Category: Theories of Relativity

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

MyHeritages Updates of Theories: Part 2

In my previous Blog I looked at some Theories for myself, my Frazer cousin Paul and my mother. In this Blog, I will continue to go down the new theories list.

My Frazer Theory with Christopher

I have done a lot of work on Frazer DNA and genealogy, so let’s check this one out:

Christopher has an American Flag by his name, but he shows his parents were from Australia. Christopher’s paternal side tree goes back to Mary Frazer:

I feel like Christopher will connect, so I will build a floating tree for him in my family tree and then connect it – assuming he fits in. According to Ancestry, it was Christopher’s grandfather who moved from Sligo to Australia:

I would expect to find grandfather Thomas in the 1901 Ireland Census:

He was in Kilmactranny Parish where my Frazer ancestors lived.

According to Google, the Townland is actually Drumsoghla bordering Loch Arrow and County Roscommon:

My relatives live on the NE side of Loch Arrow. As expected, Thomas’ father is George Acheson. And it is George’s mother that I am looking for.

Here is the family in the same place in 1911:

I assume that it was George who did not want the Frazer name to be forgotten. All the boys in the house have a Frazer in their name. It appears that George also made his way to Australia:

Here is George’s

burial place in Tasmania:

How to Get from George to Mary Frazer?

This is some of the information on Christopher’s tree:

From fellow Frazer researchers I have this information:

There were two Mary Frazers born in 1828. The one that Christopher has was apparently the daughter of John Frazer and Isabella. It looks odd that William was born 12 July, but Mary was baptized 22 July. I am looking at my old Frazer Genealogy Web Page and see this:

That means that Isabella would have been the sister of Violet Frazer who was my 3rd great-grandmother. That means that Christopher descends from the Richard Frazer and Archibald Frazer Lines. That puts Christopher most closely related to Michael in my Frazer DNA Trees:

This is the side I am more closely related on:

 

Here I am a 4th cousin once removed to Michael.

Here is some more information from my web site:

OK, I guess I’ll go with what I have. I connected the my floating tree for Christopher with my own tree. I now just have to add Christopher to two of my Frazer DNA Trees:

Christopher and I are 5th cousins on this tree:

Now Michael is not so lonely on his branch. I am one generation further out on the Archibald Line as we descend from Archibald father of Archibald.

DNA Painter

I have a lot going on in my 7th Chromosome:

The red match at the beginning of the Chromosome is where I match Christopher. It is possible I match him a generation further back at Archibald, but more likely it is from Richard Frazer. There appears to be a little overlap with Susan and Ken. However, they descend from James and Violet Frazer. Likely the overlap indicates that the DNA shared with Susan and Ken is from Violet who is the daughter from Richard Frazer as is Isabella. It is interesting that I connected to someone on an Acheson Line as I know I have at least one other Acheson DNA match that I haven’t figured out yet.

Going Through my Sister Heidi’s Theories

I am just looking for Theories that are likely to be real. I see Inguna from my last Blog, so I can add her to Heidi’s DNA Painter profile. Heidi already matches these 2nd cousins on Chromosome 11:

Here is Inguna added:

Heidi and Bill

Bill was one of the early matches. We are 4th cousins and the match goes back to James Frazer and Violet Frazer. This is Heidi’s DNA match with Bill:

Bill overlaps with and confirms other Frazer DNA matches:

Heidi and Alans

Alans is not new, but I have not added him to Heidi’s profile at DNA Painter:

Alans’ big match is on Heidi’s maternal Chromosome 3.

Wrapping Up with My Mom’s Theories

I’m ready to end the Blog, but want to check to see if there are many new Theories for my mother. Gladys’ first new theory is listed as having low confidence:

At Ancestry, I have that Elizabeth was a Rihl:

A further look at Pathways 1-4 of the Theory above has the Renner siblings born in Tenessee.

This seems unlikely as my mother’s family was from Philadelphia.

Mom and Ruta

This looks promising:

I like genealogies with photos. I also have a Gangnus Genealogy book written in German which is helpful. By the looks of the Theory, if it is right, mom and Ruta should be half third cousins. Ruta’s Tree is also helpful:

I’ll add Ruta to my tree as a floating tree and then connect the float assuming she fits. Ruta’s Tree is managed by Robert. Here is Robert at Ancestry:

He shows as descending from Philip J G Gangnus. I have him here on my Gangnus DNA Tree:

Robert shows to be related twice to my mom. That is why these DNA charts are helpful. The Theory has Ruta desecending from Gangnus and Biedermann which would be the third row from the top – the couple that is circled.

Robert has Ruta’s father moving from Riga, Latvia to Cleveland:

Heinrich’s comfirmation record includes his birth date and first names of parents:

This record looks helpful:

Here we get the mother’s name of Gagnus = Gangnus. Heinrich appears to be named for Heinrich Gagnus if I read the record correctly.

According to the Gangnus book written by Gustav Gangnus and published in 2003, Alma was one of 7 children.

Based on Robert’s tree Ruta is most likely his mother (though an Aunt is possible):

That being the case, I can just add Ruta in two places on my Gangnus DNA Tree:

The interesting thing about Ruta (and her relatives) is that they are related on my mother’s paternal grandfather (Rathfelder) and grandmother’s (Gangnus) sides.

Next, I want to connect Ruta to my tree. However, I see I already have her family in my tree:

Also, I spelled Heinrich wrong. I combined Heinrick and Heinrich.

Also when I search for Maria Magdalena, I see I have a duplicate:

These trees are a headache!

So basically, the Theory is wrong, but ny one generation on one side. That means the actual common ancestors are one above Gagnus and Biedermann as shown on the Theory.

Painting Ruta to My Mother’s DNA Profile

Ruta matches my mother here:

Here are the numbers:

The Chromosome 1 match is just under the standard thresshold of 7 cM that DNA Painter adds.

Chromosome 5

I think that this is telling me that Ruta is related on the Gangnus/Niclas side due to the overlap with Gangnus/Biederamann (in bright green):

I could change this segment in DNA Painter to reflect that, but I don’t think I will right now.

Ruta’s matches to my mom on the other chromosomes are not as clearly identified:

The other good news is that Ruta gets my mother’s DNA paternal painted DNA percent up to 50 from 49:

Robert and Long-Term Research

Many years ago, I would see Robert’s match show up at Ancestry and wonder how we were connected. I finally figured out the answer to my question. I wrote that up in a Blog in 2019 which can be seen here. Robert had his Latvian great-grandmother as Magnus rather than Gangnus. Robert corrected his tree, had his mother tested at MyHeritage and here we are. Cooperative research.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I found an interesting new Frazer/Aceshon relative
  • I added some DNA matches to my sister Heidi’s list
  • I found an interesting Latvian match for my mom that added a lot of DNA to her DNA profile
  • It appears that the well has not yet run dry on my mother’s Theories, so I will continue to look at them in a subsequent Blog.

 

Posted on

MyHeritage’s Update of Theories of Relativity

MyHeritage has recently had an update on Theories of Relativity. These are similar to what Ancesty does with ThruLines. It combines the DNA matches with potential genealogical matches.

