Posts

Posted on

The John Line of the Frazers and Marilee’s DNA

This is a follow-up on a previous Blog I wrote on the John Line. At that time, I found Marilee as a Frazer match at MyHeritage. Marilee has kindly agreed to upload her DNA to Gedmatch where I can compare her results to others in the Frazer DNA Project.

The John Frazer Line

If I have my genealogy right, John was the eldest known son of Archibald Frazer. I have John born around 1755 or 1757. Some researchers have him born as late as 1775. However, that would cause a problem with John’s son who Marilee has as being born in 1779.

 

Marilee’s Line is on the left. She is the lone known DNA tested person in the line. I have that John had four children. One of them was Archibald who Marilee has as her second great grandfather. Archibald had another John who emigrated. This John would be a pivotal person in the research of the John Frazer Line. The previous research that I have done did not go down from John.

More on John Frazer, Immigrant

Here is what Marilee has to say:

I know my Frazer ancestor emigrated from Ireland in 1850 and settled first in Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada, and then Lockport, New York, which is in Niagara County, New York. 

As I don’t have information on this line, I created a Frazer Tree at Ancestry. Here is Marilee’s grandfather and great-grandfather in the 1870 Census living in Lockport, NY:

Here the name is listed as Fraser.

In 1860, John was a Hotel Keeper:

It looks like John managed a staff of six. It appears from the birth of the children, that the family moved to New York about 1850.

I also found this monument at Ancestry:

The 1855 New York Census shows that the family had been in Lockport for four years:

That means that they would not be in the 1850 US Census and may not be in the Canadian 1851 Census. If Marilee is right and this family emigrated to Ireland in 1850, they wouldn’t have had much time in Canada. However, If John and Sarah had John in 1849 in Canada, they could have emmigrated in 1848 or 1849. Then there is the question of where did John and Sarah marry? I did find one tree that had the couple marrying in Ireland which probably makes sense.

Marilee’s DNA

One of the hopes of DNA testing is that it might shore up our genealogical research or point us in new directions for research. Let’s look at Marilee’s DNA.

Mystery Match With Bob

One of the first things I noticed on Marilee’s match list was a match with Bob. He looked familiar. Here is the match they have:

By DNA, it would look like Bob and Marilee are 2nd cousins once removed. Bob’s great-grandmother was Jane or Jennie McPartland. I have written many blogs on the McPartlands. I’m not sure if they have included Bob. Here is a portion of Bob’s tree at Ancestry:

Here is how Bob is related to other McPartlands:

It is no mystery that Bob is a 2nd cousin to Charlene and 3rd cousin to Karen and Chris. The mystery is why he shows as a pretty close DNA match to Marilee. Perhaps Bob and Marilee are related on a non-Frazer Line? Perhaps the Ann above is a daughter of Marilee’s 2nd great-grandfather Archibald Frazer?

Marilee also matches with Karen here:

For Bob, Karen and Marilee to triangulate, Bon would have to match Karen on Chromosome 7 in th same area. He does:

The closest place that Karen and Bob match are at Owen McPartland and Ann Frazer. As far as I know, Marilee has no McPartland ancestors, so that would point to the Frazer side.

In addition Brian, who I believe is Chris’ brother matches Marilee on Chromosome 7:

Marilee and Bonnie

The next person I notice going down Marilee’s match list is Bonnie. Bonnie is in the James Line of the Frazer DNA Project.

On the Frazer Chart, Bonny and Marilee would be 6th cousins. Here is their DNA match:

This is another mystery. By DNA this connection could indicate a 3rd cousin or 3rd cousin once removed.

A More Rational DNA Approach

So far, I have checked a few random matches for Marilee. These seem to indicate that she matches a McPartland that marred a Frazer and someone on the James Line of the Frazers even though Marilee’s genealogy shows she is on the Archibald Line of the Frazers.

Here is how Marilee matches others on the Archibald Line of the Frazers:

Marilee is on the top row. She matches me and some of my siblings over 15 cM. This could be a Frazer match or possibly a McMaster match. Marilee matches Michael at over 15 cM. She also matches Jamie who has a Frazer/Johnston background.

Here is how Marilee matches Frazer descendants from the James Frazer Line:

As noted above, Marilee has a good match with Bonnie. I notice that there appears to be a Stewart on the Michael Line. Marilee mentioned the Stewart name. Marilee has a pretty good match with Beverly also but a bit more with Charlotte. I note that both Charlotte and Marilee have a Jane White in their ancestry. Apparently two different Jane Whites. Charlotte’s great-grandmother is Ismena Jane White. Marilee has her third great-grandmother as Jane White.

Marilee and Triangulation

If Marilee triangulates with two people that are in the Frazer DNA Project. That means that those three people should have a common ancestor.  Above, I showed that Marilee triangulates with at least two people in the McPartland Group. That means that they have a common ancestor. I checked to see if the two Triangulation Groups (TGs) that Marilee is in has already beenidentified by my previous research. It appears that these are new TGs.

Next, I’ll look at Marilee compared to all the Archibald Line DNA-tested descendants. As I looked through the results, I found one TG:

The TG involves Marilee, Bob, me and my two younger sisters. That means that we have a common ancestor. It would take some fancy guesswork to figure out who that common ancestor is.

I checked also on the James Line for TGs, but didn’t see any.

One Guess on the Marilee, McPartland, Frazer Connection

In a previous Blog, I had supposed that my connection to the McPartland Family could look like this:

Under this scenario, Bob would have been connected to my family – above represented by my sister Heidi. This seems a bit convoluted. However, my second great-grandmother was Margaret McMaster. Her mother was also a McMaster named Fanny. Her mom was Margaret Frazer. I had supposed that Margaret could have been the sister of the Ann Frazer that married Owen McPartland. I further supposed that this Frazer could have been born around 1780. I notice that Marilee’s second great-grandfather was Archibald Frazer born 1779 and married to Jane White.

 

Above is a possible scenario that could fit the DNA. The clrcles and the lines represent the TG with a possible set of common ancestors. What if my Margaret Frazer was the daughter of Marilee’s Archibald and the sister of the Ann Frazer who married Owen McPartland? That would be one way to tie the families together. That would make Marilee and Bob third cousins, once removed and me and Marilee third cousins three times removed.

Let’s see if that is even possible. Bob and Marilee shared almost 111 cM. Here is part of a chart of ranges of DNA for fourth cousins:

127 is the highest expected match for a fourth cousin. That means that Bob and Marilee would be near the top of that range. My two younger sisters and I matched Marilee at 16 or 17 cM. That is a little below average for a fourth cousin, two times removed. I would be a fourth cousin twice removed to Bob under that above scenario. My two sisters match Bob at about 8 or 9.5 cM.

Perhaps someone will come forward with a more obvious explanation.

Occupants of Derrycastle 1834

Here is the Tithe Applotment for 1834 in Derrycastle:

My guess is that Archy is Marilee’s ancestor. John could have been his brother. William could have been his other brother. George, Philip and James could have been the sons of Philip. I believe that James was my ancestor.

