Posts

Posted on

Fun with My Frazer Enhanced Shared DNA Matches at Ancestry

I recently signed up for Pro Tools at Ancestry. The only Pro Tool I have used so far is the enhanced Shared Matches. One Quarter of my ancestry is Frazer. Then that goes back to Clarke and McMaster, so I’d like to take a look at what I have.

Here is my grandmother’s tree so far:

I’m stuck more on the Clark side.

Frazer Enhanced Matches

I’ll start here as it should be simpler than the Clarke side:

Many of these matches are from FTDNA, MyHeritage and 23andMe. Enhanced matches are just from Ancestry. It appears that my Ancestry DNA Frazer matches are at the third cousin level. However, that should include McMaster also technically as the common ancestors for this group are George William Frazer and Margaret McMaster.

One way to see my maches are through ThruLines:

I do have one match at the 2nd cousin level. That is Mabel. Interestingly, I match Faye, my third cousin with more DNA. Here is Mabel and my shared match list:

These are the first five after my niece:

  1. Matthew – on my chart
  2. Rebecca – on my chart
  3. Stephen – need to add
  4. Faye – on my chart
  5. B.V. – older match

Actually, I need to add Mabel. She is the sister of Raymond and Emily:

After adding Mabel, I realized that she and Emily are the same person!

Adding Stephen

I had a note already that Stephen was related to Whitney. When I choose Stephen’s Shared matches with me, I see this:

Whitney is Stephen’s Niece:

Here I have added him to my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Chart. Stephen must be Lisa’s brother and my third cousin. I made a note at Ancestry to that effect.

Here is how BV is related:

The relationship is on the McMaster side. However, William McMaster married a Frazer. This Frazer is quite distantly related to me.

The next 5 on Mabel and my match list could be more difficult:

I know how I am related to Gladys:

Our common ancestors were James Frazer and Violet Frazer. i believe that they were first cousins. I don’t think I have the other four on the list. However, I have noted previously that they all match Gladys.

Where is Lisa on My Chart?

Next I choose Lisa on my shared match list. I look on the right to see her highest shared match:

Fortunately, that match is with Linda and I have a shared ancestor with her. Ancestry guesses that Lisa is a 1st cousin once removed to Linda.

I don’t know exactly where Lisa fits in, but my guess is around here:

Lisa probably descends from James Clarence Frazer.

When I look at Spen, she is likely from the same branch as Lisa.

I get two hints for Kathryn:

Kathryn is either first cousin or haf niece to SM and Linda. I see that SM is not on my chart, so I will add her as a daughter of Clarence Frazer:

Finally, I have John on my list. John is most closely related to Brad:

However, the blue dot by Brad means that I haven’t even looked at his results.

John’s second largest match is with Matthew:

Matthew is my 3rd cousin:

John has no family tree, but his results are managed by Dawn. Dawn has this tree with her husband in it. This is her husbands part of the tree:

John’s maternal grandfather was my great-grandfather’s brother. That means that I can at least add John to my tree:

John would be my 2nd cousin once removed. I need to write to Dawn to find out if the John who took the test was her husband. It looks like from my notes that I did write two years ago, but didn’t hear back. It is helpful to have John on the Chart above as it reminds me who he is when the Ancestry match comes up.

Continuing with Mabel

Now I have only three because this is the end of page one of three of shared matches between myself and Mabel. As I side note, I could do this with my four other siblings who have tested at Ancestry and I would get different results and in different order. I don’t know about Alannah, but Matthew and Jan are on my chart.

Here is Alannah’s tree:

The Johnston name comes up a lot in my research, so that could be the link. Alannah’s highest shared match is with BV mentioned above. That match is only 47 cM. My guess is that the connection is quite old – as in the 1700’s.

Here are the first two matches on Page 2 of Mabel and my shared matches. I know where keith fits in on my McMaster side. I am not familiar with Lila. Lila’s tree shows some ancestors that came from Ireland and went to Ontario. I found a first and a second cousin to Lila, but their trees were not useful.

Five More on Page 2

I’m still interested in the list, so will keep going:

All these shared matches have some sort of tree. There is one match that I have not looked at named KS.

Morgan is and estimated 1st cousin once removed with Keith. I see that he is already on my chart.

Morgan should show up on my ThruLines, but perhaps I haven’t kept up at Ancestry with my McMaster side. Also Morgan does not have a linked tree, so we would not show on ThruLines because of that.

Mary

Mary is the sister of Lila. Mary and Lila are still a bit of a mystery.

K.S.

Here is KS’ tree:

A lot of these names have come up in my DNA matches, but they have stumped me so far. KS’ largest DNA match is with Mabel.

John

His match seems to go back to the 1700’s in Ireland on my Mcmaster or Frazer side or both.

n.f.

n.f. is most closely related to Matthew.

That means that he must descend from Hubert Frazer.