Wolf’s 3 Theories

I am sure that I have looked at Wolf before. He shows as new, but perhaps some of his theories are new. Here is the first theory:

This must be a half relationship as Anna as shown is born in 1807 and Anna Niclas has died years before this time. Here is what I show for Philip Jacob’s second wife:

Wolf has a different second wife for Philip:

When I look again at my tree, I see this in agreement with Wolf’s tree:

At any rate, the theory does not seem to match up with Wolf’s tree. The Theory has Johannes Hassenfuss lived for only two years from 1849-1849 and had Gagnus as his mother. Here is Wolf’s tree:

He has Johann’s mother as a Biedermann.

Theory 2

This also does not make sense:

This also does not make sense as Anna Biedermann is the daughter of Joahann Pfeif.

Theory 3 with Wolf and Me

As I mentioned above, this does not square with Wolf’s tree.

In 2018, I came up with this connection with Wolf:

Also this;

Further, I descend also from my mother’s paternal grandmother from Schwechheimer line:

This likely explains why Wolf and I share so many DNA segments:

A major advantage of MyHeritage over Ancestry is that MyHeritage has a Chromosome Browser that shows on which chromosomes and where on those chromoses two people match. If I were to map these segments, should I have them as Schwechheimr, Biedenbender or both? The likelihood is that they should be Schwechheimer, but there is no guarantee.

Some matches are under 7 cM so they will not map by default:

Here is Wolf added to DNA Painter on Chromosome 1:

I have him as Schwechheimer or Biedermann.

Paul and Bill

Paul is a second cousin on my Frazer side. Bill is here:

Bill is a 3rd cousin once removed to Paul. The MyHeritage Theory is more concise:

I will paint the DNA match to DNA Painter:

Bill’s match adds a small amount off previously unmapped DNA on Chromosome 8 Chromosome 1 confirms that Violet Frazer descends from Richard. The match on Chromosome 8 may be on the James Frazer side, but we cannot tell for sure without other matches. I should change the label for Gladys. Although she is from the Philip Line, she is also from the Richard Frazer line.

A Frazer Theory that Cannot Be Right

I know who my grandmother’s mother was and it was not Anne Lewis. I will reject this Theory. Sharee is a shared match with Shani:

Here is Shani at Ancestry:

Shani also matches me further back on my McMaster Line.

Sharee matches me here:

That match would be here on my DNA Painter profile:

That match overlaps mostly with Zoe but also with Ron. I have Zoe mapped as Clarke or McMaster.

For some reason, I have a lot of Theories showing my grandmother had a Lewis mother. Actually her mother was Margaret Clarke.

A Latvian Theory with Inguna

This match looks more likely:

My mother’s father had Schweccheimer on both his paternal and maternal sides:

It looks like he had Gangnus on his paternal and maternal side also. The good news is that there must be a connection. The bad news is that there could be many connections.

Here is Inguna’s paternal grandmother’s tree:

She has a Juris Schweccheimer in her tree where the Theory has Johann Georg Schweccheimer. Perhaps these two are the same person.  I am willing to add Inguna to my tree as a floating branch and then add her if I can find the connection.

Here is the Schwechheimer DNA tree that I have:

It seems overly simplified as it does not have my grandfather’s mother’s line. That would bring me down a generation on the tree from where I am now. Here is where I have Anna Elisabeth Schwechheimer on my Ancestry tree:

She shows up as the youngest in the family. Here is the updated Schwechheimer DNA Tree:

This feels more complete. So, for example, I am 5th cousin and a 5th cousin once removed to Otis and Sane. Confusingly, as Otis is their twice, I am related to him in 4 ways on the Schwechheimer Line.  This is why it is helpful to create a chart.

Back to Looking at Inguna’s Tree

Ancestry does not have many good recent Latian records, so I will go by Inguna’s tree for a while. Fortunately, the Lutherans kept good records, and I found this one at Ancestry:

Here, Erna is born 30 June 1889. Her husband is Johan Alexander Lutz. From the next page, it appears that Alexander was confirmed in Hirschenhof and Erna in Riga in 1908.

Here is a marriage banns record:

It appears that the Theory is following what I am seeing.

This appears to be the birth record for Johann Georg son of Gerhard Schwechheimer:

However, the theory has he was born in 1859.

Let’s go back to the daughter to see if there are any clues. Here is a marriage record:

I think these were in Russian, but the German names are in parentheses. This is from 1912.

Here is part of Erna’s confirmation record:

Now her mother is known by Emilie than Cathernine Ernestine.

Here is a non-private tree that MyHeritage used to help create the Theory:

Here we have that Erna’s mother is Catharina Emile Hermann. This is a Veckaln’s tree, so likely one that Inguna used. As I look at this tree, I see that Georg’s mother would have been about 44 when Georg was born.

I do see this record:

However, I see the date at the top of the page as 1853. That makes more sense to me. So basically I agree with the Theory, though the review could have been more rigorous. The best way to check is through the Revision Lists as that should list family units if the timing of the lists are right.

Updating the Schwechheimer DNA Tree

While working on the DNA Tree, I found this record:

For some reason, the birth date for Georg is off, but I am going with what I had above. The names seem to fit in.

That makes Inguna most likely my 4th cousin once removed.

DNA Painter for Inguna

Here is the match I have with Inguna:

By default, the second segment will not map as it is less than 7 cM. However, it seems like is should be valid due to its proximity to the first segment.

This match fills in some empty space on Chromosome 11.

Inguna and my mother have a larger DNA match:

Here is my mom’s new DNA Map for Schwechheimer:

There is no overlap with Otis’ matches. I don’t know if that is a problem or not. It is possible that Inguna may not match Otis at the 4th cousin once removed level. She does share a match with Sane.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I looked at two Latvian Theories, a Frazer Theory that could not be right and a Frazer Theory with my cousin Paul that was right
  • I mapped the correct theories on DNA Painter
  • I found the Schwechheimer genealogy very complicated due to large families and similar names.
  • I had a chance to tell MyHeritage that many of the Theories for my Frazer grandmother were wrong.
  • I will likely continue to look at the MyHeritage Theories updates.

 

 

 

Posted on

Following My Father’s Cousin’s Recent Shared Matches: Part 3

Going down Joyces’s list from newest to oldest:

I looked at TJ in my previous Blog. I know who cotton must be.

Joyce and Sarah

At first, I thought that this connection could not be right:

This is what I have on Sarah Pilling now in my Ancestry Tree:

I have that she had two children as a single mother. Then I thought: what if she happened to marry someone with the last name of Greenwood. This would seem ironic perhaps as she already had a son with the first name of Greenwood. When I searched for a Sarah PIlling marrying a Greenwood in the Colne Parish, I got one result:

What if Sarah has two children out of wedlock and then marries? Next, I searched for children of John Greenwood in Colne:

The records show a couple of John and Sarah Greenwood from Aldersend having two children baptized. My thought was that if Sarah was born in 1745, then she would not likely have children after 1785 and that is when Paul is born. I further assume that a 20 year break in children indicates a separate family of John and Sarah Greenwood and that Paul was Sarah’s last child.