Here is a map of the area:

 

The Tithe Applotment mentions Archy of Shan which would be Shanvoley. Dereenargan is where the McPartlands lived later. There were also at least one Frazer and McMaster living in Dereenargan at the time of Griffith’s Valuation. I discussed this previously here.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Marilee had a surprising DNA match with Bob – a McPartland/Frazer descendant.
  • Given what we knew of the genealogy, the size of the DNA match did not make a lot of sense
  • Bob, Marilee, and three in my family triangulated which means that we have a common ancestor.
  • I looked at some of my past DNA analysis of the McPartland/Frazer connection and came up with a possible scenario to explain the triangulation. This explanation would have Bob, Marilee and me descending from Marilee’s 2nd great grandfather, Archibald Frazer, born 1779 who married Jane White.
  • This explanation is further supported by the proximity the families. However, the genealogical evidence appears to be lacking.
  • This theory may have other DNA evidence added to it in the future or more genealogical evidence may come to light to disprove my guess or to add weight to it.
  • If I am right in my guess, I would have found my third Frazer line which was missing and the McPartland Frazer Line which was missing.
Posted on

The World of the Emmet Family in the 1700’s and 1800’s Around Bacup

In my last Blog, I wrote about the DNA results for my dad’s cousin Maury and some of our shared roots in the area of Bacup, Lancashire, England. That Blog focused more on the Howorth Line in Bacup. I would like to look at the Emmet Line in this Blog.

The Emmet Family

The information I have on the Emmet family goes back to the 1700’s. I have a web page on this family that I last updated in 2004. Here is a photo that a fellow researcher found. She believes this to be Ann Emmet (wife of Greenwood Hartrley) born 1829:

 

I tried to re-scan this, but it is difficult to scan it as the photo is within a leather frame. I’ll start with Ann’s parent and see where I can go from there.

Isaac Emmet born about 1798 and Esther Howorth

I’ll be bouncing around a bit. It would make more sense to start with the oldest couple and go down toward the present. However, with genealogy, there is a principal that you need to start with what you know which would be the more recent.

Here is the 1841 Census with Isaac and his family:

 

Here the writer spells Emmet as Emmett. They are in the Parish of Rochdale, the Township of Spotland, the area of Whitworth and Brandwood and the specific place they lived was called Stubby Lee.

 

Stubbylee is to the South of Bacup. Isaac was from Hey head which I assume is near Hey. Right before she married, Esther was living near Thorn on the map. It looks like the family had six children in 1841 and a 54 year old Mary Emmett was living with them. She could have been Isaac’s sister or other relative. From what I can tell Isaac and James Emmett were farm laborers. Isaac’s two oldest daughters were cotton weavers. Cotton weaving would have been a fairly new industry at the time.

Isaac and Esther in 1851

The 1851 Census was an improvement over 1841 as it gave more information:

Here Isaac and Esther were living at “Stubelee’ House. Perhaps the owners were not present. The head of the house was listed as a House Maid. Isaac was a servant at this house or hall:

Visions of Downton Abbey come to mind – perhaps on a smaller scale. Here is a photo of Stubby Lee where Isaac and Esther lived in 1851.

I would assume that Isaac would have been of good character and dependable to work at such a place. I also assume that this would have been a respectable job for Isaac – a cut above farm laborer or factory worker.

Here are the birthplaces of the people living in this house in 1851:

I assume that the first person was the head maid. She is listed as a widowed house maid. She was from Monmouthshire. This is a County in SE Wales. The next person is Julia Fraser. She is listed as the unmarried daughter of the head maid Ann Corfeld. She was born in the East Indies. Isaac was the man servant of the house again enumerated as Emmett with two tees. His birthplace is difficult to read. At first I thought is was Sou Clough, but now I’m not so sure. Esther was born at Nothill. This was discussed in my previous Blog. Esther is shown with no occupation, so apparently she was allowed to live at the house. From my understanding, this would have been an unusual arrangement. Isaac is listed as a resident and Esther as a lodger. Perhaps she payed to stay there. Below Esther is Mary Taterstall. She, like Isaac, is listed as a resident and the married wife of a Coach manufacturer. Mary was born in Greennook [hepton?]. The person in living at Lumb Hall next to Subby Lee was Jane Taterstall. She was a married dressmaker living on her own.

This picture raises a few questions. Where was Souclough and where were the Emmet children. Who took care of them? Were they considered to be old enough to be on their own?

Where is Souclough?

I Googled Souclough and got exactly one return. How often does that happen?

This is a burial record. It identifies Sou Clough as being in the area of Tunstead. That got me in the right area of Bacup. This place is actually called Sow Clough on this map:

This map represents where Isaac Emmet was in 1851 and 52 years earlier when he was born. So a Sow Clough boy married into a family from Hogshead (see previous Blog).

A look down present Sow Clough Road on Google Maps shows that it has newer residential homes on it. I did find one older looking house on Sow Clough Road reminiscent of an earlier day:

A clough is a deep ravine, so that would be a clough behind the house.

The Emmet Kids in 1851

I would like to find the children of Isaac and Esther Emmet in the 1851 Census to see what they were up to. According to Ann’s marriage record, she was living in Stubby Lee right before December 18th, 1851 when she got married. That means I need to check around the area of Stubby Lee Hall for Ann. I found her on the next page of the Census:

I have a feeling that a Hartley researcher friend found this before for me. So the children were living close to the parents. I count six households in Stubby Lee other than the Stubby Lee Hall.  Sister Mary at age 26 was holding things together for her younger siblings. The youngest Isaac was a Tea Boy. I was told by my friend that a tea boy would go around the factory giving out tea to the workers until he was old enough to do factory work. So he was a working boy at age 9.  He would have been born after the 1841 Census. This was definitely a working household with all five siblings between the ages of 9 and 26 working. Here the birthplaces were not listed as precisely as they were for Stubby Lee Hall. Only the parish name was given.

Isaac Emmet’s Baptismal Record

Here is the old St. John the Evangelist Church in Bacup where Isaac Emmet was baptized in 1798:

Isaac’s Parents: Edmund Emmet and Sarah

We know that Edmund Emmet and his wife Sarah were living at Sow Clough in 1798 when their son Isaac was born. What else do we know about this couple?

George Emmet, born 1796

The first child of Edmund and Sarah Emmet that I have a record of was George, baptized July 23rd, 1796:

The family was still clearly living at Sowclough. This baptism took place at St. Nicholas at Newchurch.

Newchurch was the next Town to the West of Sow Clough.

I took a further look at the Newchurch records and found this:

First, there were two Edmund Emmets. One was married to Sarah and one was married to Mary. Mary died in 1801. This could make it difficult to find the birth of Edmund. I assume that our Edmund was younger than the one married to Mary. It looks like our Emmet Family was larger than I knew.

When DId Edmund Die?

I found two records for the death of Edmund Emmet. They correspond to the two Edmund’s above.

The first Edmund was born about 1727. Our Edmund would have been born about 1757. So they may have been father and son. That is sad that Edmund ended up at the workhouse. My understanding was that the workhouse was intentionally made to be a pretty miserable place to make sure people didn’t want to go there.

Edmund’s Death Seems to Lead to His Birth

Sounds odd, I know.

It looks like this other Edmund could very well have been the father of our Edmund. I had said that based on Edmund’s age at death he should have been born about 1757. That is not far off from 1759 when this Edmund was born.

Here is Goodshaw where Edmund was born. I would guess on a straight line it would be about five miles from Goodshaw to Bacup.

Two Additions to the Hartley Family Tree

This couple of Edmund Emmet and Mary Omerod are now some of the furthest back ancestors of the Hartley family.

Where is Cloughbottom?

Cloughbottom is associated with the older Edmund Emmet. I found this photo online:

Clough Bottom appears to be associated with Waterfoot.