Looking at the Clarkes

Here is my closest Clarke descendant match at Ancestry:

Ronald is also related to me on my McMaster side, but more distantly, so that creates some potential difficulties.

Above are the top six shared matches I have with Ron.

Cheryl

Cheryl has no tree. However, she shows as a first cousin once removed to Kyle who has this tree:

There is the Lougheed name again. They are from County Sligo where my McMaster and Clarke ancestors lived. Frazers lived there also, but earlier, they were in North Roscommon. My guess is that Cheryl also has Lougheed ancestry.

Another unusual thing about Cheryl is that I have 13 pages of shared matches with her. I didn’t check every match but every match she had with a good tree had a Lougheed in it. One theory, based on the number of Lougheed matches is that Lougheed is the mother of Jane Spratt:

However, this match is still a mystery until I can work out the genealogy.

Nina – A Spratt Connection?

L.R. is Shani’s child, so I will move on to Nina. Here is Nina’s tree:

I think that Spratt is a relatively uncommon name. The connection must be on the Spratt side. Nina has a large match with Ed:

Deb also has a good match with a better tree:

Deb’s paternal side:

Here it is clear that Deb is in fact a half niece as Wray Lionel must have had two marriages.

Craig also has an interesting match to Nina:

That means that Ancsetry is right is saying that Craig is Nina’s 2nd cousin once removed:

Notice that there are no Lougheed ancestors. Ancestry thinks that Nina and I could be third cousins once removed. Assuming that is right, our common ancestors could be:

1775 seems a long time ago, but third cousin once removed does not seem like that distant of a relationship. However, I would not be surprised if the connection is at least a generation back. I have three out of found sibllings at Ancestry that showed shared matches with Nina and all their matches are at a lower level than mine.

Helena

Helena matches Nina and me with modest amounts of DNA:

Helena’s maternal genealogy goes back to William Spratt:

It appears that Christopher was older than average when he had Rachel and George. It is also possible that the Jane Spratt in my tree born in or around 1830 is a daughter of Christopher Spratt or a daughter of one of his brothers.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I started out looking at my somewhat easier Frazer shared matches
  • By looking at shared matches, I added some names to my Frazer DNA/Genealogy Charts. Other names I could figure out where they should be approximately on those Charts
  • I then looked at the more difficult Clarke side
  • The name Lougheed comes up quite often. My guess is that name is associated with Jane Spratt’s (b. 1830) maternal side
  • Another separate group of shared matches went back to earlier Spratts of Enniskiilen, Ireland (Fermanagh County). This line is likely the line of Jane Spratt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

More Butler DNA Review and DNA Painter

I need to do some extra review now that I have a new set of ancestors for my wife’s Butler Line. I had previously thought that the immigrant ancestor Edward Butler was the son of Michael Butler and Margaret Croke. This has turned out to be extremely unlikely. A more likely candidate now is Edward, son of Henry Butler and Anne Russel. This man was actually born Adam but went by Edward.

Gedmatch

I had an early match between my late father-in-law Richard Butler and a Murphy descendant from New Brunswick. I can now map his DNA to Richard’s profile at DNAPainter. I have the match’s name as Nathan on my chart:

By the chart, Nathan is Richard’s third cousin twice removed. Here are some expected shared DNA amounts for that relationship:

Here is the match at Gedmatch:

Here is Richard’s DNA Painter map currently:

He shows Kerivan, Rooney and an unknown match. I’ll add in Nathan which represents Henry Butler or Anne Russell’s DNA:

When I do that, I see that I already have Nathan, but listed as an unknown branch. Now that I know that Branch I can make the necessary changes.

Note that there is no light blue bar for the X Chromosome as men do not receive on from their father – only their mother.

Virginia and Butler DNA Matches

I have the same unknown Butler in VIrginia’s DNA Painter profile:

We now know the common Butler ancestral couple to be Henry Butler from Wexford and his wife Anne Russel.

Virginia is Lorraine’s sister and the Henry Butler DNA on Chromosome 4 is shared with James from FTDNA. Fortunately, I made that note on my chart. Also, I was fortunate to find her old FTDNA code in an old address book of mine.

Here is Lorraine’s DNA Painter Profile for comparison:

I should note that the birth years for George Butler and Henry Butler are guesses.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I didn’t find any new DNA matches but I was able to sort out some old ones
  • Previously I was searching for the wrong Edward Butler. This lead me in the wrong direction for DNA matches
  • I now appear to have the right Edward Butler. Previously, I had to fill in ‘unknown Butler Ancestor’ in DNA Painter. Now that I know that the common ancestor is Henry (born Adam) Butler, I am able to fill in the unknown DNA matches using DNA Painter.

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Butler Enhanced Shared Matches

Shared enhanced matches is a new feature at Ancestry under their Pro Tools. They are helpful in ferreting out matches or identifying matches with no trees by associating them close matches that do have trees.

