Did Christopher Dicks of Newfoundland b. 1821 Marry Elizabeth Crann?

This Blog is a follow-up on my previous Blog. Anne had tested her DNA and uploaded to Gedmatch.com which is great for DNA analysis. I posted my previous Blog at the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page. At that Facebook Page, I had this interesting comment from Karin,

Anne is Richard’s closest match on GEDMatch at 2.9 generations and 258 cM, and yet there is no apparent connection… unless of course Christopher Dicks married Elizabeth Crann, which is looking more and more likely. 

That comment sent me off to Richard’s results at Gedmatch and his Gedcom. Richard’s great grandfather was Samuel Crann:

Richard had this further interesting information on his second great grandfather John Crann:

Perhaps this Elizabeth Crann, daughter of John Crann could be the one that married Christopher Dicks born around 1812:

 

In March 2017, I had theorized that there should be a Crann in one of these two places on Esther’s Tree:

 

 

At that point, the two choices were on the Upshall Line or the Dicks Line. Karin is suggesting that it should be on the Dicks Line. In the above diagram, the green boxes are significant as they represent New Zealand Crann Lines with no other Newfoundland contribution. This branch moved from England to New Zealand.

Some Possible Crann Genealogy

My next step is to draw a tree with some of the proposed Crann connections and see if it makes sense by DNA matches. I already had this tree on my computer that had Richard on it:

As a point of interest, Forrest came up when I was looking at some of Anne’s DNA matches. Now I just add the Christopher Dicks Line through his putative wife Elizabeth Crann:

 

 

It looks like I’ve created a bit of a monster, but this is good in DNA terms. The wider the tree is, the more opportunities for DNA matching. Richard plays a pivotal role here. He is to the left of the Dicks/Crann Line, but he doesn’t descend from the Dicks of the Robert Dicks/Crann Line. He is to the right of the Christopher Dicks/[possible Eliazabeth Crann] Line but doesn’t descend from Christopher Dicks. Hence, Karin’s comment at the top of this Blog which got me going on this line of thinking.

Looking at DNA Matches

In my plan, the Frank Dicks and John Dicks lines are also important as they don’t descend from Upshalls as far as they know. Remember above, that one of my earlier ideas was that an Upshall could have married a Crann. If they also match Crann, which it appears they may, that would show that the Crann  DNA matches are through the Dicks marriage to Elizabeth Crann that we are considering here.

The Autosomal Matrix

Here I found a few others that were also in Crann Lines. Anne has good matches to our three New Zealand Crann descendants. Some testers that I haven’t looked at yet, Randy and Elaine as well as Karen all match with the New Zealand Crann descendants. Ken is still a mystery and appears to match on a different line. Notice he has huge matches until he gets to the NZ Group. Then basically nothing. This also holds true for Forrest and Sandi.

Looking for Crann Triangulation Groups (TGs)

Triangulation Groups are where three or more people match each other on the same segment of the same Chromosome. This is an indication of a common ancestor. In this case we are looking for a common Crann Ancestor.

Starting From the Bottom: Chromosome 22 TG

This was the big TG, so I’ll start here:

It seems ironic that the biggest TG is on the smalled chromosome. Here we have Heather, Margorie, Wayne, Randy, Elaine, Esther and Karen. If we go down a little more, Anne is also in there:

This shows that Anne has something called a crossover at about 35M. That is why she doesn’t start matching Heather, Elaine and Esther until then. Marjorie, Wayne and Heather are our tested and proven NZ Crann descendants. I have them highlighted in green on my spreadsheet.

This turns into quite the criss-cross:

[Edit: Edward in the bottom left is placed wrong in this tree and the next. For the correct tree see previous trees. He should be on the same level as Hayley. I am missing his female Shave ancestor here.]

Karen actually plays an interesting part in all this. She is in a TG with Randy and Esther. Because Karen is 7 generations away from Henry Crann, the match is just not there with the New Zealand Cranns. However, she triangulates on Elizabeth (now more apparently Crann). Randy, Anne, Elaine, Esther, Marjorie, Wayne and Heather triangulate on the same area of Chromosome 22 with Henry Crann born 1757. The confusing part is why Anne and Elaine don’t also match Karen in that same segment. It turns out that Elaine and Karen do match from 24 to 26M. And as I mentioned above Anne’s Crann DNA doesn’t kick in until later at 35M.

I just didn’t have enough orange lines:

So I added an orange line from Elaine to Elisabeth [most likely born Crann] Dicks. The point that I was trying to make above is that there is a TG focusing in on Elisabeth and a TG focusing in on Henry Crann. Both those TGs are using the same segments, so they represent the same Crann DNA. Technically, the DNA could be from Collens who was the wife of Henry Crann above, but by the time it made it’s way down to the two different lines, it could be considered Crann DNA. It looks like I had identified this TG back in March, 2017, but at that time, I only had Esther, Heather, Wayne and Marjorie in it. The fact that we have so many more testers now, including three that don’t appear to be descending from Upshall should put Elizabeth as Christopher Dicks’ husband.

TG On Chromosome 18

This one is less complicated:

This has just NZ Marjorie and Elaine and Esther. Note that Elaine matches her sister Joan here but Joan matches neither Marjorie nor Esther. How is that? The answer is that Elaine and Joan as sisters may match on their maternal and/or paternal sides. Elaine is matching Margorie on her maternal [Upshall] side. Joan is matching Elaine on her paternal [Ellis] non-Newfoundland side. It’s good to keep in mind with DNA that we all have a paternal and a maternal side.

Just to be confusing, it looks like Richard, Ken and Barry are in a TG with each other in the same area. This would most likely be a Dicks TG – unless they have some other non-Crann common ancestor.

A TG on Chromosome 10 with Molly, Howie, Marjorie, Wayne and Heather has been pointed out in my previous Blog.

Richard’s TG: Chromosome 8

This TG has Heather, Wayne and Richard.

The Last NZ TG On Chromosome 2

This is the last TG going up from Chromosome 22 where I started:

 

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was able to test out Karin’s perceptive theory with DNA
  • The DNA seems to show that Karin was right and that Christopher Dick’s wife should be Elizabeth Crann
  • Chromosome 22 gave the best evidence of Crann DNA in the Christopher Dicks b. 1812 Line. That showed a double TG going through Elizabeth. This double TG was apparently Crann DNA. Ironically Karen, who was part of one of these TGs, was recently added to the Upshall/Dicks Line via DNA matching.
  • The testers have reached a critical match for this Crann project with Crann descendants in New Zealand and in three Newfoundland Crann Lines.
  • It’s nice to have found some non-Dicks TGs after working quite a while on the Dicks Newfoundland DNA Project.

 

Hayley’s Grandmother’s DNA at Gedmatch

Hayley recently told me she had uploaded her grandmother’s DNA results to Gedmatch. Hayley is in the Dicks DNA Project which looks at the DIcks family of Newfoundland and their many descendants. Hayley’s grandmother is Anne and being Hayley’s grandmother she is already on a family chart of those that have had their DNA tested and uploaded to Gedmatch.

This is just one of the branches of the Dicks DNA project. Barry who is Anne’s nephew also pointed out to me that Anne is Esther’s second cousin. I checked on Esther’s list of matches and sure enough, Anne is Esther’s closest relative other than to her two half neices, Joan and Elaine and my wife (Joan’s daughter).

To the right, I have added in Karen and her ancestors. I haven’t proved that her ancestor was Esther’s Aunt, but it seems likely based on looking at her DNA matches.

Hayley was wise to get a DNA test for her grandmother. Anne gave half of her DNA to Chris who gave half of his DNA to Hayley. That should mean that Anne would have four times the Dicks DNA that Hayley does.

Let’s Get To the DNA

Here are the details:

The bottom line is the MRCA. Note that Anne and Esther are three generations from their common ancestors: Christopher Dicks and his wife Elizabeth. Esther and Anne may have some other common ancestors.

Are Your Parents Related?

There is a utility at Gedmatch called “Are Your Parents Related?” When I run Anne’s kit through that I get this:

This is what genetic genealogist David Pike (also from Newfoundland) calls Runs of Homozygosity. Anyway, Anne gets an MRCA of 3.4. That means that she is something like a 2nd cousin once removed to herself.