On the map, it looks like Waterroot, but I think that it is the same place. Well, that should wrap it up for now. I’m not sure I got all my names and places right, but I’m sure I got many of them right.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was able to take a little look into the life of Isaac Emmet – farm laborer turned servant.
  • I also looked at Isaac’s father and grandfather and the places that they lived.
  • Sadly, Edmund Jr. appears to have ended up in a poor house. This was usually a last chance place to go.
  • Edmund Sr. lived North of Rawtenstall near Goodshaw  where Edmund Jr was born. At a later time he moved to Clough Bottom which apparently later became a reservoir.
  • I was able to find the last name of the wife of Edmund Emmet Sr, but not the last name of the wife of Edmund Emmet Jr.
Posted on

My Father’s Cousin Maury’s DNA and Hartley Ancestors

My father’s cousin Maurey recently had a DNA test at Ancestry. Then his daughter Holly uploaded those results to Gedmatch.

A Hartley DNA Tree

Here is a tree showing those in the Hartley family that have had their DNA tested. Others have tested at AncestryDNA, but Ancestry does not provide specific information on which chromosome the matches are on.

 

Maury is in the line on the left. I had previously had Jim and Joyce tested. They are both children of Annie Hartley. Here is a photo of some of the Hartleys.

Maury’s mom Grace is circled in red on the right. Jim and Joyce’s mom Annie is circled in red on the left. From my generation, there are descendants of Jim circled in yellow and Mary also circled in yellow. That represents four out of thirteen Hartleys with DNA-tested descendants. I have other second cousins that have tested at AncestryDNA, but they have not uploaded their results to gedmatch for analysis.

My DNA Match with Maury

Here is what my match with Maury looks like at gedmatch:

That is more DNA than I share with Jim, but less than I share with Joyce, so about average for my three Hartley first cousins, once removed.

Here is a photo of me in the front of the boat and Maury’s nephew Tom steering in the Mattapoisett River Race. From memory I was in 8th grade. I believe that is Maury standing on the left.

Mapping Maury

My Paternal DNA Map before Maury:

This shows that 46% of my paternal side is filled in. On my maternal side which I don’t show above, I have only 20% filled in. When I choose just the green matches which represent my Hartley/Snell DNA that I share with cousins, the DNA Painter program says that “represents about 17% of the base pairs in this profile”.

Maury actually did not add much more Hartley DNA. I already have a lot of Hartley DNA matches. However, he did bring my mapped DNA up from 32% to 33%. That means, that overall, between my mom and dad’s side one-third of my DNA is mapped. That is a bit of a milestone.

Maury’s Huge Hunk of Pilling DNA

Here is a DNA tree of the Pilling Line:

A DNA tree is just people in a tree that have had their DNA tested. That means that the actual genealogical tree would be much larger. The people in green have had their DNA tested and have uploaded to Gedmatch. One exception is Jennifer who tested at 23andme which has a chromosome browser.

Maury is in the line on the left. The line on the right is from William Wilkinson. Mary Pilling married Robert Hartley. Robert Hartley died young. Then Mary married Robert Wilkinson and had another family. Richard descends from that side. That means that any Hartley descendant that matches Richard can know that they match Richard with Pilling DNA and not Hartley DNA. That is because Richard has no known Hartley DNA.

Here is how Richard matches Maury on Chromosome 19:

The orange bar is the match between Richard and Maury. The small blue match is between Richard and my brother Jonathan. The orange match is 53 cM and takes up most of Maury’s Chromosome 19. So Maury has a pretty large hunk of DNA from his 2nd great-grandmother, Mary Pilling. That DNA made its way intact through Greenwood Hartley, James Hartley, Grace Hartley and down to Maury. Mary Pilling played a big role in the history of the Pilling, Hartley and Wilkinson families. She lived in Trawden, Bacup and finally crossed the ocean as an elderly woman with the Hartley and Wilkinson families, finally dying in New Bedford.

Maury’s X Chromosome

Here is how Maury matches some of his cousins by the X Chromosome:

Here Maury matches his first cousins Joyce and Jim. Then he matches his 1st cousins once removed Beth and Pat (numbers 3 and 4).

The matches represent either James Hartley or his wife Annie Snell. Note that Maury doesn’t match me or my 4 tested siblings. That is because the X Chromosome does not travel from father to son. My grandfather had one X Chromosome but that got passed down to his daughter, not his son.

I circled the middle area of Maury’s X Chromosome matches above. It appears in that area the DNA he got on his X Chromosome switched from Hartley to Snell or the other way around. If I were to test my paternal first cousins, then they would have Snell X Chromosome and not Hartley. That is because, they descend from my grandfather’s daughter. She would have an X Chromosome that my grandfather got from his mother who was Annie Snell. Any of the Hartley relatives that matched them would then know that match was on the Snell side and not the Hartley side.

Identifying Maury’s unknown X Chromosome matches.

Here are some of Maury’s top unknown X matches. I would like to know if they are from the Hartley side or Snell side. My guess is that most of them will be from the Snell side as there would be more people matching on the Colonial Massachusetts Snell side compared to the Lancashire, England side.

When I choose these people in a Chromosome Browser, the matches look like this:

Remember I said that I thought that most of Maury’s X matches would be on his Snell side. For Maury’s group of matches in the middle, they stop at position 83M. My guess is that is where Maury’s X Chromosome goes from Snell DNA to Hartley DNA. After position 83M, Maury’s X matches disappear.

Again, this is my guess. It has not been proven by contacting each match and checking on their ancestors.

Maury and the Howorth Family

Who are the Howorths? Greenwood Hartley married Ann Emmet in Bacup, England. Ann’s mother was Esther Howorth born in 1800.

 

Maury is on th left. There is a family on the right that matches by DNA. They also descend from the Howorth family. They descend from Abraham, the brother of Esther and live in Australia. Here is Maury’s DNA match with Anne of Australia:

Other Hartleys have matches with this family, so all the matches likely represent Abraham Howorth, born in 1768 or his wife Mary.

Who Was James Howorth’s Wife Mary?

I don’t have a name for James’ wife Mary. That would be nice to know. Looking at Ancestry trees, I don’t get a clear answer. Here are the children I have for the couple:

Hopefully, these are all from the same family. Ancestry has hints for Mary. For Betty and Abram, it could be that a child died and a subsequent child was given their name in their memory.

The hints for Mary at Ancestry.com show that Mary was Mary Hargreaves. However, it shows her marrying a John Haworth. So, unless John and James were the same person, that would not be right. This is likely the John and Mary couple that Ancestry gives as a hint:

There appeared to be Hargreaves also living in Trough.

I’ll look at a website called Lancashire Online Parish Clerks where I got the information from the previous screen shot. I would think that Abraham and Mary married about 1787. When I enter a search for James Howorth marrying a Mary, I get 311 results.

Here are some of the best candidates:

I would favor the Rochdale listings as Bury and Manchester were further away. That leaves Shepherd, Holt, or Eastwood as the last name for Mary. I’ll make the assumption that Mary was the mother of all the children above. The last child was born in 1815 when James was 47.  I’ll say that Mary was three years younger than James and was 44 when her last child was born. That would mean that she would have been about 18 when she married. That would put her birth about 1771.

Here is a Mary Shepherd:

Here dad was Richard and her mom was Ellin. I would have thought that she might name some children after her mom or dad if this was the right Mary.

There are too many Mary Holt’s in the records. Here is one guess:

I like this Mary because her dad and mom were John and Betty. Mary’s first two known children were Betty and John. As I understand it, Bacup was originally not much of a place and Spotland was more of the area. So this my be a good place for an ancestor to be born.