In my previous Blog, I looked at the Butler ThruLines for two of my wife’s late aunts. It turns out that recent revisions to the Butler tree have made a lot of my older Blogs obsolete. Here is one of my wife’s Aunt Lorraine’s matches:

Lorraine’s match with Will is interesting as it brings us back an additional generation from what we had. Here are Lorraine and Will’s shared matches:

 

These are shared matches where will also matches Lorraines match by at least 20 cM. There are more matches going down. Virginia is Lorraine’s sister. Barbara descends from Edward Butler and his son George. Brian descends from Edward’s brother George of Cincinnati as does Patty. The blue dots for Charles and Jennifer mean that I have not looked at these matches. There are additional matches not shown above.

This is one way that it could work. Charles is a shared match with Lorraine and Will, but he has no tree posted. I choose Charles to get his shared matches:

 

Charles is in the the second cousin range compared to Bobbi. I know that Bobbi descends from Mary Ann. She was the son of George Butler of Cincinnati. She moved to St. John, New Brunswick and had a family. That means that Charles must be related to the New Brunswick side of the Butler family. In fact, Charles is from Halifax, Nova Scotia:

Here is the relationship between the two places:

Bobbi is on the bottom left of the image above. She is with two other DNA matches from the New Brunswick Branch started by Mary Ann Butler. Mary Ann’s sister Rebecca remained in the Cincinnati area.

Lorraine and Will’s Shared Match Jennifer

Jennifer also has no tree, but I shared match between her and Lorraine does:

Based on other matches, the link is probably on the Kirwin side:

Maureen and Lorraine are related to Michael, but Michael is much more closely related to Maureen:

Michael’s 2nd great-grandfather was from Waterford:

This may be the connection. I believe that Maureen and family are from New Jersey.

Lorraine and Patty’s Shared Match List

Patty is one of Lorraine’s biggest matches from the Cincinnati Branch:

Jeremiah is the first on page 2 of Lorraine and Patty’s Shared Match List, but he is already on my Butler DNA/Genealogy Chart. James is someone new. Here is James’ Family Tree on his maternal side:

I see three Butlers. Richard Butler was from Wexford and Adam Butler is a name that comes up in the new Butler genealogy. This is worth tracking, so I’ll create my own tree for James focusing in on the Butler connection. Even better, I contacted a Butler relative in England and he assures me that his tree is right for the Butler part.

Here is James added to the Butler DNA/Genealogy Chart:

Here are the shared connections by DNA:

 

A Peek at MyHeritage

Lorraine has a match with Marie at MyHeritage:

Marie’s tree has some familiar names:

I’ve added Marie to my Butler Chart:

I didn’t check Marie’s tree, but I’m guessing that it is right. One good thing about MyHeritage is that they show where the match is between Lorraine and Marie:

Here I added that information to Lorraine’s profile:

This is the first Butler DNA I’ve added for Lorraine and it goes back to the 1700’s. I even have an unknown category. Hopefully that will be identified at some point.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It was helpful looking at enhanced shared matches. I don’t always find out who the match is if they don’t have a tree, but I get a much better idea of what branch of the family they are from.
  • I was able to enlarge my Butler DNA/Genealogy Tree. This is a tree of DNA matches that also show an ancestral connection.
  • I looked at one match at MyHeritage and was able to map it to Lorraine’s profile using DNAPainter.
  • This is still more searching to be done for matches at Ancestry, MyHeritage, FTDNA, and Gedmatch.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Checking DNA ThruLines for a Newly Revised Butler Ancestor

In my previous Blog, I mentioned that I needed to exchange an Edward Butler ancestor on my wife’s side for another one. Now I would like to look at some of the new DNA connections based on that exchange.

Michael Vs. Henry Butler Connections

I previously noted that there were no Ancestry ThruLines for supposed ancestor Michael Butler:

However, I would not expect any. I did expect some on the Henry Butler side:

I just made the change in ancestors today and already there are four matches. These are all from the George H Butler side who was from Cincinnati.

Let’s start with Patty. She matches Lorraine by 39 cM and shows on the chart as a 3rd cousin. Ancestry shows this:

This shows that 3rd cousin is the most likely choice for this level of match. I’ll start a spreadsheet to compare the matches:

kziemann

kziemann actually has a larger match than than expected, so there is only 28% chance of being the right match. Still, that is quite close to the highest likelihood:

Regina and Joey

Regina’s match comes in at 22%

Here is the rest of the chart:

The Frequency Column does not compare well. For example, for Regina and Joey, the frequency is 22%, but they are both still top choices. kziemann at 28% is a second choice (but not by much) and then only because her match is too high and not too low. My takeaway is that all these matches fit very well for my new Butler ancestor configuration.

My Butler DNA/Ancesty Chart

I currently have this chart which I now believe to be incorrect:

I need to move the right side so that Edward is George’s brother.