When I run the report for Esther, she gets an MRCA of 4.0, meaning her common ancestors are about 4 generations back. The way David PIke explains it, the Runs of Homozygosity (ROHs) is where the DNA lines up in your DNA due to those common ancestors.  Anne’s ROHs are on Chromosomes 1, 2, 4, 7, 13 and 20. Esther’s are on Chromosomes 2, 11. 15, and 20

Do Esther’s and Anne’s ROHs Match?

Here is Anne on Chromosome 2 vs. Esther

This makes it look like Anne’s common ancestors and Esther’s common ancestors are also common to Anne and Esther. Or put another way, this could be a quadrouple match between Anne and Esther. However, look at the match above.

It looks like there is no match specifically where Anne and Esther have ROHs. I’m not sure what that means. Probably an area for future research. Maybe Anne and Esther are messing with the Gedmatch matching algorythms. Or it could just mean that Anne’s common ancestors and Esther’s common ancestors are different people.

Here is Anne on Chromosome 20 vs. Esther

Here Anne and Esther’s ROHs don’t overlap. These two sets of DNA could be from the same couple and they could have sent different segments down to Esther and Anne, but we can’t be sure of it just from this comparison.

Back To the Dicks Project

I’ll start by comparing Anne to Edward, Randy, Barry, Joan, Elaine, Esther and Karen. I’ll skip Hayley as Anne will have the same Newfoundland DNA as Hayley, but a whole lot more.

The Autosomal Matrix

First I’ll sort people by the sublines that they seem to be in:

This is to see if it looks like these people are in the right groups. One thing I notice is that Edward and Esther have a pretty high match that doesn’t seem to be explained by a 2nd cousin once removed relationship. The match numbers go down when Edward gets to Joan, Elaine, and Karen. Perhaps Edward is related to Esther on her maternal side as well as the paternal. Esther matches Joan, Esther and Karen on her paternal side.

Here are some autosomal statistics to go with the Autosomal Matrix:

Esther is a half Aunt to Joan and Elaine. They are higher than average but within range. Edward at 2nd cousin once removed to Esther should have a match between 0-316, but he matches at 392.8.

More On Anne’s Family Tree

Before I jump into the DNA, I would like to look more into Anne’s family tree, to see what I may be getting into. In other words, what if I think Esther is matching Anne on her paternal side, but she is actually matching Esther on her maternal Hann side? That would get me all messed up.

Here is what I see at Ancestry:

That is actually not a lot to go on. Anne is missing the surname for a maternal grandmother. That is about 25% of Anne’s DNA. Also, as discussed above, Anne has the same person or couple in her ancestry on her paternal side and maternal side. This would be back about three and a half generations. That would mean back four generations on one line and three generations on the other.

Here ‘s a photo of Anne’s dad William Dicks:

William was living in Little Harbour in 1935:

William was living in an $800 8 room house with wife Edith and children Patricia and Bertram. Compare that to Peter Upshall sho had 8 people living in a 4 room $60 house.

William Dicks in 1921

This appears to be the same William in 1921 at Little Harbour East:

This census gives more detail about William’s place and date of birth. William’s occupation was “coasting” on a local schooner. This raises a few questions: Who was watching the girls while Willliam was coasting and Who was William’s first wife?

William Dicks’ First Wife

This is my guess for William’s first wife:

Notice that William was living at Little Harbour East at the time of his marriage. He got married at Harbour Buffett. If he was born February 1890, he wouldn’t quite be 22 at the time of his marriage. Also if the timing is right, his first daughter Ethel M came one year later in December of 1912.

Here is the connection between Harbour Buffett and Little Harbour:

 

William Dicks’ Father and Mother

John Dicks Born About 1844, Harbour Buffett

Anne’s tree shows that William’s father was John. I found a death record for a John Dicks in 1913:

The heading on the next to the last column seems to be mis-labled. It has ‘place of death’. As the second column is already place of death I think that the last column should read place of birth. That seems consistent with other death lists I’ve seen. At any rate, this would indicate that John Dicks was born about 1844 in Harbour Buffett. That connects Anne to Esther geographically.

Edith Reid

Anne’s tree has Edith dieing in 1909. I couldn’t find a death record for Edith, but found one for Elizabeth Dicks here:

Note that this Elizabeth also died  and was buried in Little Harbour East, but was born in Harbour Buffett about 1846.

Anne’s Mother’s Side: Edith Hann

Anne’s tree shows that Edith was born 1909. The logical place to look for Edith is in the 1921 Census. Here she is on the same page as William Dicks when he was widowed with two young girls:

This is the Census I liked because it gave birth month, year and place. I’m sure all of William’s descendants have gone through this before, but it’s new to me. This tells me that Chirs Dicks was born in Little Harbour East. Edith Dicks was born in Harbour Buffett. Richard Hann was born in PInch cove in 1899 and what appears to be his sister was born in 1909 in Little Harbour East. 12 year old Edith likely had no clue that she was to marry the then 31 year old widowed William Dicks. Perhaps it was young Edith that took care of William’s girls.

Little Harbour East in 1945

Could this be our Anne? She is listed on page XIV of the Little Harbour East 1945 Census. Anne’s tree says that her dad died the year that she was born:

The other question would be how 41 year old Thomas C Dicks would be Anne’s first cousin. That would mean that Thomas’s father would have to be John Dicks’ brother?

This looks to be Edith Hann’s older brother on Page XI of the Census:

He is living next to his adopted mother, Edith Dicks.

I didn’t see Edith Hann Dicks in the 1945 Census. Perhaps she remarried.

Edith Hann’s Parents

I started out wondering about Edith’s parents. Anne’s tree has John Henry Hann and Anastasia as her parents. We know that Edith was born at Little Harbour East. Her older brother was born at Pinch Cove. Pinch cove is 6 km North of Fair Haven. That should be directly South of Little Harbour. From a short look on the internet, Pinch Cove was abandoned after 1921.

As Richard Hann was born Sep 1899, I will look for a marriage between John Henry Hamm and Anastasia before that time. Here is a John Hann, widower who married in 1894

These two were listed as ‘RC’, Roman Catholic. I also noted that the name Anastasia came up frequently in the Roman Catholic Parish Registers.

Here is Mussell Harbour:

This looks promising geographically. The downside is this Jane would have been 45 in 1909 at the birth of Edith.

Here is perhaps a more promising entry. First I give the parents:

This Robert kept coming up as I was searching marriage records. Note that both Robert and John Henry are living in Pinch Gut. The date to the left is the birth of the child.

Here are their children with their Roman Catholic Baptism dates:

 

My guess is that Robert and John Henry were brothers. Note that their two children were baptized on the same day in 1894. The date on  the right is for registration. So I have linked John Henry to Pinch Cove via the birth of his son Richard in 1899. Here John Henry is in Pinch Gut with his wife Clara who gave birth to Margaret Jane five years later.

In 1896, Robert and John Henry had another synchronized birth and and baptism even:

This time, the baptism was listed under the Church of England. Here are their children and the baptsim date:

 

Did Clara Hann Die Young?

So far, there was a John Hann who married a Jane Whelan at Mussel Cove. I don’t know if that was the same as the John Henry Hann who married a Clara and had two children at Pinch Gut. Then John Henry Hann had two children – Richard and Edith at Pinch Cove and Little Harbour East. I have not found birth records for these two yet. I have a record of a Cara Hann dieing at Ping Gut in 1903:

Based on Clara’s age of 28 at death, she would have been 19 at the birth of her daughter Margaret Jane, so that sounds reasonable. A 10 year difference between Richard and Edith Hann would explain her death and John Henry’s marriage to Anastasia. So I have built a house of cards from the incomplete records that I have.

Back To the DNA

With Anne’s DNA results, it will be important to try to filter the DNA as much as possible as there could be potentially so many matches. In a recent Blog I wrote on Martha and her family, Martha was found to have more Upshall ancestors and fewer Dicks ancestors. So that should mean that if I compare Martha’s family with Esther’s and Anne, that may show an Upshall connection (or not).

Eliminating an Upshall Connection

When I did this exercise, it appears that Anne’s matches do not line up with those places that Martha and Esther’s families line up. I take that to mean that there are no obvious Upshall shared ancestors. The one place that Annes’ matches lined up with Martha’s family, they did not line up with Elaine and Joan. Elaine and Joan match Esther on her paternal side, so that match could be on Esther’s maternal non-Upshall (Shave) side:

Here, Joan is #1, MLB (Martha’s Aunt) is #2. DTE (Martha’s brother) is #3 and Anne is #4. Esther is the person that these people are matching.