If the ThruLines are accurate, that would mean that Greenwood Hartley would have a second cousin named Hartley Greenwood!

Another reason I think that the ThruLine could be correct is that I have my ancestor Greenwood Pilling dying at Aldersend in 1804. Note that this Sarah’s two Greenwood sons were born at Aldersend.

This is part of a map from 1818. I believe that OlddrestEnd is the same as Aldersend. A newer map shows Alder Hurst in this area:

To me, the name of Sarah Pilling, the location of Aldersend and the DNA match is more than coincidental.

The Pilling Genealogy

To do this correctly, I need to add the recent Sarah match to my tree as a floating tree to see if it correctly heads back to Aldersend. I will assume that Sarah knew who her grandparents were.

It appears that Sarah’s grandfather was from Wath upon Deane:

Here is the Greenwood family in 1921. Interestingly, many worked for F Hartley & Co.

Here is Shipley in Bradford:

The 1881 Census shows a problem:

John Greenwood’s father, also a John is working for an out of business beer house if I am reading it correctly.

Unfortunately, this line of genealogy is not matching up with the Ancestry ThruLines. So, the genealogy is dissapointing, but the theory that Sarah Pilling married a Greenwood still interests me.

Joyce and Izzy

This relationship seems questionable. However, what if Jane Shaw married a Hartley before a Wilkinson?

Jane marries Moses Wilkinson in 1785, so that cannot be right.

Unfortunately, I cannot make sense from the ThruLine. I took off the parents of Robert Hartley in my Ancestry Tree hoping that Ancestry would find likely parents for Robert, but having Jane Shaw as a mother does not make sense to me.

Joyce and Tara

I have my tree built out to tara’s likely grandmother: Charlotte Robbins, so this should be easy. Due to a large Snell DNA chart, it would make sense to have one for just the descendants of Otis Snell:

These Snell relatives seem closer, perhaps because many of them stayed in the same area as where I grew up.

Joyce and Cheryl

I’ll look at these two and then wrap up this Blog.

I have a huge Hathaway DNA Tree, but so far I do not have any Philip son of Isaac Hathaway:

I’ll start a floating tree for Cheryl and then try to connect it to my tree if it works out. Cheryl’s tree goes this far:

ThruLines is leading to Daisy Crampton. In 1940, the family lived in Boston:

Beatrice was from Massachusetts. Martin was a car salesman.

Beatrice was buried in Marion, MA, where I live:

 

Here is Beatrice in 1910:

Father Albert was an ice man, but I am interested in mother Desire.

The marriage record for Desire Crampton raises some question as to Desire’s parents:

The father’s name is not given and the mother’s name is given as Betsey Nye.

Further, here is the 1880 Census:

Here, George and Julia Crampton are living with Philip Hathaway, but I do not see Desire living with them. However, Julia’s mother was Desire:

Further I do not see a Desire born in Mattapoisett in 1878:

Summary and Conclusions

  • It has been interesting going through some of Joyce’s ThruLines
  • I added one person to my Snell Tree
  • Two other avenues were interesting but somewhat of a dead end.

 

 

Posted on

My Sister Heidi’s Nicholson Match at MyHeritage

I noticed recently that my sister Heidi has a match with Kenneth at MyHeritage. They have a Theory of Relativity that looks like this:

This Theory put Heidi and Kenneth at 4th cousins once removed and the connection goes back to 1765. There are no shared matches between Kenneth and Heidi that I readily recognize. Also Kenneth’s tree is managed by someone else and is private.

Kenneth’s match also is not strong:

Connecting Heidi to Kenneth by Genealogy

I would usually try to connect going from the present to the past rather than the other way round. I see that the manager of Kenneth’s tree is from the UK which is probably a good thing as the Nicholson family was from Sheffield, UK.

I see that this is the Armstrong family in 1901 in Carlisle:

This tends to confirm the Theory at the bottom (more recent) level:

Of course, the Census does not give Mary A’s maiden name. All Ancestry Trees plus a probate record identify Mary Ann as a Lawrence. I’ll just accept the two hints, but the family is still in the Region of Cumberland:

At this point, the road I want to go down is the Hannah Nicholson road, but Ancestry gives me no hints. The 1881 Census has Hannah born in Renwick:

Renwick is quite a hike from Sheffield.

Here is a marriage record from Ancestry:

Here are Hannah and her parents in 1841:

The ‘y’ in the last column indicates that everyone was born in the same county – which would be Cumbria. The connection to Sheffield is not looking good.

Pulling the Plug

At this point, the connection does not seem feasible. The John Nicholson in my tree was married to Martha Jow:

Summary and Conclusions

  • I had hopes that a Theory of Relativity at MyHeritage would lead to an actual connection between my sister Heidi and Kenneth
  • I checked out Kenneth’s tree and his Nicholson ancestors were in Cumbria to the North of England while mine (and Heidi’s) were in Sheffield England
  • MyHeritage did have the confidence as low, and the DNA match was small
Posted on

Painting Some French Canadian DNA for My Wife’s Side

MyHeritage’s Theories of Relativity are a good way to check genealogies. They come with ready made DNA connections and genealogical connections. This lends itself to the DNA Painter Program which I use.

My Wife’s Aunt Virginia

These Theories are sortable by newest, so I will do that for Aunt Virginia (also known as Aunt Suzy). I tend to reject the Theories that don’t go along with my previous research as I tend to think my research has been done pretty well.

Denise

One of the first Theories (from newer to older) that I found that has prospects is with Denise:

Denise shows as 5th cousin to Virginia. This is on the LeFevre side. First, I check my tree at ancestry:

 

Unfortunately, I don’t have siblings listed for Angelique Delisle. I aslo do not have her birth information. I see that Ancestry has Angelique’s Baptismal record:

 

This tree at Ancestry has other siblings for Angelique:

Joachim is a logical name for the son of Joachim Delisle. I’ll go ahead and add a lot of information from this tree to mine. Next, all I need is a baptismal record for Joachim born 1783. I did not find his baptism as a hint, but his marriage record will do:

This record gives his parents’ names. That tells me that the tree at least from the top connecting Virginia and Denis is accurate. Next, I will add the DNA match to see if it makes sense. Unfortunately, the first match is just below the cutoff of 7.0 cM:

I would like to add the match on Chromosome 5 as it overlaps with other LeFevre DNA:

Denis’ match is from 28 to 46 M and represents:

Lazare LeFevre.

Painting Denise

Here I lower the lime to 6 cM:

Here I added a new color for DeLisle and Matte which is dark green. As Denise overlaps on Chromosome 5, that means that the LeFevre DNA in yellow and orange is actually DeLisle DNA. The fact that there is no overlap on Chromosome 6 indicates that the yellow LeFevre DNA is probably older LeFevre DNA and that there is a crossover between the green and yellow DNA. The darker red DNA on Chromosme 6 may be misattributed or due to intermarriage as I have it attributed to Methot which is not an obvious ancestor of LeFevre.