Here is a map of historic Spotland (before 1850) from http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/LAN/Spotland/ParishMap:

This is copied from the website as the areas of Spotland:

445 – Chadwick, 446 – Clay Lane, 447 – Catley Lane, 448 – Woodhouse Lane, 449 – Wolstenholme and Cheeseden, 450 – Brandwood Lower End, 451 – Brandwood Higher End, 452 – Whitworth Higher End, 453 – Whitworth Lower End, 454 – Healey, 455 – Failworth

Two areas that I will be looking at later in the Blog are 451 and 452 to the South and East of Bacup.

Here is a possible Eastwood choice:

Again, Mary Howorth did not name any of her children Richard or Alice that I know of.

As stated above, I am leaning toward Holt for a new Hartley ancestral name.

Back to Esther Howorth

Now I’ll look some more at Esther. Esther Howorth married Isaac Emmet. They had Ann Emmet who married Greenwood Hartley.

Where was Esther Born?

There is some confusion as to where Esther was born. Here is the online record:

I’ve looked at the original record and saw no note about Nun hill. There is a Nun Hills to the west of Bacup. There is also a Knothill. The Bacup Weslyan records have reference to a Knothill:

However, my understanding is that Spotland was a ways away South near Rochdale.I also see in the Weslyan records an interesting reference to, “Knothill Nook near Shayforth”

There is a Shawforth near Trough and Hogshead, so perhaps this is the place?

Finding Knot Hill

I think I found Knot Hill. I assume that Knothill Nook is even more specific than Knothill. I appreciate the meticulousness of whoever recorded that record. This map is from http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/

Also in the process, I have found Trough which I had trouble finding previously. I had assumed that Trough Gate was close and it is pretty close to Trough. The trick is finding an old enough map with enough detail. For some reason I get a lot of joy in figuring out where my ancestors lived. So, I’ll say that in 1800 at least, the Howorth family was living at Knot HIll aka Nothill. One problem is that place names have changed over the years. I would have to say that being born at Knot Hill sounds more prestigious than being born at Hogshead or Trough.

So. the next time you are in Bacup, look for Knot Hill. Take the A671 from Bacup going South toward Rochdale. Knothill should be between Trough Gate and Shawforth. If I am ever in the area again, I would like to get out of the car there and walk around.

While I’m Visiting Bacup

Esther was listed as living in a different place in 1821:

She was living in “Fair wall”. The groom was living in Hey Head. That is where I had the Howorth family living in 1806 and 1809. I’m not sure if the family moved about a bit or if the location was reported differently (that is, with different levels of precision).

It looks like Fair Wall was indeed a place, but where?

The above publication was from 1888.

 

Here is a detailed map from 1890 to the East of Bacup:

The last two Howorth children were born in Tong and Higher Tong. Due to the proximity of the Tong Farm and Fair View, I am guessing that Fair View may be the same as Fair Way. That leaves us with Heyhead or Hey Head. Two Howorth children were born there in 1806 and 1809.

One Hey Head Or Two?

I just noticed something today:

Ann Howorth is born in Hey head, parish of Rossendale. Hannah Howorth is born in Heyhead, parish of Rochdale. All other Howorth children have been born in the parish of Rochdale (except for the last Betty which also seems to be a mistake). That leaves a few possibilities:

  1. These are different families
  2. They moved from Hey head, Rossendale Parish to Hey head, Rochdale Parish
  3. The person writing down the information for the Baptist Baptism mixed up the Hey Head in Rochdale with the one in Rochdale.

At this point I would be willing to go with what is behind door number three. I also note that Isaac Emmet was from Hey Head in the Parish of Rochdale at the time of his marriage.

I had already given up on Nun Hills in favor of Knot Hill as per above. Now I am giving up on Hey Head which is further to the West in favor of the Hey shown below.

Summarizing the Howorth Living Areas

That leaves all the Howorth family living as per below in the purple circled locations. I have managed to round them up into areas to the South and East of Bacup:

  1. From the lower right I have Trough where Betty was born in 1789.
  2. John was born 1793 in Hogshead.
  3. Sally was born in 1795 back in Trough
  4. Abram was born 1798 in Hogshead
  5. Esther gets her own named place of birth of Knot Hill in 1800.
  6. James is born in 1803 in Hogshead
  7. Ann is born in Hey head 1806
  8. Hannah is born in Heyhead 1809
  9. Abram is born in Tong in 1814
  10. Betty is born in Higher Tong in 1815
  11. Esther is living at Fair Wall (=Fair View?) at the time of her marriage in 1821. Fair Wall and Tong do not appear by name on the map, but they should be in the area of the small circle between Hey and Bacup. Again, Tong may have been the more general area and Fair Wall a specific house or row of houses.
  12. Esther’s husband Isaac Emmet lived at Hey Head prior to his wedding day. If I have their two places of residence right, they would have been living quite close to each other.
  13. If I have the right James Howarth, father of Esther, he is living in Underbank at the top circle prior to the time of his death in 1839.
  14. By 1851, Greenwood Hartley is living at Underbank and marries Esther’s daughter, Ann Emmet.

It is unclear to me whether the family moved around a lot or if the places where they lived were listed inconsistently. Hogshead is listed three times for Howorth births which is more than any other location. This is somewhat central to the other locations. This revised version of where the Howorth family lived holds together better than the version at my Howorth Web Page.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Maury got a large hunk of DNA from his second great-grandmother Mary Pilling.
  • Maury’s X Chromosome matches represent either the Hartley side or the Snell side. Maury’s unknown X matches will likely be mostly on the Snell side.
  • Maury matches Ann from Australia. This match appears to represent DNA that they both inherited from James Howorth born in 1868 or his wife Mary.
  • I tried to find more about Mary, but didn’t have much luck.
  • I did find more information on where the Howorth family lived by looking at vital records and an 1800’s map. There was a lot of confustion due to similar place names and apparent mis-reporting of parishes.
Posted on

A New DNA Match in Marilee and a New Frazer Line

I was searching for Frazer matches at MyHeritage recently and came across Marilee. I thought it unlikely that she would be matching on the same Frazer line that I have going back to County Roscommon, Ireland. However, when I looked at her tree, I saw this:

Marilee shows that she descends from John Frazer of Roscommon. Not only does Marilee show that she is related to me, she shows that she is on a Frazer Line that has not been found to be DNA tested yet. That is great news.

Marilee and Frazer Genealogy

The John Frazer Line is shown here in some Frazer research that was done before I was born:

John is shown as the eldest son of Archibald at the top left of the image above. The Frazer DNA Project has people from the Philip, Richard and Archibald Lines, but Marilee is the first from the John Line. This is like finding a lost tribe.

Dating the Archibald Line of the Frazers

The above hand-written tree was done for a coat of arms for a Frazer that was issued in 1952. The birth dates were given for the four brothers as 1757, 1758, 1759 and 1760.  Originally I had followed this early research which had the first known Archibald, born in about 1690 having two sons. The first son was  Archibald who married Mary Lillie and the younger son was James . It was the Archibald who married Mary Lillie that was shown as having the four sons above. Other researchers felt that there needed to be another Archibald in the line for the dates to work out. I added that extra Archibald but never felt all that comfortable doing that. That change also required having later birth dates for the four sons. As a result, perhaps, Marilee’s tree shows John’s first son born when he was two years old!

The Elphin Census of 1749

The first good record I have of North Roscommon Frazers is in the Elphin Census. This is what it shows:

Let’s assume that this represents the situation for the Frazer family in Aghrafinegan, North Roscommon Ireland in 1749. We believe that Archibald had four sons. That means that he had at least four children. The Census shows that Archibald had three children under 14 and none over 14. That makes me believe that these children were on the young side of 14 and that there were children yet to be born .