Narrowing Down Anne’s Matches To the Dicks Line

 

When I look at shared matches between Elaine, Joan and Esther, those DNA matches eliminate Esther’s maternal side because Elaine and Joan are only related to Esther on the Upshall side. I had trouble figuring out more about Anne’s family history, but by DNA, it seems that she didn’t have an obvious Upshall influence in her DNA. That means that if I compare Esther, Joan, Elaine, and Anne, I should get mostly Dicks DNA. Now according to Martha, Henry Upshall’s father was Peter Upshall b. about 1800 and she has him married to a Margaret Burton. So there is the potential to have some Burton come through there assuming Martha is right. However, Anne could likely match Esther also on her maternal Dicks Line, so this method would elimiate that line of Dicks.

 

Comparing Ann’s DNA to Joan’s

As I mention above, Anne and Joan’s DNA should be specifically on the Dicks Line (and their ancestors). Here is how Joan and Anne match:

 

Comparing Anne to the Dicks DNA Project

Next, I’ll compare Anne to those who are in the main area of the Dicks DNA Project. Here is how the big Dicks Matrix looks:

Actually the Christopher branch is shaping up as one of the biggest branches and one with a lot of people that match each other. There are some, notably Nelson, Ken, Charles and a few others that match outside their branches. This could be on other Dicks Lines or other Newfoundland surnames. Based on a recent Blog, I added Karen to Esther’s family based on an Upshall connection. It appears that she fits quite well in the Christopher Dicks Line also.

Summary and Conclusion

  • As Anne has good DNA matching results, I found it a bit overwhelming looking at all her matches.
  • More work is needed in comparing Anne’s shared matches and the the Triangulation Groups she is in.
  • It is possible to narrow down the scope of Anne’s shared DNA by looking at certain testers with known genealogy. However, this could also fileter out matches that we do want. In this example, I looked at Anne’s matches with Joan, my mother in law to narrow down her matches. I could have also used Joan’s Elaine sister for this.
  • I tried to fill out Anne’s maternal side genealogy. This was to see if there could be other shared DNA matches that we didn’t know about. I found this to be a bit difficult to do. If Anne’s maternal genealogy were obvious, it would already likely be on her tree.
  • I’ll likely be following up with another Blog on Anne’s DNA results
  • I like how the Christoper Dicks (b. 1812) Line is filling in and how the DNA matches comirm the genealogy that we have for that line. Knowing the surname of Christopher’s wife Elizabeth would be a big help.

Mandy’s Upshall Connection

I had a response as a follow-up on a Blog I wrote about Martha and her family. Martha mentioned Mandy who also descended from her great great grandmother Jane Upshall . Mandy is on AncestryDNA, Gedmatch and has an Ancestry Tree. That is a combination for making things easy for me to look at.

Mandy’s Third Great Grandmother – Jane Upshall

This is what I find from Mandy’s paternal grandfather’s line:

That means that Mandy is one generation further away from the Upshall connection than Martha. Here is how the connection looks from the Upshall standpoint:

Hey, how did my Garmin get in there? By this, Mandy would be 2nd cousin three times removed to Esther. But I need to go through Joan and Elaine, because Mandy is also related in other ways to Esther. This relation is by the Kirby and Emberley Lines (and possibly others). Joan and Elaine are not descended from Esther’s maternal side, so that will eliminate as far as possible the non-Upshall DNA matches.

Mandy’s DNA

It turns out that Elaine is not on Mandy’s match list. However, Mandy does match Joan, Martha’s Aunt and my wife in that order on Chromosome 17.

 

That’s interesting becuase Joan and my wife got some Upshall DNA that Elaine and her 1/2 Aunt Esther did not. M.B., Mandy and Joan form a Triangulation Group. Here is how the Triangulation Group (TG) looks like:

Here Mandy is 1st cousin twice removed to M.B. and 3rd cousin twice removed to Joan. I don’t show my wife, Marie. They would be 4th cousins once removed. In order to be sure this is a TG, I had to make sure that Joan and M.B. match by DNA. They do.

As I mentioned, Mandy and Joan are 3rd cousins twice removed. That would be equivalent to 4th cousins. They have better than 50% chance of matching. That would explain why Mandy and Elaine didn’t match. Another reason could be the Upshall Chart I have above. I don’t really know if it’s right. It’s a trial chart. And even if it was right, we don’t know Peter’s wife – or if he had the same wife for both potential children of Peter Upshall.

Upshall TG Summary

Based on three Blogs, here is a summary of the TGs I have found so far that appear to hark back to an Upshall ancestor:

Due to Mandy being further out as a relative, she gets only one TG. Bob is in there due to a previous Blog I wrote. His results were inconclusive.

Mapping Chromosome 17

If I want to use this information, I could try to visually map Elaine and Joan’s DNA on Chromossome 17. Here is the chromosome browser showing how Joan and Elaine match each other.

It turns out that the crossovers were a little difficult to figure out. I wasn’t sure if there were crossovers at 13.3 and 13.8M or not. A crossover is where you have DNA on your chromosome from one of your grandparents and it crosses over to another grandparent, Mandy and M.B.’s Upshall  match is on the right of the Chromosome where I have a large segment shown:

Next, I look for more places where Esther matches Elaine and Joan:

There are two long matches. This shows that Joan has a maternal crossover at 30M and Elaine has a maternal crossover at 39M.

A Paternal Match is Needed: Melissa

Melissa is the best paternal match for Joan and Elaine. She matches Elaine and Joan with a common Ellis ancestor:

Melissa’s match translates to these blue Ellis segments for Joan and Elaine:

This tells me a few things:

  • The two crossovers at 13 can be eliminated. The only place to put them in now would be on Joan’s maternal side and that is too small a segment in the middle of a Chromosome.
  • Joan’s Ellis blue will go to the right as she already has a maternal crossover at 30.
  • The same applies for Elaine

Elaine has a maternal crossover already at 38, so that means that the blue Ellis can continue to the right:

Now it looks like I’m stuck going to the left of the Chromosome. But I’m not really. Logic dictates that Joan and Elaine’s Ellis DNA segments will continue to the left. How do I know that? The segment between 2 and 10 is FIR (Fully Identical Region). That means that Joan and Elaine must share the DNA from all 4 grandparents in the HIR (green) region. If I change one of the blues going left, that would make the area a non-identical region or a no-match area. So the crossover must be a maternal one. Joan has to switch to Upshall or Elaine has to switch to Daley.

I’m happy enough to leave Chromosome 17 as is for Joan and Elaine. This would be a good one to check for Ellis descendant DNA matches.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Mandy had one good Upshall certified match with Joan
  • Mandy has other matches with Esther, but they are likely on her maternal side where they share Kirby and Emberley ancestors.
  • Elaine and Esther did not have the same Upshall DNA match with Mandy. That gets to the importance of testing multiple people.
  • Elaine and Joan’s DNA results were important in filtering out the non-Upshall DNA matches that Mandy has with Esther.
  • For fun, I mapped most of Elaine and Joan’s Chromosome 17 to see where they got their DNA from. I did this using a method called visual phasing. To do this between two siblings, it is important to have good matches on the maternal and paternal side.

 

My First Try at Two Sibling Visual Phasing

I recently had my wife’s Aunt Elaine’s DNA tested. She is the only sibling of my mother in law Joan. I would like to try to visually phase these two. Fortunately, they have have a half Aunt Es wasther. She is related on only one of their grandparent’s sides. That side is Upshall from Newfoundland. I am hoping that Esther’s DNA results will be helpful in visually phasing.

Aunt Esther’s Upshall DNA

Here is how Elaine matches Aunt Esther:

Here is how my mother in law Joan matches Esther:

It looks like Esther will be a big help in identifying Elaine and Joan’s maternal grandfather side.

Chromosome 1

I’ll just jump in and try Chromosome 1. That is the big one.

Already I have a bit of a problem. There is some green within the second HIR or Half Idendical Region (yellow area). I am ignoring it for now. This graphic shows that Joan and Elaine have no FIRs on Chromosome 1.