Here is Virginia’s DNA map with added dark green:

Some of the yellow DNA got overwritten by the darker orange on Chromosome 5 when the DNA is not expanded.

Virginia and Annie

This is the relationship we are looking at:

Here is my Ancestry Tree for my wife’s side:

The J F as Eustache is for Jacques-Francois. I have some children, but not Joseph:

There is only one tree I see at Ancestry under hints which has a Joseph:

According to this, Marie Judith Tremblay had 20 children. Wow.

Here is part of Annie’s Tree:

Here is a record I found at Ancestry:

It would seem logical to look for a marriage for Joseph and Marie, though these are common names. One detail from the above is that Joseph was a Journalier:

Here is his marriage:

For some reason, I don’t see his parents listed. This marriage was in 1834. If he was 25 when he married, that would put his birth at about 1811. Here is a Jude born in 1812:

However, this appeaers to be a burial record.

At this point, I’ll just paint in the DNA match and see if it makes sense.

Painting Annie

Most of Annie’s DNA would make sense, though I don’t have a lot painted on the Pouliot side so far:

Again I kept the 6 cM cutoff:

I gave Fortin/Tremblay a periwinkle color. Before I refreshed the settings, Virginia was 36% painted on her maternal side and only 22% painted overall. Annie brought her up to 23% overall and 37% overall.

Suzy and Cecile

These two show as 5th cousins along Suzy’s Pouliot side. A few things seem irregular such as Virginia’s Girard being private and a deleted profile in Cecile’s ancestry. I can see from my tree who the missing person is on Virginia’s tree:

Cecile’s tree suppies some more detail:

I now need to figure out if Gregoire was the sister of Marie Genevieve. Based on this, it appears that there is a generation missing on Cecile’s side of the Theory of Relativity. What I need to do is prove that Elysee and Marie Genevieve were siblings.

More on Marie Genevieve

I need to spruce up my tree for Marie Genevieve. Here is a marriage record from 1804

This would put Marie Genevieve’s birth at around 1784. This appears to be her birth record:

The place and father is right, but the mother’s name is off:

I suppose the Marie part is right as I have the mother as Marie Josephte Tremblay. Here is the location:

Elysee Girard

I am having trouble tracking this person, so I will stop at this point.

Aunt Virginia and Lucien

The problem with Lucien is that his father shows as being born in 1860. Does that sound reasonable?

My Late Father-in-Law Richard

Richard matches with Annie aslo, so I don’t have to recreate the wheel with this connection. Annie matched on Fortin/Tremblay. This is on Richard’s Pouliot side:

In Richard’s Maternal side key, the Pouliot side is meant to be on the bottom. I don’t see Fortin/Tremblay there, so I can add that. Here are two Chromosomes where Annie shows up:

On Chromosome 1, Annie adds older DNA between Pouiot DNA. On Chromosome 10, Annie overlaps on even older DNA. This actually represents intermarriage as the connection is probably with an older Tremblay Line:

Annie fills in some blanks on Richard’s Chromosomes 12 and 17:

She also brings his maternal side painted percentage up to 45% from 44%:

Sylvain and Richard

Sylvain is #2 on Richard’s most recent Theory of Relativity after Annie:

Here I skipped a few generations at the bottom, but Richard and Sylvain show as 5th cousins. This is also on the Pouliot side. Here, it would be important to show that Alexis and Genevieve Gagne are siblings. Here my tree is a bit skimpy:

Here is a tree at Ancestry that implies that Genevieve died quite young:

At this time, I will attempt a shortcut. Richard has a cousin who shows at MyHeritage named Fred. Fred is also at Ancestry which means that Fred has ThruLines.

Fred is third from the right. Fred has ThruLines with 11 of these Gagne Children. Fred, like my father-in-law, descends from Alexis and has 33 DNA matches on that line. Here are the details for Marie-Genevieve:

Fred shows matches to daughters Olive and Marie-Euphrosine Gagnon. I was looking for Theophile Martel born 1790. Well that shortcut did not work. Time to abort this mission.

Richard and Jean-Francois

Let’s see if I have any better luck with Jean-Francois. First I check to see if I have already mapped or ‘painted’ Jean-Francois to Richard’s chromosomes and I have not. Here is the Theory:

Jean-Francois shows as a 4th cousin once removed to Richard, so a bit closer relationship. Here, I will check to see if Elisee and Judith are siblings. I’m going to use Fred’s ThruLines at Ancestry as a surrogate again:

Here I see that Fred has 16 DNA matches with descendants of Judith. I take that as a good sign. In fact, I have Judith in my Tree already. I’ll say that the proof is good enough to map Jean-Francois.

Here is how Richard and Jean-Francois match by DNA:

I recently added Fortin/Tremblay to Richard’s map, so time to map this new match:

On Chromosome 1, Jean-Francois overlaps with Annie mapped previously.

Above, Jean-Francois fills in some gaps.

Richard and Martin

This would be a Pouliot line that I have not mapped if the genealogy seems correct. I am tempted to again check on Fred’s ThruLines.

Fred has Antoine instead of Charles. That doesn’t mean the MyHeritage connection is wrong. I checked Richard’s two sisters’ ThruLines and no connection there either. Here is a detail from Martin’s tree:

If this is correct and Charly’s mother was born in 1844, then she would have been 62 when giving birth to Charly which doesn’t sound right. With some more work, I could probably make some of these connections, but I won’t right now. There is perhaps a generation missing.

Updating Aunt Lorraine

Here is Aunt Lorraine’s ‘painted’ Chromosome Map as 23% painted overall:

Most of the DNA identified is on Lorraine’s maternal French Canadian side. She is currently 23% painted overall and 38% painted on her maternal side.

Lorraine and Marjorie

This connection goes back to the 1700’s. This connection does not look right. I have a different mother at the top:

If this is right, then there must be a generation missing on Marjorie’s side. I’ll skip this for now. Lorriane also has a Theory with Myriam with the same issue.

Lorraine and Denise

I had painted Denise above with Aunt Suzy. The connection was with DeLisle and Matte:

Denise fills in some gaps on Lorraine’s Chromosomes 6 and 17. This brings Lorraine up to 39% painted maternally and 24% overall.

Lorraine and Paul

These two have a small DNA match. I already have a Michel in my tree, so I’ll say the connection is OK.

I didn’t hadd the smaller match as it was below 7 cM.

Lorraine and Jean-Francois

I mapped Jean-Francois to one of her siblings above, so I’ll map him to her profile also:

Jean-Francois supplies overlapping Pouliot DNA evidence on Chromosomes 3 and 4.

I decided to change this match color to blue for greater contrast:

Lorraine is up to 40% painted on her maternal side now.

Bernadette: 5th Cousin to Lorraine

This would take more work. How would Angelique Delisle be the daughter of a Lalonde?

Lorraine and a Different Martin

When I look up Girard/Tremblay trees, they all show a daughter Emerentienne born 1795. Likewise, Lorraine’s ThruLines show Emerentienne:

Here is where Martin shows up on Lorraine’s DNA Map:

Lorraine and Another Denise

I hope that these repeating names do not cause problems in the future:

I see at least one Ancestry tree with a Jean Francois Louis, so that is hopeful.