The Added Archibald

That must be what lead to the researcher’s interpretation that there needed to be another Archibald:

Under this scenario, the Archibald that married Mary Lillie (or Lilly) was not the son of Archibald born around 1690, but his grandson. He was not only the eldest son, but th eldest child.

The One Archibald Scenario – My Preference

There could be many explanations for the Elphin Census. It is possible that none of the children in the Census were the four brothers. That would have to be case if the birth dates of 1757-1760 were right in the early research. Let’s assume under the one Archibald scenario, that Mary Lilly was the mother of all the children. Let’s also say that she may have had children over a time span of 20 years or so. I’ll guess she got married at the age 20 and had children until about the age of 40. I’ll give her 5 years to get married and have three children. That would put their marriage at 1744. I’ll say Archibald was born in 1720 and his brother was born around 1722. If Mary was 20 at the time of her marriage in 1744, then she could have had children until about 1764 or so. If Marilee’s tree is right, then John had a son in 1777. Let’s say John was 22 at the birth of Stuart. That would mean that John would have been born 1755. That is a lot of supposin’, but I would start the four sons’ birth dating at 1755. The other three sons’ births could be spread out between 1755 and 1764 or so.

Further Supposin’

Let’s look at Archibald and James’ parents. Let’s say that Mary was 22 when Archibald was born. I had Archibald born in 1720. That would put her birth at 1698. Then she would have been a 51 year old widow in 1749. Perhaps her husband was two years older than her and was born in 1696. I’ll say he died about 1745 at the age of 49.

John Line Added to the Frazer DNA Tree

This is my tree of the Archibald Branch of Frazers that have had their DNA tested:

Marilee’s eldest John Line is added on the left in pink.  I cut off some of the Archinbald/Stinson Line of the right. I also updated the birth dates for the top two rows. The addition of the John Line to the Frazer DNA Tree is a big deal as the John Line represents 25% of the DNA of these four brothers.

From this tree, Marilee is my 5th cousin once removed. From the configuration of the three, it looks like Marilee’s closest Frazer relative should be a 5th cousin.

I didn’t check Marilee’s genealogy. It wouldn’t hurt for someone to check to see if they come up with the same results she did.

I’m glad I got a new, larger screen on my computer. This is the overall Frazer Project:

This is actually a simplified view as the yellow and blue lines are much bigger. Also the yellow line should be in there three times and the blue line two times. The James line is in white on the right.

Marilee’s DNA

Marilee’s DNA test results are at MyHeritage, so I will only be able to compare her results with those results that I have uploaded to MyHeritage. Let’s see how Marilee compares. I’ll start:

I have a match with Marilee on Chromosome 7 and a small match on Chromosome 20. I can add those to DNA Painter, however, I will have to lower the threshold for the Chromosome 20 match as it is only 6.7 cM.

Here is the view on my DNA Painter Map. I circled the new segments from Marilee that represent Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilly.  Green represents my Hartley side. So on Chromsome 7 and 20, these matches are at important places. They represent where my DNA crossed over from my Frazer Grandmother to my Hartley grandfather.

On Chromosome 20, the brown represents my 2nd great grandparents George Frazer and Margaret McMaster.

Where my DNA goes from brown to mustard could be where my DNA crossover went from McMaster to Frazer. There are other possibilities.

Marilee’s DNA Compared to My Siblings

I didn’t see that Marilee had a match with my sister Heidi. Sharon has a match. Sharon’s match was similar to the match I have with Marilee, except it is a little smaller on Chromosome 7 and I didn’t see a match on Chromosome 20. I didn’t see a match between my brother Jonathan and Marilee. My sister Lori’s match with Marilee appears to be identical with mine.

While I was at it, I checked if my cousin Paul and my more distant cousin Gladys matched Marilee, but they did not. So that is it for the DNA comparison for now. The genealogy part was more interesting than the DNA in this case.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It was great to come upon Marilee through her DNA match. Finding a DNA match with someone from the John Line is like finding a lost tribe or city. I have been looking at the DNA for about three years and Marilee is the first DNA-tested John Frazer Lline descendant that I have found.
  • While looking at the John Line, I also streamlined the Archibald Line by taking out an extra Archibald that was added previously.
  • I see why the extra Archibald was added based on an interpretation of the Elphin Census of 1749. However, I see how that extra Archibald is not needed by another interpretation of the Elphin Census.
  • Marilee matches three out of five in my family. By the tree, we would be 5th cousins, once removed. That is pretty far out for a DNA  match.
  • I am hoping that Marilee will be able to get her DNA uploaded to Gedmatch.com. Then, I can take a look to see how she matches all the people in the Frazer DNA project.
Posted on

A McMaster from Ireland

I was quite excited recently to hear from John. He saw that I had posted my cousin Paul’s DNA results at MyHeritage. John knew of no Frazer ancestry in his , but did mention McMaster ancestry in Sligo. I wrote back and asked John about his ancestry. Here is his letter:

Joel,

My Grandmother (on my mother’s side) was Elizabeth McMaster married to Charles Roycroft. I was aware of Arthur McMaster as a relative when growing up in Sligo but I never met him. The additional information regarding her siblings, parents and grandparent I got from the 1901 and 1911 census where Arthur, Archie and Catherine McMaster were listed as farmers at Dromore, Kilmactranny. The attached Roycroft family tree is on Excel (from left to right instead of from top down) with some additional information included as comments in the cells with a little red triangle in the top right hand corner. Hoping you can bridge the gap!

 

B 26/11/1871 Charles Roycroft
D 13/01/1925
M –/–/1910
B –/–/1888 Elizabeth McMaster
D 19/12/1965
Siblings
B –/–/1883 Arthur William McMaster
B –/–/—- 4th McMaster
B –/–/1892 Lily Margaret McMaster
Parents
B –/–/1850 Archie McMaster
B –/–/1854 Jane …………..
Grand-Parent  
B –/–/1829 Catherine ………….

Regards,

John

Now, I have a few McMaster Web Pages that I can dust off. All I have to do is find an Archie who married a Jane. I was able to find this family, but I had to look at two of my web pages. I have one web page on the McMasters where I mention different lines of McMasters in the Kilmactranny Parish area of County Sligo. I was not able to tie them all together.

McMasters Everywhere

Here is Archie from my McMasters of Dromore Web Page:

I am more related on Jane’s side. Jane was also a McMaster. To complicate things, I have that both of Jane’s  and Archibald’s parents were McMasters! Talk about being related. So John’s Elizabeth must be the Ann Elizabeth that I have.

McMaster DNA Tree

I already have a tree for some McMasters that have had their DNA tested. I’ll just add John in on my James McMaster Sr/Fanny McMaster side. But…

Uh Oh, Problems

While looking at my references, I found one that goes against what John and I had. Here is a wedding that someone I know transcribed from the Kimactranny Church:

This throws a wrench in the works. John had that Elizabeth was the daughter of Archie McMaster and Jane. That seemed to correspond with my records that had Ann Elizabeth as the daughter of Achibald McMaster and Jane McMaster.

Going back to my web page, I see a Lizzie Jane here that seems to match the marriage record:

I guess it could be confusing having an Ann Elizabeth born in 1887 and a Lizzie Jane born in 1888. I hope John doesn’t mind me swapping out his grandmother. My guess is that the person doing the wedding got Lizzie’s dad right. Also Mary Kate, who was a witness at the wedding, was a younger sister of Lizzie Jane. There was an Arthur in this McMaster family also.  Perhaps it was this Arthur that John had heard about.