Here is the new chart showing the relationship between Patty on the George side and Lorraine on the Edward side:

It shows these two as third cousins. That is what they are, but it is good to check to make sure I have thre tree right.

Patty, Kim and Regina are already on the chart. I just need to add Joey:

An Extra Generation

Now that I have added in Edward Adam Butler, I get a bonus generation:

Lorraine’s ThruLines shows George Butler, father of Henry Butler. This name was provided by my most helpful Butler Genealogy friend Peter.

Here are two extra matches for Lorraine:

Here, Peter and Will are shown as half 4th cousins once removed. However, I suspect that is because the wife of George Butler above is not known. I have previously looked into the match with Will, but not the match with Peter.

This Peter is different than the genealogy friend Peter. When I click on the George Butler above, I see one tree from Peter:

Here is what Peter’s tree shows:

One interesting thing is that Peter of the DNA match above and Will are both from England. These two descend from Anastasia Butler of Wexford.

I’ll add George to my Butler DNA/Genealogy Tree:

I put Anastasia’s family on the left, though I do not know the birth order. My genealogist friend Peter made an educated guess on the George at the top and his children. However, an educated guess plus DNA matches makes for a more educated guess. The red lines and circles indicate that Peter and Will are fourth cousins once removed to Lorraine. The chart also shows the impressive amount of DNA matches to my wife’s family in support of the new family tree.

Here is my finished ThruLines Chart for my wife’s Aunt Lorraine and her sister Virginia:

Where the freqqency is on the lower side it is because the match is larger than average. I think what happens often is that there is either a  match or not. When there is a match, it tends to be larger thana average.

Summary and Conclusions

  • After correcting the Butler genealogy back to Ireland, I picked up some Ancestry ThruLines right away
  • I added those DNA matches to my corrected Butler DNA/Genealogy Chart.
  • The seven in the ThruLines amount to only about half of the total matches on the non-Edward Butler descended side of the chart. The other matches were from other testing companies or matches that didn’t have trees or linked trees and I was able to find out the genealogy.
  • I was a little surprised that the ThruLines added a potential ancestor of George Butler. He would have been born in the late 1700’s. This George was added in by my researcher friend Peter.
  • The ThruLines corroborate the corrected Butler ancestry on my wife’s side
  • I intend to do further analysis of the Ancestry DNA in a subsequent Blog.

 

 

 

Posted on

Swapping Out Butler Ancestors

Ever since I have been working on my wife’s Butler genealogy, I have been assuming that the parents of her Irish immigrant ancestor, Edward Butler were:

  • Michael Butler and
  • Margaret Croke

Now due to recent events I believe that Edward’s parents were:

  • Henry Butler and
  • Ann Russell

Here is Edward, now believed to son of Henry Butler from Wexford:

The Catalyst for the Change

The catalyst for this is that my wife’s niece and recently my wife’s sister have been looking into the genealogy. They convince me that, based on Mary Crowley’s death certificate of 1905, that she was a widow at the time. This means that Edward, son of Michael Butler and Margaret Croke who died in 1915 could not have been Mary Crowley’s husband. Mary Crowley was the husband of immigrant Edward Butler.

Major Reasons for the Swap

  • None of Edward’s children had the names of Michael or Margaret
  • A Blog I wrote in 2019 showed that Michael Butler and Margaret Croke were probably not the parents of Edward Butler based on DNA analysis. They were more likely in the Henry Butler and Ann Russell family
  • Immigrant Edward Butler lived in Cincinnatti during the 1860 and 1870 Census. Also living in Cincinnati was a George Butler, son of Henry Butler and Ann Russell.
  • George Butler had a brother named Edward (born Adam) who died in Boston in 1891.
  • There have been many autosomal DNA matches between the Edward Butler and George Butler family descendants.

Correcting the Genealogy

In my past research, I have a lot of information on Edward Butler. However, a lot of this is from the Edward Butler born in Poulrone, County Kilkenny and who died in Newton in 1915. I need to separate the two Edward Butlers and replace the wrong ancestral couple with the correct one. Once I do that, I believe that Ancetry ThruLines will begin to populate for Henry Butler and Ann Russell. Right now, my wife’s late Aunt Lorraine has no Michael Butler ThruLines (nor should she if I am right):

Downsides to Swapping the Edward Butlers

  1. I was used to researching the Edward from Poulrone
  2. Edward Adam would have been quite young when he married Mary Crowley

This is from my Butler researching friend Peter from England:

If Edward Adam Butler was born 24 July 1839 he would have been a few months shy of 16 when he married in St. John, New Brunswick in 1855.

Taking the Plunge

The first step is changing my records at Ancestry.