Here the DNA points out a problem as Denise is overlapping on LeFevre side and should be on the Pouliot side. That means that it is likely that Lorraine matches Denise on Lorraine’s LeFevre side and not her Pouliot side.

Lorraine and Douglas

I am going further with Lorraine than I went with Suzy or Richard:

We see again the name or Emerentienne. It helps to see unusual names. I’ll just go ahead and map Douglas based on the assumption that the tree is correct.

Douglas brings up another problem on Chromosome 6. By the genealogy, he should be on the Pouliot side, but he overlaps with DeLisle who is on the LeFevre side.

Check Lorraine’s Visual Phasing

I have done some work to figure out which part of Lorraine’s Chromosome 6 is Pouliot and which is LeFevre:

Lorriane is the top. The important part is where Pouliot goes to LeFevre or salmon to blue. If the scale on the bottom matches correctly, that should be at about 136M. So after 136M is LeFevre and before is Pouliot.

This shows Douglas’ match to be up to 135M. So that may actually be the inflection point, more typically called the crossover. That means that if I did my visual phasing correctly, then Douglas is mapped properly as Pouliot. That also means that Denise should be matching on the Pouliot side and has a connection there. I checked Denise’s match on Chromosome 17 and that should be in the region of Pouliot also.

Pouliot starts for Lorraine at 26M and Denise’s match starts at 39M.

Lorraine and Louise

This could go on forever, but I think I’ll end it here:

I see several trees at ancestry with a Marie Ann which I take to be Anne Marie above. She also shows on Lorraine’s ThruLines:

Again with reckless abandon, I will paint this match onto Lorraine’s map:

Here I made a mistake and created a new group. Then I merged it back with the old group and changed the color to purple for contrast. Louise’s matches overlap with Jean-Pierre. It turns out that Louise is related to Jean-Pierre in this way:

Summary and Conclusion

  • It seemed I got better at the mapping as I went along
  • I tried to skip any sketchy connections or situations where the MyHeritage Theories showed multiple common ancestors
  • One conflict was seemingly solved through Visual Phasing
  • It could take a while to map all the French Canadian Matches as these three siblings have so many matches
Posted on

An Updated Look at Hartley and Related Theories

In this Blog, I would like to update my Hartley Theories and beyond. I have about 10 DNA results that I have uploaded to MyHeritage. MyHeritage has Theories based on DNA matches that also have possible genealogical matches. Here is a chart I made and updated last August:

I highlighted 2 because of similar names that showed up. I also made a dstinction between paternal and maternal theories. I see that I did not include my cousin Paul’s results. This may be better sorted by common ancestors:

Looking for New Theories

Next, I need to add to the list. For me, that appears to be Jane. Jane shows a possible connection with Clarke and Bachelour:

The problem with this connection is that I have that the father of Thomase Clarke was John Clarke. That makes two matches that I have that show this apparently wrong common ancestors.

Heidi and Wolf

I previously had Wolf on my Biedermann tree and not my Gangnus tree:

This is more in line with Wolf’s tree:

The question is, which is the right Theory: MyHeritage’s or mine? I tend to want to go with my own analysis. I wrote a Blog on Wolf here.

Sharon’s Theories

My sister Sharon has the most Theories so far:

Go Sharon. I didn’t see any new Theories for Sharon.

Brother Jon’s Theories

Here is a new one:

Although the Theory seems wrong, I should double check MyHeritage’s reasoning. Also this could be a case of where there is smoke, there is fire.

I need to check the genealogy for Leonie, Jane and Susan. If they all truly go back to the same ancestors, then either:

  • Their genealogy is right and mine is wrong
  • Mine is right and theirs is wrong
  • We have a different common ancestor but near the place where it seems like our common ancestors are showing in this Theory

I think I’ll wait to analyze this later.

Lori and Jim’s Theories

I either missed Lori or had her mis-labeled as Jon. I deleted the extra Jon, so now I need to add in Lori’s Theories.

This Theory looks new for Jim. It is his last:

Ashley is from New Zealand and adds to the Clarke mystery.

Checking the DNA on Jim’s Clarke Match

Jim has 2 small DNA matches with Ashley:

These are Chromosomes 9 and 18. If these are truly Clarke or related DNA matches, then these DNA matches should be in areas mapped for Jim under his Frazer grandparent side. Here is Jim’s Chromosome 9:

Jim’s match with Ashley on Chromosome 9 is between 80 and 85M. I put an arrow where that would be. Jim’s map shows that he should have Hartley DNA in that area – assuming the match is on Jim’s paternal side.  That means that this match cannot be a Clarke match.

That match is consistent with Chromosome 18 where Jim has his paternal side mapped as all Hartley shown in orange:

Jim and Leonie

While I have Jim’s visual phasing maps out, I’ll look at his match with Leonie:

Jim shows a lot of Frazer in blue on his Chromosome 1:

On Chromosome 7, the formatting is off, but Leonie’s DNA maps to Jim’s Frazer side:

Checking Jon and Lori against Leonie

I checked Jon and he had no Theory with Leonie. That means that I had to redo Jon’s list. He has the fewest Theories of any of my siblings at 6 now:

Lori matches on the Frazer side on Chromosome 7:

Lori doesn’t match on Chromosome 1 even though that portion of her Chromosome maps to Frazer.

At this point, I’ll move on to people other than my siblings. Between my siblings, the average number of Theories we have is 12 if I have it right.

 

My Mom’s Theories

Right now, I have that my mom has 11 Theories based on my spreadsheet. When I check MyHeritage, she has 10. The issue is with matches with mulitple theories:

Wolf and Patrick have multiple Theories. It is possible that others do also. Here my mom’s theories are all on her father’s side. There are two with Lentz, but they seem off. There is another issue in that 5 Theories that my Mom does not have that at least one of her children do have. This seems a bit off. Also, it seems like my mom is the only one who seems to have the theory that I verified with Biedermann and Lautenschlager. I am not sure why her children didn’t include this theory, but they did include the Gangnus Biedermann connection that I have not been able to substantiate.

My Father’s First Cousins: Joyce and Jim

These two should help to push back further on my Hartley side. These two have many theories, but I will only look at the ones on their Hartley side. When I check Joyce, I see that I had three mentioned on my spreadsheet, but two of these I no longer see as theories. When I reviewed Jim’s results, he still had the one Theory on his Hartley side. Here is the chart so far:

Summary and Conclusions

  • MyHeritage’s Theories are worth looking at
  • The Theories seem to be in four categories:
    1. Those are obvious,
    2. those that are close to be being right, but the actual common ancestors are nearby,
    3. those that I can’t prove are right are wrong
    4. those that are obviously wrong
  • I think that some Theories have disappeared
  • I’ll keep looking at MyHeritage’s Theorys. Ancestry’s ThruLines seem better but Ancestry doesn’t show DNA segment information
  • Using other tools to test the Theories is a good idea. I used visual phasing in this Blog to show one Theory could not be right based on the DNA.
Posted on

Looking at Some New Theories of Relativity for My Wife’s Ellis Side

I had heard not too long ago that MyHeritage had developed some new Theories of Relativity. These are DNA matches where MyHeritage thinks there is a likelihood that the genealogies also match up. I thought that I would write a Blog while this ‘new’ designation was still new, but it took me a bit longer than expected to write this Blog.