Here is Lizzie Jane 1901:

It looks like the father Robert had died four years prior to this time. However, that brings up a question as to Helena. When I look at the Census, she shows as 5 months old.

Here is the tree I come up with:

The record for Edward McMaster’s birth in 1851 is missing. That could be because he was born during a time when the records at Kilmactranny Church were either not recorded or lost.

John’s DNA

That was a bit of a complicated introduction to John’s genealogy. What about the DNA?

First, I looked at how my cousin Paul matched John. I noted that Paul and John’s shared DNA Match was Emily. I also noted that there was a triangulation icon next to Emily. That means that Paul, John and Emily share one or more common segments. Triangulation means that Paul, Emily and John should also share common ancestors.

MyHeritage circles the segments that are in common and triangulate. The red matches are Paul’s matches with John. The yellow matches are Paul’s matches with Emily.

These circled areas are on Chromosome 3 and 18.

If I have it right, Abraham McMaster and his wife Margery would be the common ancestors between John, Emily and Paul. In this scenario, John is a fourth cousin to Emily and Paul. Emily and Paul are 2nd cousins to each other.  This fits in with MyHeritage’s prediction that Paul and John are 3rd-5th cousins by the amount of DNA that they share.

I also note that four of my siblings have shared DNA matches with Paul and John, but not me.  However, my siblings don’t have the triangulation sign.

Now in a previous Blog on the subject, I was able to infer triangulation between Ron, Steve, Lori and Emily:

The above triangulation was on Chromosome 13. So perhaps Stephen, Ron, and John all descend from Robert McMaster. Emily is a key person as she is in both Triangulation Groups.

Summary and Conclusions

  • McMaster Genealogy is confusing. In addition, the DNA can be confusing due to intermarriages.
  • John is the first DNA match to my family that matches primarily on the McMaster side. Ron and Stephen also share McMaster DNA with me, but their primary match is on another line (Clarke).
  • I think that I have Ron, Stephen and John in the right tree descending from Roibert McMaster. There could be other McMaster connections, but I just looked at the closest ones.
  • John’s paper trail is clearer than Ron and Stephen’s. John has a good marriage record for his grandparents that ties Lizzie Jane to the Robert and Anne McMaster family. The 1901 Census also makes the relationships clear.
  • The birth record for Edward McMaster is missing. However, many other records for many years were missing from the Kilmactranny Church. Edward’s wedding record gives his Father’s name as Robert and his mother as Mary which would fit into the tree as I have it.
  • Triangulation appears to put Stephen and Ron in the Sligo McMaster family.
  • Triangulation also confirms the genealogical evidence for John’s grandmother.
  • I am happy to find a McMaster relative through DNA matching. It would be helpful if John and Ron uploaded their DNA results to Gedmatch.com for more DNA analysis.
  • There must be a lot of McMaster descendants, so I must have a lot more McMaster relatives.

 

Posted on

Playing with DNAPainter

i have been hearing a lot of rave reviews about DNAPainter, an award-winning DNA analytical tool. So I thought that I would try it. Before I tried it, I had to finish my taxes. Now my State Taxes are in the mail and my Federal Taxes are e-filed, so I’m raring to go.

Using DNA Painter

The instructions seemed pretty straight-forward and intuitive. In short time, I went through a lot of my Gedmatch top matches and painted into the program.

I have a lot of 2nd cousins as my Hartley great grandparents (represented in green above on the DNAPainter) had 13 children that made it past infancy.

My grandfather is third from the right with his 12 siblings and mom. I”m told this photo was from 1938.

The DNAPainter shows that I have painted 28% of my chromosome. So far I have not started on my X Chromosome and still have some more to map.

The Matches Behind the Matches – Under the Hood

This is one of the cool features of DNAPainter. Here is Chromosome 18, for example:

This shows that on the top paternal side, I have a blue match mapped to James Frazer and Violet Frazer. They were born around 1804. When I select the Chromosome, it opens up, so I can see the matches that make this up:

The Maternal side splits out also, but I am just looking at the Paternal side for now. These four bars represent four people that I match and two sets of common ancestors. The brown represents my Frazer and McMaster great-grandparents. The blue represents my Frazer 2nd great-grandparents.

Separating the DNA and the Ancestors

A lot of genetic genealogy is about separating out the DNA. For example, if I have a match on the brown segment above, I would like to know if it is specifically Frazer or McMaster DNA. My guess is the brown match with Emily above is a Frazer and not a McMaster match. Emily in brown above should match Gladys, Susan, and Doreen in blue.

It seems like Emily has to match the blue matches, but I’ll check to make sure:

These are Emily’s matches with Doreen, Susan and Gladys (in that order). Emily’s matches with these three women go from about 26M to 53M. Emily matches me from 35M to 52M. Now on my Chromosome 18, I got all my paternal DNA from my Frazer grandmother. I can now know two things:

  • The match with Emily is a George Frazer match and not a McMaster match
  • The segment right before 35M and after 52M on my Chromosome is not from George Frazer. This could be DNA I got from McMaster or even my grandmother’s mother Clarke.

Because I know that my match with Emily is with George William Frazer, I can map that DNA more specifically. In order to do that I click on the brown Emily segment on Chromosome 18:

Then I choose Edit Segment.

Under the drop-down menu for Group/ancestor, there is an option for ‘Create a new group’. This looks like a good option.

 

Now the match with Emily is yellow and represents just George Wm Frazer 1838. This means in a practical way, I will not be looking for McMaster matches in this segment, but Frazer matches.

More George on Chromosome 7

By the way, here is George Frazer and his wife Margaret McMaster:

Again, the light blue goes back to James and Violet Frazer in the early 1800’s. On the end of the blue segment, it gets a little darker, indicating that something is going  on. That is when I look under the hood:

Again, here is a match in brown (indicating Frazer/McMaster.  However, this time it is a match with my cousin Paul and not with Emily. This has to be just George Frazer as it is overlapping with a match going back to the parents of George. The two blue matches represent Ken and his sister Susan. Ken does not show up on Paul’s match list, as the match would be too small. However, Paul does show a match with Susan.

This match that Paul has with Susan is at about the same location as the match I have with Paul. That is triangulation and shows that the DNA that Paul and I share in brown should be in yellow for George McMaster.

I went in and edited the segment that I share with Paul:

It doesn’t look llke a big change, but I would rather have a short specifically identified segment than a longer more vague segment.

Splitting Out My Hartley/Snell Great-Grandparents

I have a lot of interest in splitting out my Hartley and Snell great-grandparents. That is because my Hartley great-grandfather was born in Bacup, Lancashire and my Snell great-grandmother has ancestry going back to SE Massachusetts in Colonial times. I have brick wall issues on the Hartley family in Lancashire.

Here is my Chromosome 9 from DNAPainter. I got all my paternal DNA from my paternal Hartley grandfather on Chromosome 9. Here are my second cousin (and 1C1R) matches that I have mapped so far:

These two areas look suspiciously like crossovers:

These are likely areas where my DNA switched from Snell to Hartley, or from Hartley to Snell. The first circle is at 81M. The second circle is at 126M. If I were to look at all my Chromosome 9 paternal matches, I may be able to figure out which ones have Colonial Massachusetts ancestry and which ones have Lancashire ancestry.

Adding More Matches to DNAPainter

I’ll add Michael. We have a common ancestor going back to the 1700’s.