I also had to remove records that were associated with Edward Butler of Poulrone. Here I have that George of Cincinnati and Edward are brothers:

So there is a bit of sorting out to do.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It is difficult to swap out one ancestor for another. This is especially true as I have been researching this ancestor for so long. It is sort of like saying goodby to a family friend who is no longer family.
  •  There is also the nagging questiion of, did I get the right guy this time? Most signs point to adding in Edward (Adam) Butler of Wexford. The major problem right now is that he was born a bit later than I would have thought he should have been. The possible explanation is that he padded his age to sound older.
  • However, overall, there were many reasons to remove Edward Butler of Poulrone, County Kilkenny with Edward (Adam) Butler of Wexford.
  • One reason why Edward (Adam) was added in was due to DNA matches between the one who I now believe is his brother (George Butler of Cincinnati) and my wife’s Butler family.
  • I am looking forward to exploring more of these DNA matches in a subsequent Blog.

 

 

Posted on

Enhanced Shared Matches at AncestryDNA Part 3

In part 2 of my Blog series on enhanced shared matches, I looked at four matches. For three out of four, I figured out how they fit in and added them to my DNA/Genealogy Trees. I’ll continue the exercise in this Blog. This was one of four methods suggested by Jim Bartlett in a recent Blog that he wrote on the subject.

Doris on My Maternal Side

 

Ancestry thinks that we could be 2nd or third cousins. That should be easy to figure out. However, Doris has no trees. It looks like I have never tried to contact Doris. Doris and I share a match with Barry:

Pro Tools tells me that Barry could be Doris’ first cousin once removed. Here is how I am related to Barry:

This is interesting becuase Barry descends from a NIcholson ancestor named Maria who stayed in the UK when most of the family moved to Philadelphia. That means that Doris is likely from the UK. I believe that Barry and I should be full, not half third cousins.

I see that Sue is Doris’ daughter:

Sue shows that she has a tree but there is nothing in it. I have written to Doris to see if she would like to share information.

Mystery Match Kathy

I know that Kathy matches on my mother’s side – perhaps on the Nicholson or Lentz side or both:

Kathy’s closest shared match is with my late mother:

This makes sense as my mother is obviously an earlier generation than me. That would mean that Kathy likely descends from Lentz and Nicholson and is from a generation later than me. This also means that no close relatives to Kathy have tested at Ancestry.

Mystery Match #3: emach

Even the name of this paternal side match is mysterious. Joyce is emch’s grandmother:

I’m glad I got a DNA sample from Joyce at a family reunion.

I also see that emach’s mother is Jill:

Here I’ve added emach into my Hartley DNA/Genealogy Tree:

emach is my second cousin once removed. The tree is a little out of date as I’m not at my primary computer writing this. David should be in the same box with emach.

Mystery Match #4: Matthew

I think that four matches are enough for a Blog. Matthew is on my mother’s side:

I am now down to below 100 cM for a match.

Matthew’s best match is with Marian:

However, she has a line through her tree next to her name. That means she has no tree.

One More: Howard

Howard and I have a fairly large match:

Even though the match is quite large, I think that the relationship is quite distant. Based on Howard’s last name, I would suspect connection to the Pilling side, but I don’t see obvious Pilling matches that we share.

Howard and I share a match with John:

John shows this:

However, I have questioned some of these Hartley trees. I have two Robinson Trees that I have looked at, but I have not looked at this one. This gives me an idea for a subsequent Blog. I can look at all my Hartley Common Ancestor Trees at Ancestry to see if they have anything in common or shared matches.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I looked at four more enhanced shared matches
  • I found out where one of them fit in my Hartley DNA/Genealogy tree.
  • For three of them, I have a pretty good idea where they fit in my maternal tree, but not exactly
  • the fifth match is in a category of Hartley matches that I am unsure of, because I am so unsure of the Hartley genealogy before the early 1800’s. However, it gives me impetus to take a fresh look at my possible early Hartley ancestry to try to prove or disprove the Ancestry theories.

 

 

Posted on

My MyHeritage Match with Gangnus Ancestry

I was interested in a match that I saw recently at MyHeritage. I match Matthew who shows this ancestry:

I actually purchased a book in German by Gustav Gangnus on the Gangnus family. So it is possible that Friedrich S. Gangnus is in the book. I do see the name. He married a Hassenfuss. I am so sure this will link up with my tree that I will create a floating tree in Ancestry and then try to attach it at the right place.

According to the 2003 book I have, Friedrich’s father was Georg Michael Gangnus. It turns out that he is already in my tree:

Here is part of my Gangnus DNA/Genealogy Tree:

This discrepancy is that I descend from Johann Jacob born 1777 and Biedermann. Matthew appears to descend from Johann Jacob and Boehler. This could be due to a second marriage. As I look up my Gangnus book, I see that is the case.

Herre is Matthew:

Matthew shows as my half fourth cousin once removed. That is pretty obscure. Chances are that some other DNA snuck in ther on the Hassenfuss or Schmidt side.