Next I add Esther’s DNA to the mix:

This is interesting. I see two maternal crossovers for Joan. Joan’s maternal grandparents are Upshall and Daley. Esther represents Upshall. So at 17.4M, Joan must go from Upshall to Daley. I say this because Elaine continues to match Esther (Upshall) after 17. 4M. The same thing happens at marker 117.6. Now look at Esther. She must have a maternal crossover between 70 and 117.6M.

Actually, it looks like I made a mistake. My first comparison of Joan and Elaine is the same as Esther and Joan, so I must have done it wrong. I’ll make sure I have Joan and Elaine this time and lower the levels to 3 cM and 300 SNPs. Now my results look more reasonable.

That looks a lot better. Forget my comment about there being no HIRs. There are at least five green HIRs between Elaine and Joan. Things didn’t line up perfectly, but I tried to fudge them in. Upshall is shown in orange which corresponds to the matches with Aunt Esther. Next, I add in some more Maternal segments for Elaine and Joan:

Again, the orange pretty much mimics the matches that Joan and Elaine have with Esther. The difference is with Elaine’s last orange segment. That goes more to the left as I don’t show a crossover there. There should also be a maternal crossover for Elaine to the left of her second orange segment. That means that to the left of that middle orange segment, there should be some green Daley.

The Paternal Part of the Puzzle

It would help to have some paternal matches at this point. Melissa is one match that I have mentioned in at least one previous Blog.

I like Melissa’s matches, because she doesn’t show any obvious Rayner in her ancestry. A Rayner would mess things up as that is Elaine and Joan’s maternal grandmother’s name. Jane would also be a good choice here.

Melissa adds some information. She represents the Ellis side. She matches Joan, but not Elaine. As Melissa does not match Elaine in this location, I have put down the paternal grandmother Daley in Elaine’s segment below Joan’s Ellis segment:

[Edit: the reddish paternal segment on Elaine’s bar should actually be Rayner.]

Now I have a little bit of paternal informatiion, but I appear to be at an impasse. Next, I will look at Joan’s Excel spreadsheet of matches. I see a Hayley there that matches through the Dicks Line. Dicks is a mother of Upshall, so that counts as an Upshall for my purposes.  Here is Joan’s match with Hayley:

This does not help as Esther already matches in this area. However, it does point out that I missed a crossover at the beginning of the Chromosome where the FIR (green) between Elaine and Joan goes to HIR (yellow).

I’ll take a break for now and move on to another Chromosome.

Mapping the X

I mentioned that Chromosome 1 was the largest Chromosome. The X Chromosome is fairly large also. There are some advantages to mapping the X Chromosome. One advantage is that Elaine and Joan’s paternal X is already mapped to their father’s mother (Daley).

See, I already mapped both of their paternal side X Chromosome. Joan and Elaine both get the same X Chromosome from their dad. This is the same one he got from his mom (Elizabeth Daley). Here is the genealogy:

See, that is why I check. Joan and Elaine’s dad was an Ellis and his mom was a Rayner, so I got that backward.

That leaves Upshall and Daley for the maternal side. I mapped three maternal crossovers, but there may be more that I don’t see.

Again, Esther will represent Upshall and not Daley. That is because Elizabeth died in the flu epidemic. Fred Upshall remarried a Shave and had Esther.

When I check Esther’s X against Elaine’s, I get no match. Joan and Esther, however, do match:

In fact, Joan’s matches with Esther line up with the crossovers I have. That is good news. Here I also changed the color of Rayner to be consistent with Chromosome 1.

 

I’m pretty sure the end result should look like this:

Back to Chromosome 1

In the Dicks DNA Project I have been working on, I have a Triangulation Group Summary. The mother of Fred Upshall was a Dicks, so Dicks helps to identify Upshall DNA.  Here is a partial shot of that Summary for Chromosome 1:

I have not added Elaine to the Summary yet. This shows that Cheryl, Charles, Joan and Elaine match on Chromosome 1. Here is how Cheryl matches Esther, Elaine and Joan:

Adding Cheryl and Position Numbers

I got the numbers on the top of the Joan/Elaine comparison from Gedmatch’s full resolution option on their chromosome browser. A few observations:

  • Cheryl’s matches confirm Elaine’s crossover at 94 and Joan’s at 118M
  • Cherlys’s match with Joan also indicates a likely Paternal crossover for Joan at 70M
  • Elaine and Esther match to 158M. That means that Elaine likely does not have a crossover at 152
  • Due to the centromere of Chromosome 1, the two browsers align very poorly around 152M. Note on the original comparison between Joan and Elaine how quickly the numbers go from 118 to 152M.
  • As mentioned above, Elaine’s Upshall segment should go past 152, but then there is a FIR. That means that Joan will have an Upshall segment above Elaine’s. That means that her Daley segment will look tiny, but it will actually go from 118 to 152M which is not so small.

Based on my above observations, I have this new map:

I gave Joan a paternal crossover at 70.5M. I also gave her a paternal crossover at 152M. This leads to another observation. The area between 60.5 and 70.5M is a FIR. That means that for Joan and Elaine, their paternal grandparent and maternal grandparent have to match. That means that at 60.5M, Joan’s Ellis DNA has to turn into Rayner DNA or Elaine’s Rayner DNA has to turn into Ellis DNA. Either way, there will be a Paternal Crossover for either Elaine or Joan at 60.5M. That means that there is not a maternal crossover at 60.5M for Elaine nor Joan. That will expand the maternal Daley to the left for Elaine and Joan:

This leads to more observations:

  • One I could have noted before. Betwen 17 to 26.6M Elaine and Join do not match each other. Elaine has Upshall DNA there, so Joan has to have Daley there.
  • Elaine has a Maternal Crossover at 26.6M. That means that there is no Paternal Crossover there. That means that I can move the two paternal segments to the left.
  • The fact that Elaine has a Maternal Crossover at 26.6M means that Joan has no maternal crossover there, so the Daley segment can be moved to the left also for Joan.

Moving the Daley segment to the left for Joan created a Maternal Crossover for her at 17. That means that there is no Paternal Crossover there and the two Paternal segments can be moved to the left:

So Chery’s matches were a help.

Summary and Conclusion

  • A first shot at two person visual phasing has shown promise.
  • Chromosome 1 is a difficult one, but I got a start on it
  • The X Chromosome was mapped for Elaine and Joan.

 

 

 

Edward and the Dicks Family Autosomal DNA

My last Blog was about Edward and his Newfoundland Dicks YDNA. In this Blog, I’ll look at the autosomal side of Edward’s DNA.

Edward’s Newfoundland Genealogy

Edward descends from Christopher Dicks who was believed to be from Harbour Buffett, born 1812:

This Christopher was believed to be the son of another Christopher who was born around 1784. The 1784 Christopher had many children and their ancestors have had their DNA tested. I have been trying to tie that DNA as best I can back to Christopher. This is somewhat complicated by intermarriages. My wife has also tested. She is the daughter of Joan. Esther is a half Aunt of Joan and has Dicks on her father and mother’s side. By this chart, Edward is Esther’s 2nd cousin, once removed, Joan’s third cousin and my wife Marie’s third cousin, once removed.

Edward’s Dicks DNA

Here is Edward’s match with Esther:

The estimated number of generations to their common ancestor is about what one would expect for a 1st cousin once removed. That could mean that Edward and Esther share ancestors outside of their Dicks ancestors shown above.

Here is Edward’s match with Joan:

Joan and Edward also share more DNA than expected. The 3.5 generations estimated to a common ancestor would usually indicate a 2nd cousin once removed. However, this is still within normal ranges. Also note that Joan shares some DNA with Edward that Esther does not. See Chromosome 6, for example.

My wife, as expected also got a little more DNA than average for a 3rd cousin once removed:

The DNA that Esther, Joan and Marie share with Edward should represent the DNA shared with Christopher Dicks b. 1812 and his wife Elizabeth. This is especially true for Joan and Marie. Remember I said that Esther has a Dicks ancestor on her maternal side, so this is a complicating factor.

The Autosomal Matrix for Dicks Descendants

I’ll do a multiple kit analysis at Gedmatch with 24 descendants of Christopher Dicks b. 1784. Then I put the results in a matrix:

I’m quite happy with the results as all the Christopher Dicks descendants scored well (inside the bold box). Everyone is well behaved. Hayley has slightly lower scores with Joan but that is expected as she is one generation removed from Edward, Barry and Joan. Edward has some notable matches outside the Christopher Line of around 100 cM with Molly and Ken that could be worth pursuing. I’m still a bit puzzled with the large match that Ken has with Esther.