My Wife’s Aunt Elaine

I’ll start with Aunt Elaine.

The New part doesn’t jump out, but it is there.

The Theory has Elaine and Isabel as 1/2 third cousins. I’ll check my Ancestry Tree to see if this makes sense. It doesn’t:

I have Abraham’s father as John Rayner. I had this tree in an earlier Blog on my mother-in-law Joan:

Unfortunately, I missed one of Isabel’s ancestors where the red arrow is. Elaine is Joan’s sister. I assume that makes Elaine and Isabel full fourth cousins. I suppose there could be another connection or connections. Here is a corrected tree:

Adding Isobel to DNAPainter

Here is the new Rayner/Watson DNA added to Elaine’s tree

Here is the same graphic for Elaine’s sister Joan who had fewer matches with Isabel:

This match gets Joan up to 41% painted overall from 40% previously.

Elaine and Mervyn

MyHeritage has this for Theory 1:

I can’t figure out how MyHeritage got this connection. Their Theory 2 and three match what Ancetry has:

The next connection is to Dicks also, but a generation further back from MyHeritage’s Theory 1:

 

I’ll assume that Mervyn’s connection is on the Upshall side. I’ve already added Mervyn to Joan’s DNAPainter Map. I’ll add Mervyn to Elaine’s map:

Mervyn doesn’t overlap with Barbara, but doesn’t conflict with other more recent Upshall matches.

Elaine and Leslie on the Reinhold Line

Next, I need to verify this connection. I see that Leslie appears on Elaine’s ThruLines at Ancestry:

I’ll assume that Leslie’s genealogy is right.

This match gets Elaine up to 28% painted overall from 27%.

Mapping Leslie to Joan’s Map

This gets Joan up another percent to 42% painted overall. Leslie adds some important DNA to Elaine and Joan’s maternal side:

A Reinhold Tree

I’m surprised that I haven’t built a Reinhold DNA/Genealogy Tree. I’ll do that now. In order to do it right, I’ll try building out Leslie’s tree. Here is a birth record for Leslie’s grandfather Leslie:

I got this far with a fast tree, and it seems OK:

Other Ancestry trees has Lydia’s husband as Frederick John Rhynold born 1792. Here is my Rhynold Tree:

I will expect more additions over time.

Back to the Upshall Family with Betty

I would like to check this Theory. There are a few ways to do this. The best way is to build a tree for Betty back to  the commn ancestors. Or I could build my tree down to Betty. Or I could check Ancestry ThruLines. I’ll start with the ThruLines as they are easiest:

Elaine has 4 matches with descendants of Alexander Upshall, so that is a good sign. Here is a late addition for Theodore from 1951:

It turns out I already had Theodore in my family tree.

Betty adds some Upshall/Dicks DNA to Elaine’s Chromosome 6 and confirms some matches on Chromosome 11.

Adding Betty’s DNA to Joan’s DNA Map

Betty’s match is similar in that it adds some DNA to Chromosome 6 and confirms other Upshall/Dicks DNA matches.

Joanne on Elaine’s Paternal Side

This relationship is supported by Thrulines at Ancestry:

Adding Joanne to DNAPainter

This added a new ancestral couple for Elaine and segments on Chromosomes 1, 4, and 12.

The next logical step is to add Joanne to Joan’s DNAPainter profile:

Joanne’s match gets Joan up another percent to 43% painted overall. This is what 43% looks like for Joan:

Edna on the Dicks Line

It took me a while to figure this one out:

Edna also has a Theory 2 with Christopher Dicks who was the father of this Christopher Dicks:

I haven’t been keeping up with my Dicks DNA Project and had Edna already but as per Theory 2:

Here I’ve added in Edna again:

Finally, I’ll add Edna to Joan’s DNAPainter profile. I turns out I had mapped Edna to the elder Christopher. She would be better mapped to the younger Christopher DIcks. I think I can fix that in this screen:

I searched for Edna on Elaine’s match list but could not find her.

Time to Start a Newcombe Tree

However, Alicia and JP are at Ancestry and I see this for JP at Ancestry:

For some reasons, MyHeritage did not pick up these other connections. I’ll go ahead and map Alicia as Newcombe:

Alicia’s results are very similar to Joanne’s. When I look at the shared matches at MyHeritage, I see that Joanne is Alicia’s mother.  That makes sense based on the results. Of course, that means that JP is Joanne.

Elaine and Diann

Diann has a Theory with Elaine on the headachey Dicks side:

 

This looks good on the surface, but I don’t have Susan so far on my DNA tree and I don’t see a Susan on the Ancestry ThruLines:

Diann would add new DNA to Elaine’s map, so this would be an interesting connection to track down in the future.

Jacqueline Shows a MacArthur Theory with Elaine

Are these charts faded-looking because they are Theories? My shortcut check for Jacqueline’s tree is by using Ancestry’s ThruLines. ThrulLines shows that Elaine has 155 DNA matches on the MacArthur Line, but 51 of those are on the marion MacArthur Line. Elaine has 20 matches on the Ellen Line.

I see that Jacqueline is actually on the ThruLines:

The ThruLines don’t prove the connection, but strongly suggest it to be right. Next, I’ll compare the DNA with other MacArthur matches:

MG is Jacqueline’s mother. Robert is also a theory with Elaine, but he is MG’s son, so would add no new DNA.

Elaine and Josh Have Three Theories

I am leaning toward this one:

The Harriet Rayner Line is well-represented by ThruLines:

I’ll add Josh to Elaine’s DNAPainter Profile:

It looks like there is a possible crossover between Josh and Josheph. That could mean a few things. One possibility is that Elaine’s match with Josh is on the Simmons side. That would be one explaination of why one match ends where the other starts.

Josh and Joan

These two match on Chromosome 4:

I had already added Josh to Joan’s profile, but I had the match from the older Hopgood/Yeo. I’ll erase this match and keep the one I just added.

David and Joan

While I’m on Joan, I’ll look at this Theory:

The good thing about this Theory is that there are not other proposed theories. Ancestry’s ThruLines gets down to David’s grandmother Evelyn:

I would say that is evidence enough for my purposes of mapping David to Joan’s profile:

It appears that I have already mapped David. When I check more on the earlier David, I see this:

I don’t know why David would have had more matches earlier and why they were mapped to MacArthur.

I tried to see if Elaine had a Theory with David, but I didn’t see one.

Joan and Margaret’s Theory on the Ellis Side

Ancestry’s ThruLines get down to John England:

Margaret adds to the confusion on Chromosome 2:

I could not find this match for Elaine.