Our common ancestor is Richard Frazer. I don’t know his exact birth year or his wife’s name. However, the red DNA that we share could be from Richard Frazer or his wife. So I indicated that in the key. I also notice that on Chromosome 17, there are a few hash marks. This indicates a common pile-up area within the area of the match that I have with Michael.

Adding Nigel

Nigel is a maternal match and our common ancestors also go way back to Sheffield, England.

This yellow match on Chromosomes 1 and 3 goes back to 1765. When I hit the orange refresh button, I see that my mapping has increased from 28% to 29%:

It also shows that I added 4 segments.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was most impressed with the individual segment look underneath the map. This is what Roberta Estes calls the self-triangulating feature. I think of it as the under the hood look.
  • Using the under the hood look and known cousins, I was able to assign DNA to a specific ancestor in two cases. This requires multiple known matches in overlapping segments.
  • I’m sure that this feature will have more applications for me with unknown matches in the future.
  • I would like to try to use DNAPainter to separate out my Hartley and Snell sides going back to my great-grandparents.
  • Next up, I’ll map more DNA from MyHeritage, FTDNA and/or 23andme.

 

Posted on

Paula’s Ellis DNA?

I had an email from Paula recently. Paula believes she descends from the Ellis family of Prince Edward Island. I told her I would take a look at the DNA as my wife’s family also descends from the Ellis family of PEI. Paula believes that she descends from Edward Stanley Ellis born 1905.

The Ellis Family

The Ellis Family was a large one from PEI. Here are a few of the descendants that I have been tracking by DNA:

Above are represented three of the children of William Ellis and Hannah Tawton. Paula has done it the right way by posting a tree at Gedmatch. She shows herself descending from William Ellis and Agnes Ellis. Note on the existing tree that Robert and his mother descend from Mary Ann and Agnes Ellis.

Here I have circled Paula in the purple William line and the salmon Agnes Line. I just noticed something interesting. I have that Sarah on the far right has three Ellis ancestors. That is a bit confusing. I am guessing that they are all related. I suppose this is where Paula’s offer to send my Tylenol comes in. Due to Paula’s configuration, she is on a branch by herself on the left. She is on a branch on the Agnes side on the right, but within that branch, she is sixth on that branch. Due to her distance from others, DNA matching should not be as good as others already within the Ellis group.

Paula’s DNA

Here is how Paula compares to other Ellis descendants in general:

Paula’s biggest match is with Agnes.

Triangulation Groups

Any Triangulation Group that Paula is in may give hints as to common ancestors. We have to be careful due to the intermarriages between common PEI families.

I found Paula to be in one Triangulation Group (TG) with Margaret and Laura here:

This TG could be shown this way:

Ruling Out Other Options

A lot of genetic genealogy is about ruling out options. Paula needs to check Margaret’s ancestry to make sure there are not any other ancestors she may be matching going back about four generations. If that can be done without finding other common ancestors, then that makes the above diagram more sure.

Paula would be a third cousin, twice removed to Margaret and a fourth cousin once removed to Laura. Paula matches both of them at 32.5 cM which is a very good match.

This shows that 32.5 is not far off from what one would suspect for a 4C1R or a 3C2R.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I cannot say for sure that Paula is an Ellis. I would like to see some closer relatives tested along her two long lines to be more sure. In that way, the DNA matches could be worked back or worked up the lines.
  • I cannot say that Paula is not an Ellis. The matches with other Ellis’ seem consistent with what would be expected.
  • Paula does triangulate with an Aunt/niece combination. The ancestry of the aunt and niece should be checked to see whether there are other common ancestors at the level of William Ellis and Hannah Tawton or at a more recent generation.

Paula at MyHeritage

I notice that Paula is also at MyHeritage. MyHeritage shows shared matches that Paula and my wife’s Aunt Elaine have. One common match appears to be a half sister of Paula. In these shared matches, I am looking for triangulation. MyHeritage will show that.

 

At the top is Paula’s estimated half- sister. To the right there is a purple icon which indicates triangulation. Further down is Sharon, also with triangulation. Here is Sharon’s tree:

Sharon has John Raynor and Sarah Simmons which is also a common ancestor of Elaine. This may be where the triangulation occurs. But notice that Sharon is missing a maternal side, so there may be other possibilities.

The next person to triangulate with Paul and Elaine is Stephen. He triangulates in the same spot that Sharon does on Chromosome 2:

I couldn’t figure out Stephen’s tree, so I don’t know if he has Raynor or Ellis ancestors.

The next person to triangulate with Elaine and Paula is Elizabeth. She also triangulates at the same spot as the previous two people. She also has no tree.

So, going through MyHeritage showed that Paula may triangulate on the Raynor side. That doesn’t mean that she isn’t an Ellis ancestor. All very interesting. We will have to see if more matches turn up that will solve Paula’s mystery.

Posted on

A New Frazer Tested for YDNA

People say that YDNA is complicated. It is not too complicated. YDNA gets passed on from father to son unchanged. Except it does change on average about once every 144 years or so. That reminds me of how to have a good lawn. Plant grass seed. Wait 100 years and you will have a good lawn.

Rodney Added to the Frazer YDNA Tree

 

There is some confusion on the Archibald line (left side)  as to whether there should be two Archibalds or one under the top Archibald. Some researchers added one to make the dates look better, but I am thinking of taking one back out. For example, an alternate tree has one Archibald but has Philip born 1758 instead of 1776.

Here is the alternate tree:

 

If nothing else, the symmetry is better on this one.

Rodney’s STRs

Rodney tested for 111 STRs. That is a good amount. Jonathan also tested for 111 STRs. Rick and Paul tested 67. STRs are Short Random Repeats. These are repeats of certain markers on the YDNA. They may increase or decrease every so many 100’s or 1,000’s of years. Some markers change faster than others. Over a large amount of time these markers could go up or down and we wouldn’t know it as we weren’t around 1,000 years ago to test them. However, this tree only goes back to about 1690 or so, so we shouldn’t have to worry about that.

Rodney’s Vs Jonathan on the Thomas Henry Line

Jonathan’s sister asked me about Rodney and Jonathan’s STR comparisons. Rodney and Jonathan had a perfect match at 67 STRs but a one difference at 111 STRs. That was because their only difference was between STR 68 and 111. The actual marker for this difference is at DYS552. Rodney has a value of 24 and Jonathan has a value of 25. That means that Jonathan has one more Short Random Repeat compared to Rodney. Out of all the STRs, that is the one that distinguishes Rodney’s Line from Jonathan’s line.

Which Line Changed: William or Edward Fitzgerald?

And does it matter? It would be nice to know who changed, because that would mean either 24 or 25 would be ancestral, meaning that Thomas Henry either had 24 or 25 for that marker and one of the lines changed. I did not have the 111 STR test done for my cousin Paul, but he has taken the BigY. When he had that test done, I uploaded his results to YFull and they extracted some of the STRs from the BigY test. Unfortunately, the extraction from the BigY test does not get good reads for all the STRs. Fortunately, Paul did get a result for DYS552. He had a result of 25.

That means that 25 is likely the ancestral value. 25 would also likely be the value for Archibald Frazer born around 1690.

This is the way I’ve heard STRs explained. Pretend at every conception along the male line through the ages, the YDNA is going through a copying machine. All the different STRs are being copied. Every three generations or so, one of the 111 STRs has a copying error and one more copy or one less copy is made. In Rodney’s case, one less copy must have been made of DYS552 in either Rodney, Rodney’s dad or his grandfather, William Frazer.