Triangulating

Next I take all the specific segment matches between the 24 Dicks descendants and compare them to each other. Actually, I have done this already for 23 of the Dicks descendants, so I need to look to see what difference Edward makes in all these comparisons. Now we will be unlocking the secrets of Edward’s genetic past. The say something like that on the Finding Your Roots TV show that I watch.

Triangulation Group (TG) Chromosome 5

The first significant TG is see is at Chromosome 5. It looks like this in spreadsheet form:

Gedmatch repeats the matches, so each match shows up twice. Here we see that Esther, Edward and Joan all match each other.

It would be logical to assume that the common ancestors for this TG are Chritopher, born about 1812 and his wife Elizabeth. The theory is that the TG points to only one ancestor, so the DNA for this TG is only from Christopher or Elizabeth. So, what about Hayley? She is not in the TG. She shows as matching Pauline who is also not in the TG. That tells me that their match is coming from a different direction. Hayley does have Christopher and Elizabeth as ancestors, but Pauline does not. We would have to look for another common ancestor that these two have. Pauline is on the Dicks/Joyce Line.

Grace, Dorothy and Catherine are all from the Dicks/Adams line, so it could be likely that they are matching on that line only.

A nested TG on Chromosome 5

This next TG on Chromosome is a little more complicated:

In my previous work on Dicks DNA, I had noted the TG with Wallace, Judy, Katherine and Cathy. I also had Nelson in there, so I probably lowered some thresholds for that. This time, there is also a TG with Edward, Esther and Barry above, and Edward is added to the TG below. I interpret this as meaning that the top TG harks back to Christopher and Elizabeth and the second one is for the elder Christopher b. 1784 and his wife Margaret.

This should be an interesting visual:

The black TG is the first TG that is more recent (Christopher of the early 1800’s). The second TG goes back to the elder Christopher (from the late 1700’s) and wife in red. Edward is in both TGs. My strong guess is that the red TG is truly a TG for Christopher and Margaret. This is because the DNA is coming from four of the children. It is possible, but not likely that each of these four lines has a common ancestor with a surname other than Dicks.

Why is Edward in two TGs and Barry and Esther only in one. I can only guess. My guess is that Edward inherited DNA from Christopher b. 1784 and Margaret. Perhaps Esther and Barry inherited DNA from only Christopher or Margaret. Any more guesses would make my brain hurt too much, so I’ll stop there.

TG Chromosome 6

There is a similar situation on Chromosome 6.

At the top, there is Grace, Sandra and Dorothy. They are from the Elizabeth Dicks/Thomas Adams Line. Katherine, also a part of that line, pops in below. Wallace, Judy, Molly and Howie are in the Rachel Dicks/James Joyce Line.  So picture these Dicks line outside of the highlighted TGs.  The highlighted TG could be one TG where Cathy opts out and decides to start matching Cheryl. Edward opts into the TG not far from where Cathy opts out. The other way to look at it would be like the previous TG. Barry, Edward and Hayley all have Christopher b. 1812 and his wife as ancestors.

Well, that’s pretty ugly. In this situation, I’m not sure if Cathy, Barry, and Hayley might not have another common ancestor. My best guess right now is that I have the ancestors right.

another brain twister on chromosome 6

 

Here Edward is in the middle of two new TGs. Edward matches Esther and Pauline in one TG and Joan and Ken in the other. Here are the two TGs in a Chromosome Browser from Edward’s point of view:

  1. Esther
  2. Pauline
  3. Joan
  4. Ken

We know that neither of these TGs have Christopher b. 1812 and his wife in them. That is because, as far as we know, Pauline and Ken do not have these two as ancestors.

I have shown in the past from DNA that Esther and Joan have Crann in their ancestry. One place where Crann may have come in could be that the Margaret that married the Christopher in the top red circle was a Crann. That would make the red TG a Crann TG and the yellow one a Dicks TG. Again, it is a bit of wild speculation, but it does help explain why Ken has such large matches with other Dicks. He is likely related on many lines.  Note above that he descends from a Dicks/Crann Line.

Cathy and TG7

Cathy was in a TG above with Barry and Haley on Chromosome 6. Here she is in a TG with Edward and Esther:

This makes me wonder what Cathy has in common with Edward, Esther, Barry and Haley. I see by her family tree that she had Harbour Buffett ancestors.

One or two new TGs Chromosome 9

This was a little difficult to see, so I hid some of the duplicate matches:

Aah, the mysteries of DNA. There is one good thing about my mother in law being in TGs. She is a half niece to her Aunt Esther, so that cuts down on some of the possible lines. Below is Esther’s family tree. Joan is only related on Esther’s paternal side which includes those ancestors within the red box.

The bad news is that there are a ton of gaps in the tree. The only two surnames I have for sure are Upshall and Dicks. Plus it is difficult to be sure about the two oldest Dicks families on the tree. The point is that the TGs on Chromosome 9 have to be on the top part of the tree highlighted in red.

TG10

Esther and Edward have at least one ancestor in common with Ken who is from the Dicks/Crann Line:

TG11 Christopher b. 1812

 

TG13 – Dorothy from the Adams Line

 

I must be near the end.

TG14 – back to home base and Christopher

 

This is all solidifying that Joan, Edward and Esther have the same relatively recent common ancestors.

TG18 on the Adams Line with Grace and Nelson

TG19 – With Wallace and Judy on the Joyce Line

 

Those are all the TGs. Now I just need to summarize them.

TG Matrix

The matrix is getting big, so I will have to show it in two screen shots. I hid a few of the people. One person, I don’t see in Gedmatch anymore. Sandi was in only one TG and Forrest was in none. I hid Clayton as he is unsure of his Dicks ancestry.

Assuming that all these TGs represent Dicks, we should be amassing quite a bit of information on the various Dicks Lines and for their parents Christopher Dicks and his wife Margaret. In fact, I show at least one triangulated segment for each chromosome.

Filtered TG matrices

Here I filtered just by Edward’s TGs:

Esther:

Joan:

Finally, the Matrix filtered for Ken’s TGs:

This further shows Ken’s affinity to the Christopher Line by TGs.

I’ve gone on way too long, so it’s time to quit.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Edward has contributed a substantial amount of information to the Newfoundland Dicks DNA Project
  • Edward is clearly in the same group as Esther, Joan, Barry and Hayley and has formed many new TGs
  • The arrival of DNA results recently for Edward, Barry and Hayley has more than doubled what was available for the Christopher DIcks b. 1812 descendants.
  • Ken continues to play an interesting part in his matches and TGs
  • Filtering the TG Matrix showed some promise. It appears that Ken is more closely related to Joan than to Edward based on filtering.  However, Ken showed up most in Edward’s TGs other than TGs Edward had within the Christopher Line.

Edward and the Dicks Family YDNA

I recently had an email from Edward. He had found my Blogs on Dicks DNA via Google. He had done a lot of Dicks genealogy in the past and now has had his DNA tested. That is great news. Edward is someone with a great knowledge of Dicks genealogy and has tested his Autosomal and YDNA.

First, Dicks YDNA

Seeing as I knew nothing up until now about Dicks YDNA, I’ll start with that. Edward is R-L371. That needs a bit of explanation. In very broad strokes, that shows that the branch of Dicks that we are looking at is R1b > L21 > L371. L21 is an interesting branch. L21 has been called the Celtic branch. This may be inaccurate, but to me it typifies the old inhabitants of the British Isles. As you know, the British Isles have been invaded by many different groups. I suppose you can say the L21’s are the invaded rather than the invaders of the British Isles.

Here is L371 on the L21 Tree:

This is from an outmoded tree. The creator of the tree gave up updating it in 2015 as so many L21 branches have been discovered. You will notice that some groups have more branches than others. L371 has very few branches. YFull tracks (for a fee) branches for people that have taken the BigY YDNA test or equivalent.

The interesting thing about the YFull Tree is that it gives dates. It shows that R-L371 was formed 4300 years ago. However, it has R-Y15149 right under it formed only 350 years ago. That is a long time span.