Gangnus? DNA

Here is how Matthew and I match:

This would be on my paternal side. Here is the information in tabular form:

I will put this information into DNA Painter. However, by default, anything under 7 cM is not entered.

One interesting thing, is that it is likely that this DNA could have come from Johann Jacob Gangnus born 1777. Here is Maternal Chromosome 4 mapped:

I have this mapped to Johann Jacob Gangnus 1777, but there could be other ancestors lurking around. The right side of my match with Matthew defines the crossover from my Rathfelder side to my Lentz side. My match with Jereme starts my Lentz side matches. Chromosome 5 was under the pre-set limit.

Here is Chromosome 15:

Here my match with Matthew does not fill in blank area. However, as he is beneath the orange matches, it shows that those matches are actually carrying down Gangnus rather than Rathfelder DNA. The match with Carolyn is on the Lentz side and is probably an incorrect match as it is in an area that is supposed to be the Rathfelder side.

Matthew and Gladys Painted

Gladys is my (late) mother.

See the small match I had on Chromosome 5 does not show on my mother’s match. My mom’s match on Chromosome 1 is below the limit.

Here I am showing my mother’s paternal and maternal side to make it look more like my maternal side. Angelina was someone with a fairly large match but I couldn’t figure out the genealogy of the match. Interestingly, Chromosome 15 did not get painted as it was slightly below the threshold. It’s probably a valid match as both my mother and I had it.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Matthew or one of his relatives did a good job getting his Latvian genealogy back to the 1800’s
  • It was clear to me that Gangnus plus Latvia plus a good DNA match was important
  • The book by Gustav Gangnus on the Gangnus family made it easy to connect my Gangnus family to Matthew’s
  • Painting the matches helps to visualize where the DNA matches are.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Enhanced Shared Matches at AncestryDNA Part 2

In my previous Blog, I took a shot at looking at my enhanced shared matches. This is a new feature that AncestryDNA has under it’s Pro Tools. As the name suggests, there is a charge associated with the Pro Tools. In my previous Blog, I looked at a few matches on my Hartley side that I was curious about.

In this Blog, I would like to look at a suggestion from Jim Bartlett in his Blog:

1. Work down our Match list. Start at the top, and methodically work on each Match that we haven’t placed in our Tree. The advantage here is that the top Matches (most shared cM) are usually the easiest to figure out. With Pro Tools we can see their top Matches, potentially ones with good Trees, and often tease out their place in our Tree. At the least, even if we cannot find the exact relationship, we can figure out which sub-branch of our Tree they are on (which is all we really need to know for them to be helpful forming a tight group).

This is his Plan of Attack #1 out of 4.

Top Unknown Match

This would have to be Keith:

I recognize the last name. My grandmother had a sister Agnes Lentz whose married name was the same as Keith’s. I have that Agnes had a son named Robert Lester in 1925, but I have no further information on him. Keith’s tree is private. I messaged Keith at Ancestry, but got no response.

This is probably a pretty easy example. The first shared match between Keith and myself is my late mother. She shows as likely 1st cousin twice removed. Now the Robert Lester I mentioned would be my mother’s first cousin. That means that Keith at twice removed could be Robert’s grandson.

As I scroll down my shared match list, I see Mia:

Mia is Keith’s daughter and has an unlinked tree:

Mia has Robert as her paternal great-grandfather. This seems to confirm what I had guessed. I wrote to Mia in the past. She got back to me once but did not follow up apparently. Without the Pro Tools, I would not know that Mia was Robert’s daughter which is helpful.

Keith and Mia are related on my Lentz and Nicholson side. I am having more trouble with the Lentz side, so I will add them to that tree:

Here is the add:

Keith is my 2nd cousin once removed and Mia is my second cousin twice removed. Keith may be helpful in checking out other Lentz matches.

My Second Top Unknown Match: Bird

I have a high match with bird. I don’t think I ever heard back from her. She is on my Hartley side. I go down the Shared Match Pro list and look for large matches:

Turns out that Bird is an Aunt or half sister to S.W. S.W. is my second cousin:

Ancestry thinks that S.W. is bird’s aunt or half sister. That means that we are related through my great Aunt Mary. Mary Alice (also known as Molly) had several children. So it may be possible to reason out a more exact relationship. However, I believe that bird must descend from Mary Alice aka Molly.

Upon further review of my tree, I see a person who would fit the remaining name of bird that I have blurred out. Here is my Hartley DNA/Genealogy Tree so far:

This is a big family, so this is the tip of the iceburg. My great Aunt Mary is in the second row about the middle. I am missing Mary Alice or Molly:

Here I have filled in Mary Alice and her children. Susan, Lady and Bird have all tested at AncestryDNA. So Bird was actually a niece to Susan and Lady and not a half sister.  I may have been able to figure this out without the Pro Shared Matches, but the new utility got me to figure it out. Another mystery solved. So far, I am two for two.