Elaine and Ron on the Rainer Side

I have found this Theory to be wrong before.  Ron is the son of Isabel who I have mapped already, so I’ll skip Ron.

Elaine and Randy

He is also at Ancestry:

I have already mapped his father, so I don’t need to map Randy. I should be getting to the end of the new Theories. The smaller match Theories are often not as important as the bigger DNA matches.

Elaine and Rachel

Here is an interesting Threory:

A fifth cousin is pretty distant. I looked to see if there were any Ancestry ThruLines and there were not, so I will put this Theory on hold.  So that covers it for ‘new’ Theories for Elaine. There were others that I didn’t discuss as the genealogy didn’t look right. There is perhaps another connection than the one suggested.

Joan and Wendy

These next Theories should apply to Joan only as I am done with her sister Elaine:

This relationship appers to be supported by ThruLines:

In fact, Alicia is mentioned above in this Blog. Wendy looks to be a 2nd cousin once removed to Alicia. I already have Wendy in Joan’s DNA map:

I’ll need to sort out Joan’s Paternal Chromosome 2 at some point as it is quite a mess:

Summary and Conclusions

  • By now, the ‘;new’ designation is going away, so I was right in trying to look at these before that happened.
  • I assume that Ancestry has the largest DNA database. Because of that it is worthwhile to get a second opinion from Ancestry’s ThruLines, to see if these Theories make sense.
  • I was able to add to Joan and Elaine’s maps as to where they got their DNA from
  • There was some conflicting information such as in the paternal Chromosome 2 above. This is due to intermarriage, or incorrect genealogies or both.
  • The first Theories were the best. The Theories at the bottom of the less were less reliable and/or less helpful
  • MyHeritage has a good combination of genealogical trees and DNA matches with detailed DNA information (unlike Ancestry). This makes them ideal for use with the DNAPainter Program
  • Joan is now at 43% painted overall and Elaine is at 30%

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Adding to My Mother-in-Law Ellis’ DNA Map

I learned something interesting recently. My wife’s mother’s DNA seems more endogamous than my wife’s father’s. Endogamous means that your ancestors tended to intermarry with each other’s cousins. One way to check this is through AncestryDNA. Here are some numbers for Joan:

Divide Joan’s close matches by all her matches and multiply by 100 to get a percentage. I get 9.6%. For Joan’s sister Elaine, I get 10.5%. My wife’s father is not at Ancestry, but his two sisters are. For Lorraine, I get 7.3% and for Suzy, I get 7.6%. That means that there was more intermarriage on the Ellis side than the Butler side. The higher the percentage, the higher the intermarriage rate. I had assumed, that as half of Butler was French Canadian, that there would be more intermarriage there, but the PEI and Newfoundland ancestry of the Ellis family trumps the Butlers.

Updating Joan’s DNAPainter Map

This is what I have:

The higher percentage Joan has explains why I had trouble finding consistant common ancestors for some of Joan’s DNA matches. Many matches had more than one possible set of common ancestors. Joan is 36% painted overall now. I would like to bring that number up a bit in this Blog.

Ivan at MyHeritage

MyHeritage has DNA and Trees, so is a good place to start:

Based on Joan’s ThruLines at Ancestry, George seems to be a likely son of Peter Upshall:

Ivan overlaps with two people who have Dicks genealogy:

That means that Ivan could have Dicks genealogy or that Edna and Cheryl could have Upshall genealogy. There are even other possibilities!

Glenys at MyHeritage

Glenys matches on the Upshall Line:

She shows as a 2nd cousin once removed. I can check on the tree quickly. Glenys has her mom as Gladys Upshall from Newfoundland. She has her grandfather as Theordore Malcolm Upshall from Harbour Buffett. That is where my wife’s ancestors came from, so that makes sense.

This record at Ancestry is helpful:

I painted Glenys in, but she did not add any new DNA.

Irma at MyHeritage (MacArthur)

The MacArthurs had a large family, so Joan will have a lot of 4th cousins from that line:

Here are the ThruLines from Ancestry:

Joan has 175 matches, with 55 matches on her Marion MacArthur Line. The Effie MacArthur at MyHeritage is probably the Euphemia at Ancestry. Let’s add in Irma:

On Chromosomes 4 and 9, the MacArthur DNA is bumping into the Ellis DNA, so something could be off in the genealogy on one or both sides.

Unfortunately, I’m not up to sorting it our right now. My guess is that Irma could have Ellis ancestry.

Mervyn on the Upshall Side

Mervyn is also on Ancestry:

Based on Joan’s 7 matches to descendants of Susan Upshall, I’d say it is time to add Susan to my wife’s ancestry tree.

The match on Chromosome 2 is interesting:

Mervyn is matching the Dicks. However, if Chris Dicks married a Collette for example, this would make sense as Mervyn is also a Collette.

Richard on the MacArthur Line

It is not clear to me why the top person was deleted. It seems clear that it would be MacArthur/MacDougall. I’ll just assume the genealogy is right.

Richard filled in some paternal DNA for Joan on Chromosomes 1 and 17, but her overall painted percentage is still 36%.

Rebecca: Another MacArthur Descendant

Rebecca comes down by way of Hugh MacArthur:

Rebecaa matches Joan on Chromosome 11:

Rebecca’s match overlaps a bit on the Rayner side. My colors are a bit off. I need more contrast between MacArthur and William Ellis. Also between Ed and John Rayner.

Rebecca brings Joan up to 37% painted overall and 29% paternal.

David at MyHeritage: A New Line?

David matches on the Gorrill/Newcombe line.

David’s match is on Chromosome 14 and gets Joan up to 31% painted (from 29%) on her paternal side.

Rhonda on the Ellis Side

I feel like I have a long way to go here:

Rhonda shows as a third cousin twice removed to Joan.

The match on Chromosome 17 should indicate that the match with Debbie should be on the Ellis side and not the Gorrill side.

Wendy on the Newcombe/Pring Line

This would be a new set of ancestors to map:

Joan and Wendy have a different possibility at the 5th cousin level, but I will stick with this option. First, I’ll check on William, son of William Newcombe. I see this in the 1851 Census for Devon, England:

That means that that William and Mary had a pretty big family.

This results in a bit of a mess as Chromosome 2 shows overlap with other families. Something to work out at a later time! Also, I see that other trees have names other than Pring for Mary.

Wayne on the MacArthur Line

The tree looks legit. We have come across Euphemia or Effie before.

Wayne fills in a bit of a gap at the end of Chromosome 4 for Joan:

Wayne also matches Joan on Chromosome 18 but only in areas already covered by other matches.

Devin on the Dicks Line

Bonnie on the MacArthur Line

I have had good luck painting in the MacArthur line:

Bonnie gets the paternal side up to 32% painted:

She fills in some missing area on the paternal side of Joan’s Chromosome 12.

Richard on Joan’s Daly Line

Joan doesn’t have many matches on her Daly side:

Richard is a good find. That brings Joan up to 44% painted on her maternal side and 38% overall. For some reason, the Theory above shows ‘deleted profile’. Here is Richard’s tree on his maternal side:

Richard would be a good candidate for an X Chromosome match to Joan based on their genealogy. However, MyHeritage does not show X Chromosome matches.