For R1b, Alex Williamson’s Tree is another resource. This tree also analyzes BigY testers.

I erased the ID’s for privacy. From the above, it looks like there are three L371 people that have taken the BigY test and uploaded to the Big Tree. This shows that McKee and Stewart share one variant (with a number) and two SNPs. SNPs are the ones starting with letters, like BY11922. If two Dicks descendants were to take the Big Y test, it would be likely that a new SNP would be found that would be unique to the Dicks family.

STRs Vs SNPs

I started out discussing SNPs above as they are more certain than the STRs. SNPs are Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms. The Single is the important word and it means that they are singular or unique. STR stands for Short Tandem Repeat. A repeat is a number of copies of a position at your YDNA that gets repeated more or less due to a mutation. Because the value of the STR can go up or down over time, this makes for some ambiguities.

STRs and SNPs have an interesting interplay. For example, STRs are used to estimate a SNP, then SNPs are further tested for verification. This is unless a BigY or similar test is taken. The BigY finds all your named SNPs and then discovers new or unnamed SNPs which would be named at a future date once someone else tests positive for them. Once one has tested for a SNP or Haplogroup that is as close to the present as can be found, the STRs can be used as a sort of fine tuning within that SNP.

Ed and Harold’s STRs

Ed forwarded me the results of his 111 STR test. 111 STRs are a lot. That is pretty much the maximum number of STRs that people take at FTDNA. Ed also sent me Harold’s 111 STR results. Harold is a Henry Dicks (b. 1774) Line descendant and Ed is a Christopher Dicks (b. 1789) Line descendant.

This came out quite small. Harold is listed first. the value in red is Harold’s Haplogroup. It is in red because this SNP is a very general SNP estimated on his STRs. Ed has the haplogroup or SNP of R-L371 that I mentioned above. This is in green indicating that Ed has tested for that Haplgroup or SNP confirming that he has it. Ed highlighted in yellow the STRs that differed between him and Harold. He noted that there were only 4 out of 111 STRs that were different. That likely means that Harold and Ed share the same Haplogroup of R-L371.

FTDNA L371 YDNA Project

FTDNA has many Projects for surnames and different Haplogroups. I find the Haplogroup Projects to be more helpful. Ed is in the Dicks surname group and the L371 Group. I haven’t seen Harold’s results in either group. Here is the grouping that Ed is in within the FTDNA L371 Group:

Ed is placed with six other YDNA tested people because they have similar STRs. The heading he is under is called Modal 1.3. When I look at the L371 Group description, it says that:

Modal 1, R-L371+                   Represents an early Briton (Celtic?) group found heavily today in Wales and scattered across south England.

The modal for this group is important. The modal is basically the number for the STR that occurs most often. This modal is considered to be the representative number for the group or can be considered the older number. The colored numbers are the ones that deviate from the Modal. So in this case, I take the modal to be the modal for the group that consists of Thomas, Monroe, Reese, Phillips and Dicks. As there are five different surnames, I am guessing that this group has been around since before there were surnames in that area. That area probably being Wales according to the information above.

A Dicks YDNA Signature STR

A signature STR would be a set of STRs that would define the Dicks surname. I looked at the places where Ed and Harold were different than the Modal 1.3. It turns out these were the STRs that Ed and Harold were different from each other:

The exception was for DYS534. However, without Harold, the Modal was tied between 15 and 17. With Harold added the modal would have been 17, so I’ll leave that one out. Assuming that the Mode is the older, that means that Ed would have the older STRs for DYS449, CDY and DYS710. Harold would have the older STR for DYS549. Another point is that the STRs in maroon are the faster moving STRs.

A Simple Dicks STR Tree

Here is one guess of how a STR tree could be drawn for the Dicks family including Harold from the Henry Dicks Line and Ed from the Christopher Dicks Line.

Keep in mind that these trees are not an exact science. This is just one possibility of how to draw a tree. More information would refine this tree. You may wonder why Harold had three STR changes and Ed had only one if they were the same distance from a common ancestor. All I can say is this is pretty typical. DNA seems to have a mind of it’s own. Harold’s first two changes were the fast STRs, so that makes sense. Harold and Ed only had one STR change each for non-fast STRs. Some people even tend to disregard some of the fast moving STRs such as CDY as they can be misleading over a long time period. Another interesting fact is that the difference between the mutation rate of the fastest and slowest mutation STRs could be as much as a factor of 1,000 times.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I didn’t know anything about Newfoundland Dicks YDNA. Now I do.
  • Even though some complicated things happen with YDNA, the changes are confined to one long line going from father to son where all the fathers and sons follow a straight line – in this case Dicks line.
  • The Newfoundland Dicks Haplogroup appears to be R-L371
  • Harold is almost certainly R-L371 based on STR similarities to Edward
  • There is likely at least one haplogroup below R-L371 that would further define the Dicks surname. However, finding new haplogroups requires the BigY or similar testing.
  • In a previous Blog I tied together the Henry Dicks and Christopher Dicks Lines together by looking at autosomal DNA matches. The YDNA matches between Edward and Harold do the same thing in a more precise manner.
  • I’ll look at Edward’s autosomal DNA in an upcoming Blog.

 

Marie’s Connection to Richard and Newfoundland by DNA

Marie is my wife. Richard is a person on Marie’s Gedmatch match list. In fact,  Richard is, at the time I write this, Marie’s 495th match on her ‘one to many’ match list. Marie and Richard don’t know each other, so how do I know they have a Newfoundland connection?

Marie and Richard’s DNA Match

Marie and Richard’s DNA match looks like this at Gedmatch:

This shows that Richard and Marie share modest amounts of DNA on three of their Chromosomes. By DNA they could have a common ancestor about 5 generations ago. That means that they could be roughly 4th cousins. Marie could have gotten this DNA from her mom or dad, but she got it from her mom, Joan. This is how Richard and Joan match:

Joan shows as 4.3 generations away from Richard. The difference between Joan and Richard and Marie and Richard should be 0.5 generations roughly. This is because Joan is one generation closer to Richard and her common ancestor, but Richard is no closer or further. So it should average out to 0.5 generation difference roughly. Richard and Joan should be about 3rd cousins once removed, or something similar. Now I’ve narrowed down Marie’s match to about half of all her DNA matches.

Marie’s 1/2 Great Aunt Esther

Marie’s Aunt Esther is the key to understanding her match to Richard. Richard and Esther also match by DNA. Both of Aunt Esther’s parents were from Harbour Buffett, Newfoundland. So if Richard matches Esther, Joan and Marie and Esther, Joan and Marie match each other in the same DNA segment, that means they all have a common ancestor. Here is Richard’s match to Esther:

This shows that Esther, Joan, Marie and Richard only share DNA on Chromosome 11 from about position 12-19 M. That shared DNA would likely represent the common ancestor between Richard, Esther, Joan and Marie. Here is Marie’s family tree up to Aunt Esther:

Fred Upshall’s first wife Elizabeth died in the flu epidemic. Marie descends from Elizabeth. Esther descends from Fred’s second wife Margaret who was also from Harbour Buffet, Newfoundland. Any shared DNA with Joan, Marie and Esther must come from Frederick or one of his ancestors and not from the Shave side. That is how I know that Richard and Marie connect through Newfoundland and more specifically through Harbour Buffet, Newfoundland. Even more specifically, the Upshall side of the Harbour Buffett tree. We have narrowed down Marie’s DNA match with Richard to her mother’s side. Then to Marie’s maternal grandmother, Florence. Next, Marie has eight great grandparents, but we have narrowed down the DNA she shares with Richard to one of her eight great grandparents, Fred Upshall. Put another way, Marie has 2,000 matches on her ‘one to many’ match page at Gedmatch. This would narrow those matches down to 250, on average.

Richard’s Genealogy

So far, I haven’t looked at Richard’s genealogy at all. Richard and Esther have both tested at AncestryDNA. Richard shows as a predicted 3rd cousin to Esther at AncestryDNA. Above, Gedmatch estimated 3.5 generations to a common ancestor. This would be equivalent to a 2nd cousin once removed.

Richard’s Newfoundland side is through his father. Here is Richard’s paternal Newfoundland Line:

Two Trees Together: Where Are the Common Ancestors?

