Lorraine’s Clusters including paternal:

The connected clusters 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 are maternal or French Canadian. Clusters 4, 5, and 6 are on the paternal or Irish side.

It took a while to go through Cluster 1:

I looked at all the common ancestor suggestions and assumed that they were right. Out of 28 matches there were 17 common ancestor suggestions. They all included Lefevre, so I assume that this is a Lefevre cluster.

Here is the overall picture:

Clusters were paternal, so I did not look at them. Lefevre or 1873 had two wives. My wife descends from the Pouliot wife and not the other, so the blank wife (CA2) indicates a half relationship.

The last Tremblay/Bouliet result does not go well with the Methot/Angesrs descendant match as Tremblay is in a different part of the tree:

What I see is that most of Lorraine’s Standard Clusters are on the Lefevre side. A few are on the Methot/Angers side. There are some on the Lefevre/Pouliot side, but those relations are too close to be helpful. This would be at the 1st cousin level. Usually, one looks for the 2nd cousin level or further out to track.

Pouliot Clusters

I can force Pouliot clusters by choosing a person of interest:

I’ll choose 2nd cousin Belharuk. I’ll choose a match level between 30 and 150 cM:

I don’t know why sometimes I get a large cluster to see and sometimes I do not. Here is the first match in the 10 match cluster:

Robin is on the Lefevre side, but her grandmother is a Pouliot. This is very confusing. Here is a situation where I can identify with the Ancestry computers as they are confused also. I better go to Fred’s tree. He is one of my wife’s relatives and I trust his tree:

Fred does not actually descend from Lefevre. That explains Lorraine’s clusters above. Many that are called Lefevre are actually Pouliot. Fred’s tree shows on his paternal side.:

Here is a Pouliot DNA tree I made a long while ago. I believe that it correctly shows the Pouliot relationships:

Here we see Belharuk, Robin, Fred, and Lorraine. Fred, Belharuk, and Lorraine are 2nd cousins to each other and not related on the Lefevre side. The confusing part is that Joseph Martin Lefevre also marries Mabel Ford:

And that is what causes a great deal of confusion.

I am not sure how to fix this at Ancestry.

Here is John in Cluster 1:

He is the third match down. According to Shared Matches at Ancestry, he is the son of Judy. Here is Judy’s tree on her maternal side:

Here, I have added Judy and John to my Pouliot DNA tree for the next time I get confused by what Ancestry is showing:

Back to Lorraine’s Standard Clusters

I just remembered that I can filter Lorraine’s standard clusters by her maternal side:

Cluster 3 is actually Pouliot:

This explains the mystery as to why Lorraine had so many Lefevre clusters. Not all the Lefevre clusters were really Lefevre clusters.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I assumed that the Common Ancestors shown in the close relationships of the  Standard Clusters were right, but many were not.
  • I found this out when I went looking for Pouliot Clusters
  • That means that I should not always accept the close common ancestor suggestions that Ancestry has.
  • This Blog has me thinking about mapping my wife’s aunts’ French Canadian DNA using DNA Painter.