Loretta with a Single Ellis Common Ancestor

 

According to MyHeritage, Joan and Loretta are 1/2 third cousins once removed. That means that they only have one common ancestor who is James Henry Ellis born in 1801. That also means that the DNA that these two share comes from James Ellis.

Loretta’s matches with Joan are on Chromosomes 9 and 11. On Chromosome 9, Loretta fills in some blank space. On Chromosome 11, Loretta’s matches indicates that Marianne’s and Melissa’s DNA are from the Ellis and not the Gorrill side.

Janet on the Dicks Line

Janet fills in a small blank in the maternal copy of Chromosome 15:

Shantall and Hopgood/Watson Common Ancestors

Shantall provides the first painted in segment for Joan on her Chromosome 22:

Sharon on the Rayner/Simmons Line

Sharon is Joan’s first paternal side match on Chromosome 10:

This match tips the scales and gets Joan up one percent to 33% painted paternally and 39% overall.

Clarice on the Rheihold/Hurst Line

Clarice is the first maternal side identified match for Joan on Chromosome 16:

A Small Rayner/Hopgood Match with Brian

This small match was the first for Rayner/Hopgood and shows at the very beginning of Chromosome 9:

Josh on the Hopgood Line

Josh is the last Theory of Relativity at MyHeritage that Joan has right now:

The Theory has a few deleted profiles, but the genealogy seems alright:

Josh is the first painted Hopgood/Yeo segment:

Summary and Conclusions

Here is the new map for Joan:

  • I was pleased overall with looking at the Theories at MyHeritage. They added many new segments
  • I didn’t add some segments as there were multiple close common ancestors
  • There were some theories especially on the MacArthur line where the genealogy was messed up, so I didn’t try to fix the genealogy.
  • I was hoping to get Joan up to 40% painted. I think I can do that by working out the MacArthur genealogy or looking at Gedmatch for DNA matches. This can be handled in a subsequent Blog.
  • The interrelatedness of some of Joan’s ancestors presents some challenges when looking at the DNA.
  • I enjoy making these maps, but it can be a time-consuming exercise.
Posted on

My Wife’s Theories of Relativity and DNA Painting

My wife Marie has Butler, Ellis, Lefevre and  Upshall. Butler is originally from Ireland, Ellis from PEI, LeFevre from Quebec and Upshall from Newfoundland. I have uplaoded Marie’s DNA results to MyHeritage. They have a utility called Theories of Relativity. This matches DNA with family trees. Once I get those connections, I can map Marie’s DNA using DNA Painter an online utility.

DNA Painter

I have already mapped quite a bit of Marie’s DNA here:

This shows that Marie is 30% painted or mapped. I’d like to improve this by looking at MyHeritage’s Theories.

Marie’s Theories of Relativity (TOR)

Marie’s top TOR is already mapped. That is Fred. Marie’s second TOR is Jo-Ann. Their common ancestors are Hopgood and Watson:

Marie and Jo-Ann match here:

I downloaded the details of this DNA match and entered them in at DNA Painter. I didn’t have these ancestors at DNA Painter, so I added them along with a new suggested color:

When I do this, I notice a potential problem:

This indicates that Jo-Ann’s match is bumping into Sarah’s match. That makes me suspect that I have mapped Sarah wrong. Sarah may have Hopgood/Watson ancestors also that I didn’t notice.

Another Look at Sarah

Sarah’s results are at AncestryDNA and Gedmatch. This is how I have Sarah at Ancestry:

That means that there is a mix-up somewhere. The reason I suspect it is on Sarah’s side is because the DNA match for Marie and Sarah is high for a 4th cousin once removed. I don’t want to try to fix this at this time, so I’ll just note the discrepancy. The problem is that one shared segment should represent one shared common ancestor. In this case it represents two.

Even with the overlaps, Jo-Ann brings up Marie’s mapped DNA to 31%.

Caroline and the LeFevre/Boure Line

Next is Wallace who I already mapped. Then Caroline. TOR shows a common ancestor with this couple:

This tree is also not without its problems. How could Charles Lefebvre be born in 1891 and have a daughter born 1870? This Ancestry Tree from Marie’s cousin has a Charles:

When I checked details on Caroline’s tree, it said that Charles was born before 1891. So I’ll say Caroline’s tree is OK. Caroline doesn’t add much new DNA, but doesn’t conflict with other DNA

Caroline overlaps with orange and pink but those are also LeFevre matches from more recent generations:

Pierre -Luc and an Older Pouliot Ancestor

Here is how MyHeritage shows the connection:

My suspicious side says that there could be other ancestral connections, but my lazy side says, put this in as is. Pierre-Luc’s DNA doesn’t bump into anyone that it shouldn’t bump into.

Pierre-Luc bumps into Joe and Patricia but they have common ancestors with Marie of LeFevre and Pouliot. That means that Joe and Patricia’s pink segments above Pierre are most likely Pouliot DNA. That means that if I wanted to get fancy, I could re-assign those two Joe and Patricia segments to Emma Pouliot. But I won’t.

The Problem with Daniel: Too Many Ancestors

Here is how MyHeritage shows Daniel:

But also like this:

DNA Painter may help figure out which DNA goes where. First, I’ll put Daniel in ambiguously:

Here are the hairs we are trying to split:

On Chromosome 2, we still can’t tell where Daniel belongs:

 

First I had to change Daniel’s color to green so he would show up better. In order to tell where Daniel belongs, we need an older match. The pink, orange and blue matches are too recent. That means that I entered Daniel correctly as Methot or LeFevre. For brevity, I left out the spouses. Sorry, spouses.

Daniel’s DNA matches with Marie were just under the limit of 7 cM, so they didn’t get painted:

Irma with PEI Ancestry

Matches on Chromosomes 2 and 3 will be too small to paint:

Painting this brings up more problems:

Here we have some bad overlaps between Ellis, Hopgood and MacArthur. One may be explained in that Irma has a different path to Ellis:

The Hopgood segment was one we just mapped from Jo-Ann – but with reservations.

Here is another path for Jo-Ann:

Here is a more likely, but slightly more distant relationship:

 

The Problem with Marie’s DNA Matches

Marie has four grandparents as do we all:

  • Ellis from PEI – Island genealogy and intermarriage, but the records are pretty good
  • Upshall from Newfoundland – More intermarriage like in PEI, but the records are not as good or missing
  • Butler from Ireland – No known intermarriage but very few relatives who have tested or posted genealogies
  • LeFevre from Quebec – Very good genealogies but a lot of intermarriage

Summary and Observations

  • Marie has confusing intermarriage issues on three out of four sides of her tree. This makes analyzing her genetic genealogy difficult
  • The further back the match is, the more possibility there is that the DNA could represent multiple sets of common ancestors
  • DNA Painter points out some of these issues. However, it is possible that DNA Painter could also sort out from which ancestors these DNA matches come from where there is more than one possibility.
  • I may come back to this later and try to sort this out.