Mystery Match #3: David

My match to David has some similarities to Bird:

I match David at 148 cM vs 150 for Bird. Here is a shared match between David and me:

I am the administrator for Joyce’s DNA, so that is convenient. A second shared match makes it even more clear:

Here I have separated out Jim and Joyce and added Jill and David to my Hartley DNA/Genealogy Tree. Again, I probably could have figured this out before, but I didn’t without the Pro Tools. The Pro Tools give a certainty to this line that I could have assumed before.

Mystery Match #4: Jessica

If I ever figured out how Jessica fits in, I didn’t make a note to that effect. Jessica shows up on my maternal side.

Jessica has a sister named Angela who matches me at a lower rate (64 cM). However, she has a private tree.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I tried going down my list of matches as suggested by Jim Bartlett in his Blog
  • I fairly easily identified my first 3 uncertain matches.
  • I could not identify the fourth match. However, she likely descends from Nicholson and Lentz. I aslo could not trace her ancestry easily.
  • This was a pretty fun excercise and I will likely continue in a subsequent Blog

Jessica’s Genealogy

I will have to make a tree for Jessica and see where that takes me. This is what she has:

Here is my tree so far:

So far, I’m in the US with this tree, so  I’m tempted to accept all the green hints to see if any familiar names show up.

Still nothing rings a bell.

Here is the next level:

Still no luck. It seems like I should see a famililar name by now. I can tell by the shared matches that I am related to Jessica probably on the Lentz or Nicholson side or both.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Enhanced Shared Matches at AncestryDNA

The big news at Ancestry is that they have Enhanced Shared Matches. My understanding is that means that tells you of your shared matches with another person, you can now tell how those shared matches match each other.

In order to access this utility, you have to sign up for Pro Tools:

I suppose the other tools are helpful, but all the talk is about the enhanced shared matches. I am interested in a match on my Hartley side where I can’t find a connection.

Hartley Enhanced Shared Matches

I’ll start with a match I do know about:

Kristen and I have a pretty good match of 42 cM at Ancestry. We are third cousins once removed. Our common ancestors are Greenwood Hartley and Ann Emmet. That means that our shared matches should be along the Hartley or Emmet Lines.

Now, instead of a Shared matches selection I have this:

Here is the first page of what I get:

Heather is my daughter. Lori and Jonathan are my sibglings. The next two people are my father’s first cousins. I note that Joyce has a good match with Kristen, so that is interesting. I have access to the the results for these people, so it isn’t telling me anthing new, but it is helpful to have this in this format to compare in one place.

Some Unknown Hartley/Emmet Relatives

I have to go to page two of my shared matches with Kristen for this:

Jennifer has been a question mark in my mind as she has no tree. Notice a tree icon with a line through it. Emily is a known relative. She is my 3rd cousin twice removed. She shows as a 1st cousin to Kristen, but this is estimated by DNA. She would have to be a 1st cousin once removed to Emily in real life.

I haven’t yet figured out what the plus button is for.

saudet

I haven’t figured out how I am related to saudet. saudet shows as having a 63 cM match to Kristen and possibly a half 2nd cousin once removed or 2nd cousin twice removed. Here is her tree:

saudet’s mother was born in 1928. Kristen’s father was also born in 1928. That means that a second removed relationship is not likely. Looking at the tree, it is my assumption that I am related to saudet on her maternal side. Her paternal side is French Canadian. In addition Gonsalves and Rogers come from Portugal – though Rogers does not strike me as a Portuguese name. Further, Xavier and Saulles are from Portugal. That leaves the lines of John and Alice Shadlock.

Here is a photo of Elizabeth Shadlock:

 

Let’s go back and look at Kristen’s tree:

If Kristen and saudet are third cousins and they are both related to me, then the connection would have to be at the level of Able Burrows or Mary Ann Hartley. Actually, it would have to be at the level of Mary Ann Hartley, as I am not related to Abel Burrows.

An Audet/Pilling Connection?

Jack shows up on my shared matches with saudet:

Jack has Pilling in his tree:

Jack has that the John Pilling in his tree born 1824 was from Trawden.

My Father’s Cousin Joyce

I can go back a generation to my father’s cousin Joyce. Joyce and saudet have a shared match named Ruth:

Joyce and Ruth have a common ancestor:

Here again, we see the Pilling family. That means that my best guess is that saudet is related to the Hartleys on the Pilling side. Mary Pilling had a child before marrying Robert Hartley. That means that Ruth has no known Hartley ancestor. However, the exact connection between Pilling and Audet is somewhat of a mystery.

Here is another shared match between Jocye and saudet:

Richard also has Pilling ancestry on the Wilkinson side. Mary Pilling married a Wilkinson after Robert Hartley died.

This depiction is incorrect at Ancestry as Mary Pilling should be at the top of the tree. However, again, the common denominator is Pilling. This ensures that the connection is on the Pilling side. I must say that Elizabeth Shadlock’s baptism record is somewhat irregular.