This is the difficult part. The genealogy of Newfoundland is missing much information. Here are Richard’s and Esther’s trees side by side:

Ancestry points out that Richard and Esther have the common Kirby surname. It could be that Joseph and John Kirby were brothers.

The Crann Connection

In a previous Blog, I show a triangulation between Esther, Joan and a Crann back to England. I show that Elizabeth and an Upshall spouse could have come from John Crann, but I now see that they could have come from another child of Henry Crann. I’m sure there are other possibilities.

This is where things get interesting. The John Crann in the diagram above is the same as in Richard’s tree. Remember when I said that Richard, Esther, Joan and Marie all matched on only one segment? That is the same segment represented by the Triangulation Group (TG) in the diagram above:

All I have to do is to see if Richard matches Heather from New Zealand. The good news is that he matches Heather. The bad news is that it is not on Chromosome 11:

Sometimes the DNA doesn’t behave like I would like it to. This could be a case where Richard and Heather are matching on the Collins side and Esther, Joan and Heather are matching on the Crann side (or the other way around). A TG only points to one ancestor. Here is Richard added to the Crann Tree:

In this tree, Richard matches Forrest (his third cousin twice removed):

Richard matches Wayne:

And Heather matches Wayne for a triangulation on a specific segment on Chromosome 8:

What I’d like to make clear is that the line is green is from New Zealand. The line in white is from Newfoundland. The ancestors Henry Crann and Elizabeth Collens were from Netherbury, Dorset, England and their children headed off in opposite directions. So this is a long range triangulation. This helps those with intermarried Newfoundland roots as the New Zealand descendants have just the Crann/Collens ancestors. This makes finding common ancestors easier clearer.

Summary and Conclusion

In this Blog I traced a DNA match between my wife, Marie and Richard. This match went up through Marie’s mom and through a common match with Marie’s 1/2 great Aunt up through one of her eight great grandparents. This greatly narrowed down where the match came from.

Then I looked at common ancestors. Richard and Esther have a Kirby surname in their ancestry, but the Kirby isn’t in Joan and Marie’s ancestry. After that, I looked at the Crann connection that Richard has. This was based on previous DNA work I had done. It turns out that Richard triangulates with Crann descendants from New Zealand that have never had ancestors in Newfoundland. This New Zealand triangulation removes some of the complications of intermarriage in Newfoundland. The Crann connection also confirms the previous work I did showing that there must be a Crann somewhere in the ancestry of Esther, Joan and Marie.

Fitting Barry into the Dicks Genealogy by DNA

My wife’s mom and 1/2 great Aunt Esther seem to be getting some good Dicks descendant matches at Gedmatch recently. One of the newest ones is Barry. Barry is match #5 on Esther’s ‘One to Many’ list at Gedmatch. Barry is match #8 for my mother in law Joan. #8 out of 2,000 matches is not bad.

The Genealogy

Barry tested at Ancestry. He hasn’t linked his tree to his DNA test, but I have found a little tree that Barry put together:

I quickly started off by recreating the tree. However, I headed in the wrong direction. There was a Harbour Buffett marriage on-line for a William Dicks and Edith Hann which I assumed was the right one. Apparently there were two William Dicks/Edith Hann married couples. One was in Harbour Buffett and the other in Little Harbour East. Here’s a map posted at the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page that I high-lighted:

Little Harbour East apparently is adjacent to Little Harbour.

Barry’s tree connects to Hayley’s tree.

My previous Blog was on Hayley’s DNA. According to Barry, this branch of Dicks moved from Harbour Buffett to Little Harbour East in the 1860’s. Hayley helped me out by sending along the Little Harbour East Censuses for 1921 and 1935:

I was unable to find Bertram on my own, probably due to a Census misspelling. Here is a photo of the twice-married William Dicks sent to me by Hayley:

Barry’s DNA

Hayley is Barry’s first match on his ‘One to Many’ list at Gedmatch:

They have all sorts of DNA shared. A common ancestor of 2.5 usually means a 1st cousin, once removed. That is what we have here:

Esther is a 2nd cousin once removed to Barry based on the chart above. By DNA, on average, their common ancestor should be 3.5 generations away. Here is what the DNA match between Esther and Barry shows:

This shows that either Barry and Esther share more than the average DNA for a 2nd cousin once removed or that they have extra ancestors in common. Based on Newfoundland genealogy, I would guess the latter. By DNA, Barry and Esther look to be more like 2nd cousins.

Joan and Barry should be 3rd cousins by their common ancestor, Christopher Dicks. At Gedmatch, that would be on average 4.0 generations to a common ancestor. Here is what Gedmatch shows for the DNA match between Barry and Joan:

The difference isn’t as pronounced with Joan. Perhaps because her ancestry is one quarter Newfoundland and Esther’s is 100% Newfoundland.

The Autosomal Matrix

I like to look at the matches in Gedmatch’s Autosomal Matrix as the different lines of descent sometimes become apparent.

If I look at Barry going across, his largest non-close family match is with Esther. This tells me that compared to all these other Dicks descendants, he fits in the Christopher Dicks group.

  • Barry has a good match with Ken in the Crann group, but not with others in that group. This could indicate a non-Dicks match between Barry and Ken.
  • Ken has large DNA matches with many of the Dicks descendants on the Matrix.
  • I had forgotten that Ken has a Dicks ancestor on the Burton line also. The matrix seems to show he is more closely matched to that line than the Cran Line. I had forgotten about Ken’s Dicks/Burton ancestors, so the Matrix didn’t highlight that.
  • Esther and Nelson match others more as they are one generation closer to their common ancestors than others.
  • Esther has an additional Dicks line that I haven’t figured out yet.
  • Others will have other relationships with families outside the Dicks family which would cause interference.

Triangulation Groups: A Better Way

A Triangulation Group (TG) is a group of three or more people. All their DNA matches each other in every combination. When this happens, the group should have a common ancestor. In a group of all Dicks descendants, the common ancestor is more likely to be a Dicks ancestor (or spouse). The problem with creating a large Dicks TG Matrix is that it takes a while to look at all the possible matches.

The goal when I have done all the Dicks triangulation is to put all the results into another matrix. I had done that before with the Henry line which is a brother line to Christopher Dicks, b. about 1784. I took out the Henry Line for simplicity below:

Looks like I am missing at least Ken, Sandi, Hayley and Barry. I should also add in Clayton, as there is some question as to which line he is in. The pink TGs indicate that the DNA could be coming from the spouse of a Dicks. For example, an all Adams line TG, could be DNA coming just from Adams and not Dicks. Marilyn aka Molly and Howie are siblings. If two siblings plus another match, this is not usually considered a TG as the siblings have the same parents. Esther and Joan are in many TGs, but as they were the only two at the time from the Christopher b. about 1813 Line, those TGs go outside that line (or are from the unknown wife of Christopher).

When I do this comparison of Dicks DNA, I get 1620 lines of matches. However, each combination is repeated, so it is only 810 lines really. When I make the new TG Matrix, there is good news and bad news. The good news is that Ken and Barry especially have created a lot of new TGs. The bad news is that it makes the TG Matrix show up very small:

I made a slight adjustment in the TG Matrix. I put Molly and Howie in just one row, but that row is for Joyce and Crann. A few other observations:

  • Barry appears to be in TGs 7 times with the Christopher Line. That appears to place him solidly in the Christopher (born about 1813) line
  • Barry appears to be in TGs 3 times with Nelson of the Adams line. This could be partially because Nelson is one generation closer to common ancestors.
  • Ken’s results are confusing to read. He seems to be in TGs outside the Cran group more than in it.

Ken’s results

Ken’s closest relationship in his Dicks/Cran line is 3rd cousin, once removed. That is with the common ancestor of Robert Dicks and Jane Cran.

However Ken is also 3rd cousin once removed with Esther and Nelson with the common ancestor of Christopher Dicks, the father of Robert Dicks born about 1784. It may also be that Ken is in many non-Dicks TGs with Dicks descendants as he may be more closely related on those lines than the Dicks lines. For example, I know that Ken has an Upshall ancestor. The TG that he has with Esther and Joan could be a Dicks TG, an Upshall TG or some other name where we have a missing ancestor. Compare the Christopher Line to the Cran Line:

Barry is only 2nd cousin once removed to Esther and 3rd cousin to Joan. This makes a big difference in the DNA comparisons compared to Ken’s Cran relative results. Another thing that I forgot was that Ken has ancestors in the Dicks/Burton line also:

Let’s say that Ken’s case is advanced DNA analysis and I don’t have to figure out all his matches right away.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Barry and Hayley appear to be linked closely by DNA to Esther and Joan. The interpretation is that they are linked in the same Christopher Dicks Line.
  • Without Barry’s results, it would have been difficult to interpret Hayley’s results by the TGs. However, as we know that Hayley is closely related to Barry, his results apply to Hayley’s
  • Ken’s results aren’t easy to interpret just within the context of the Dicks DNA study. I left my previous Blog on Ken thinking there was more to be discovered about all his matches and I still feel that way.

 

Hayley’s Harbour Buffett Dicks

I was glad to find a DNA match between Hayley and my wife’s family. This DNA match represents a shared Harbour Buffett, Newfoundland heritage. Here is a painting of Harbour Buffett I found on the internet by Charlene Pafford Sharpe:

I can tell I’ve been doing this research for a while, as I recognize the Pafford name.

Here is how the tree was for my mother in law Joan and her Aunt Esther:

I was beginning to think that there was something wrong with my narrow Christopher Dicks, Jr. tree. However, I am happy to now see Hayley on that tree also:

See, much better. Esther is at Ancestry where Hayley shows as a 3rd cousin as predicted by DNA. Hayley is actually a 2nd cousin twice removed to Esther, which by DNA is virtually the same level of match.

Matches Between Hayley, Esther, and Joan

These matches should zero in on their common ancestors of Christopher Dicks born around 1812 and his wife Elizabeth. I put these matches together in a spreadsheet:

Here we have two categories of matches. The gold highlighted matches triangulate. That means that Hayley matches both Joan and Esther. Also Esther and Joan match each other at those areas.

Hayley Compared to the Larger Dicks DNA Project

Here is Hayley in a Matrix of Dicks descendants:

  • These matrices work better when people aren’t related different ways.
  • The Adams dark box makes the most sense as they have higher numbers among their own group.
  • Adams refers to the married name of the female Dicks, daughter of the Christopher Dicks that was born around 1784.
  • Esther has more than one line of Dicks in her ancestry, but I don’t know what the second line is.
  • Molly and Howie descend from two Dicks Lines
  • Hayley has matches with Forrest, Ken and Sandi from the Dicks/Crann line. Perhaps Hayley has some Crann ancestry also?

Hayley’s Dicks Triangulation Groups (TGs)

This is the part I don’t like to do as it is a bit of work. I choose all those who have said that they are descended from the Christopher Dicks born around 1784. I check how to see they match each other. I look for TGs out of that group of matches. Gedmatch will run a TG report, but it will include all of your ancestors. The TGs that I want to look at here are supposed to be specifically narrowed down to the Dicks family as much as possible.

Here is where Hayley triangulates with Nelson and Sandra from the Dicks/Adams Line:

This means that these three have a common ancestor. As Nelson and Sandra are closely related, I could not guarantee that the common ancestor would be Dicks. Assuming the common ancestor is Dicks, the TG would look like this:

Hayley has another TG with Nelson on Chromosome 18:

Nelson is a good choice to be in a TG with as he is closer to the common ancestor than many. Also if only Grace’s sister had tested and not Grace, we would not know about this TG. Note that Esther and Joan are not in this TG, but match each other. That would mean that the DNA that Esther and Joan got in that Chromosome 18 match was probably non-Dicks and probably Upshall.

That’s It

  • I didn’t see any more TGs for Hayley. Looking over her tree perhaps there was not a lot of overlap with other Dicks collateral names.
  • I’m glad to have another DNA-tested Christopher Dicks, Jr. descendant on the tree.
  • Hayley’s DNA testing supports her tree. That tree shows a common ancestor of Christopher Dicks, Jr. and his wife Elizabeth for Hayley, Esther and Joan
  • Hayley matches with three Crann line testers. This connection may be worth looking into.

 

 

A New Harbour Buffet DNA Match

My wife’s great Aunt Esther is Ms. DNA for Harbour Buffet. She likely matches anyone else by DNA who has Harbour Buffet ancestors. Both Esther’s mom and dad were from Harbour Buffet:

I noticed recently that Esther has a new match at Gedmatch named Doug. Doug is Esther’s fourth match on her ‘One to Many’ list at Gedmatch. Her first is my mother in law. The second is my wife. The third is Ken who I blogged about here.  I have a feeling that Ken and Doug will match by DNA.

Here is Doug’s tree:

A lot of Douglas’ ancestors were from Harbour Buffet. Douglas has two Samuel Kirby’s in his ancestry. Also an Upshall which is great. Notably missing from Douglas’ ancestry is the Dicks name. I have written many blogs about the Dicks family.

Here is Doug’s match to Esther by DNA at Gedmatch:

Remember that I thought that Doug would have a big match with Ken above? Well I checked and didn’t see Ken on Doug’s ‘One to Many’ match list at Gedmatch. This is a little surprising as they appear to share at least two surnames.

Doug and My Mother in Law, Joan

My mother in law, Joan is related to her 1/2 Aunt Esther on the Upshall line, but not the Kirby line. Here is how Joan matches Doug by DNA:

When I add in Esther to the mix, here is a simplified view of their combined ancestry:

  • It is simplified to show common ancestors and potential common ancestors
  • Further it is missing two of Douglas’ Kirby lines
  • It is meant to show that Joan does not descend from the Kirby family
  • It is possible that Henry and Jane Upshall could have been siblings.
  • Note that the two potential Upshall siblings Henry and Jane are shown in different generations.

DNA Triangulation – Upshall?

Triangulation as implied by the name requires the DNA matching between three people. The potential for this happens at Chromosome 2. Esther and Douglas match between about 209 and 243M. Douglas and Joan and Esther and Joan match between about 238 and 243M. When this happens, it is likely that the three people share a common ancestor. In this case, an Upshall common ancestor would be possible based on the genealogy. That is, possible, until I consider Molly.

Molly is in the Dicks DNA Project that I have been working on for some time. She also matches Douglas on Chromosome 2. Here is how Douglas matches Esther (1) Molly’s brother Howie (2), Molly (3) and Joan (4):

This shows that Molly and her brother Howie are in a Triangulation Group (TG) with Douglas and Esther. Then Douglas, Esther and Joan are in a TG. How can this be?

A Possible Crann Explanation for Douglas, Esther, Molly, Howie and Joan

The problem above is that Molly has no known Upshall ancestry but has Crann and Dicks ancestry. Douglas has no known Dicks ancestry but has Upshall ancestry. In a previous Blog, I had theorized that either an Upshall or a Dicks had married a Crann:

This was based on Crann lines in green above with no Newfoundland ancestry. What if the father of Henry Upshall above married a Crann? Supposing that Crann was also the mother of Jane Upshall? This is perhaps a house of cards, but an interesting theory that would explain the DNA matches. Under this scenario, the TG for Molly, Howie, Esther and Douglas would represent Crann DNA. The TG for Douglas, Esther and Joan could either be Upshall or Crann DNA.

a few arguments against my theory

The theory above is not without its problems. One is that Douglas doesn’t match any of the non-Newfoundland people with Crann ancestry. The other problem is that I notice Douglas has a tree on Ancestry with different ancestors for Jane Upshall:

This would also be confusing, if true, as Esther has Burton ancestors on her maternal side.

Well, as they say, Rome was not built in a day.

Summary and Conclusions:

  • Douglas and Esther have a large DNA match
  • Douglas and Joan (who doesn’t have Kirby ancestry) match to a lesser extent
  • I assume that most of Douglas and Esther’s DNA matching has to do with their common Kirby and Emberley ancestors. However, as these names are not in my wife’s and mother in law’s ancestry, I have not been following these names.
  • Douglas, Joan, and Esther share the ancestral Upshall name which appears to be somewhat rare.
  • Some of the DNA shared between Douglas and Joan appears to be from a common Upshall ancestor
  • A Triangulation group between Molly, Howie, Douglas and Esther could be from a Crann line. However, this is a theory at this time. As part of that theory, a Crann would have married an Upshall.
  • I was expecting Douglas to match Ken who I had looked at before. Ken also has an Upshall in his ancestry. However, I could not find a DNA match between Douglas and Ken.