My understanding is that Elizabeth’s mother was Mary Shadlock and the father was shown as William Walker. However, if William was the father, then why didn’t Elizabeth take his name? In addition, the baptism appears to be four years after the birth which is unusual. Also John Pilling was a sketchy character. He lived in the New Bedford but abandoned his family and returned to England with money that he had from a food cooperative.

Mystery Match Lee

Lee is another person of interest. Lee matches my at 22 cM at Ancestry. He has Hartley ancestors in the Colne area. Lee also matches my father’s cousin Joyce at 23 cM. Here is Lee’s tree:

Lee has:

  • Margaret Hartley from Colne
  • Robert Horsfield from Colne
  • Samuel Thornton from Colne
  • Alice Irving from Colne
  • William Wilson from Colne
  • John Clark from Colne
  • Margaret Simpson from Marsden

That would be a lot to check into.

I have that Joyce and lee have a shared match with Rebecca:

I also have a note that Rebecca has a Shackleton in her tree. However, Rebecca’s tree only covers her maternal side:

Also Thomas Shackleton was from Heptonstall:

Perhaps not too far from the Colne area, but not too close either. His father was from Wadsworth which is interesting as it looks not too far from Trawden:

Here is my Shackleton web page:

There is a slim chance that Rebecca’s John and my ancestor John could be the same person. Interesting possibility. I also notice that Rebecca has a Betty Greenwood in her tree and Nancy Shackleton in my tree married a Greenwood Pilling.

Another interesting shared match between Lee and Joyce is Kevin:

Kevin has a small match to Joyce, but a large tree:

Kevin does not show any Shackleton ancestors. In fact, his ancestors are not from Lancashire but mostly from Yorkshire. This suggests that the connection between my family and Lee’s could be in Yorkshire rather than in the Colne area.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I looked at two mystery matches on my Hartley side using Enhanced Shared Matches
  • I gained my certainty on where these matches should occur.
  • One match is certainly on my Pilling side
  • The other match is most likely in Yorkshire and possibly on my Shackleton side
  • I would like to try some of the three other methods suggested by Jim Bartlett in a recent post he wrote. He calls the method I used in this post as Focus on Specific Problems.

 

 

Posted on

An Arthur YDNA Test with Possible Links to Hartley

A while ago (last April), a new YDNA match appeared on some peoples’ radar. I thought that I would hear back more from his family, who were interested in his results, but I have not yet heard back, so I thought that I would write a Blog on some of the possibilities concerning that match.

Arthur took the 111 STR YDNA test. Here is how I match him compared to others:

Arthur is my 4th match at 8 steps. As his match is inbetween others with known Hartley ancestry, it is possible that Mr. Arthur has some Hartley ancestry – perhaps going back many years. Another interesting thing about this list is that many have taken the BigY700 test. That would be everyone except for Arthur, Ross and Wolka.

FTDNA has a time predictor:

It comes out that our common ancestor is perhaps around the year 1450. However, the range is between 1100 and 1700. Further, I am one step away from my brother James. That means that James and Mr. Arthur are a GD of 7. That puts the date for a common ancestor aroudn around 1500 (or between 1200 and 1750).

Mr. Arthur to Hartley YDNA Project People .

I can put these STR comparisons into a spreadsheet. Here is the start:

This is just my brother and I so far. Here is the match list sorted by GD:

The closest match is with Channon. STRs are not as accurate as SNPs which the BigY test looks at, but they should give some information.

Here are Channon’s closest matches at the 111 STR level:

Of Channon’s matches, everyone who has information on Paternal Earliest Known Ancestor has that ancestor as a Hartley.

Here is Channon’s Block Tree. These are all people who have taken the BigY test:

The “Your Branch” refers to Channon. He is in A11134 with three other Hartleys. A11134 branches off of A11132. It is thought that Mawdsley is an early relative of the Hartleys, but he probably branched off before the age of surnames. Arthur does not match Mawdsley at the 111 level but he does at the 67 STR level. That means that Arthur and Mawdsley are more distant matches compared to those in my Excel spreadsheet above.

There are two other branches under the main Hartley Branch of A11134. Those are Ft225247 which my brother and I are in and A16717. That is an early branch of Quaker Hartleys who moved to Pennsylvania – probably to avoid persecution.

Summary and Conclusions

  • A person with the surname Arthur has taken the 111 STR level YDNA test.
  • Arthur has relatively close matches to Hartleys indicating at least a fairly early common ancestor with Hartleys.
  • Arthur’s closest STR match of the ones in the Hartley YDNA Surname Project is with someone with the surname Channon. However, Channon appears to also have early matches with Hartleys.
  • My theory is that Arthur has Hartleys in his ancestry – possibly going back to the year 1600 or before. The Hartley name in the area where my Hartleys came from go back to around the year 1422.