There is one implication concerning the mutation in Rodney’s line. When Paul is compared to Rodney and Jonathan, it looks like he is more distantly related to Rodney than Jonathan. These differences are called GDs or Genetic Distances. However, based on the tree, Paul is related no more closely or further away from either Rodney or Jonathan.

It’s Simple

That is why I said at the top that YDNA is easy. Rodney and Jonathan have a common ancestor of Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836. Jonathan and Rodney have a GD of 1. That means that change happened after Thomas Henry Frazer as he had only one value for each of his 111 STRs. Because we know Paul’s result for DYS552, we know Thomas Henry Frazer’s value at location DYS552. There is only one catch. It is possible for STRs to go up and down. What if DYS552 changed more than once since 1690? This would be highly unlikely. If DYS552 was a fast-moving STR or if there were several thousands of years to the common ancestor, this would be more likely, but that is not the case here.

The Bigger Picture

Using the same principles, I should be able to get some ancestral values for our common ancestor, Archibald Frazer. However, let’s start with a smaller part of the Archibald tree, like we did on the James Line.

Here is Rick and Paul on the Archibald Line of the Frazer YDNA tree. Where Rodney and Jonathan had 3 generations to have YDNA changes from their common ancestor, Paul has 4 generations and Rick has 5 generations from their common ancestor of James Frazer born about 1804.

Rick has taken the 67 STR test but not the BigY test. Paul has taken the 67 STR test and the BigY test. As a result, he has some results from the 111 STR test, but is missing many of the STR markers between 68 and 111. Here are the differences between Paul and Rick:

Getting the Ancestral STR Values

Now I want to know what values James had for his STRs for 444 and 576. These are the values that Rodney and Jonathan have going up to the orignal Frazer ancestor born around 1690.

That means that Rick’s STR of 444 went down one repeat from 14 to 13 and Paul’s  STR of 576 went up from 18 to 19.

Putting it Together

Now we know that Archibald , born about 1690 had 444 = 14, 576 = 18 (oops, typo above) and 552 = 25. However, there are two other differences from the Archibald Line and the James Line.  It will be easier to show this on a tree:

Now there is a tie, so how do we tell which values are ancestral? (That should be CDY above.) In order to figure out the ancestral values, we have to go outside the Frazer project and bring in some more distant relatives: Grant, Hayes, and Stewart. Fortunately, I have already done this in a previous Frazer YDNA Blog:

This shows the ancestral value to be 391 = 10 and CDY = 35-38. Now we have our five ancestral values for Archibald.

Here is the final Frazer STR Tree:

 

Observations:

  • If I drew this right, Jonathan has no mutations going back to Archibald, born about 1690.
  • Paul and Rick both have three mutations going back from the same Archibald.
  • There are more mutations on the Archibald Line than the James Line, but they average out.
  • Paul and Rick have a GD of 2. That represents differences in marker 444 and 576.
  • Paul has a GD of three compared to Rodney and Jonathan. This is based on markers 391, CDY and 444. 552 was not counted as Paul did not test at FTDNA for 552.
  • This tree contains some 67 STR results and some 111 STR resuilts.
  • Other direct male Frazer descendants that have YDNA STR tests should be able to tell what branch of the Frazer tree they are in based on this tree.
  • This gives an idea of how the mutations occur. There were two mutations that happened rather quickly between about 1690 and 1804 on the Archibald Line. So that was one every 57 years.  Rodney had one mutation. I’m not sure when he was born, but let’s say one mutation in 260 years. Let’s say Paul and Rick had a mutation about once per 87 years. An average between Paul or Rick and Rodney would be about one mutation in 173 years. This is comparing a bit of apples and oranges as some tested at 67 STRs and some tested at 111. I don’t know how to average Jonathan in as he has no known mutations.

 

Dating Using the McDonald TMRCA Calculator

Rodney and Jonathan

That should say generations at the bottom. Jonathan and Rodney have a common ancestor at three generations.  This calculator’s first choice for a GD of one at 111 markers is 2 generations away. Three generations would be the third choice.

Paul and Rick

This graph tops out at 5 generations. Paul and Rick are 4.5 generations away from a common ancestor, so that is close enough.

Paul Compared to Rodney (and Jonathan)

Paul and Rodney are 7 generations to a common ancestor. At least they are on the tree without the extra Archibald. This shows 8 as the first choice, but almost the same chance as being 7 generations away. Rick and Rodney should be at the same genetic distance (GD) and they show as 7.5 generations away from a common ancestor. These would also apply to the matches between Rick, Paul and Jonathan.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Rodney’s YDNA test has added some symmetry to the Frazer YDNA Tree
  • The YDNA test does not appear to be precise enough to tell us if the Archibald tree is correct or not. Either configuration would be reasonable based on the YDNA.
  • The Frazer STR tree sets down some results that places the four tested Frazer descendants in their different branches.
  • A Frazer that is unsure of his branch would be able to test his STRs and find out which branch he is in.

 

 

Posted on

Walking the Streets of the Boston of My Ancestors and Relatives

In my previous Blog, I looked at the early married life of my great-grandparents James Archibald Frazer and Margaret Clarke in some detail. I also looked at where they had their photos taken and where James lived and worked in the 1890’s. In this Blog, I would like to show some connections leading up to my great-grandparents’ arrival in Boston by using maps and City Directories.

Frazer, Clarke and McMaster

These three families were inter-related. Also the Frazer and McMaster families were related in County Sligo, Ireland. I would like to pull these three families together as they lived in Boston. Here are some examples of the inter-relatedness of these Boston families:

  • William McMaster married Catherine Clarke 1882
  • James Archibald married Margaret Clarke. James was William’s nephew. Margaret was Catherine’s sister.
  • Celia Clarke married Edward McMaster in 1876. Celia was Catherine and Margaret’s older sister. I believe that Edward and William were first cousins.

It is a bit confusing.

The McMasters

Edward McMaster was the first that I have a record of to make it from County Sligo to Boston. According to Edward’s Naturalization records, he made it to Boston in 1868:

McMaster and Clarke in 1880

Here is the 1880 Census

Edward and Celia are living in the same house as Charles McGarry (here shown as McGeary) and Celia Clarke. Charles was a furniture dealer. Edward was a Hack Driver.

The elder Celia Clarke was the Aunt of the Celia married to Edward McMaster. Here is a partial Clarke tree:

Those in green have had their DNA tested. The two Celia’s are on the top left of the tree. It would stand to reason that the elder Celia came to the US prior to the younger one. A family story says that Charles McGarry was Roman Catholic and that they left for the US due to the scandal of a Protestant and Catholic marrying.

The North Boston Years

Here is a map of Margin Street from 1877. Margin is between the green 12 and the two red smudges below. Later in the Blog I show that 23 Margin Street where the McGarry and McMaster family lived was to the right of the letter “N.” on the Street (below Cooper).

I suppose some of these buildings on North Margin are the same or similar to those in 1880:

There were four families living at 23 North Margin Street in 1880. It looks like there could be about four floors in these buildings.

Going Back in Time – McGarry’s

I said that I was going to use the City Directory and maps. Here is Charles in 1869:

I feel confident that this is the same Charles McGarry based on the spelling of his last name and his profession. I am having a bit of trouble interpreting the entry. I assume that he works a J. Nealon & Co. at 135 Endicott. Endicott is one street to the West of North Margin. It appears that Charles lived still at 23 South Margin, but I’m unclear as to what 26 Charlestown refers to. I assume that 23 South Margin and 23 North Margin Street are the same place(?)

Let’s see if the 1870 Directory clarifies things:

Now there are three Charles’. It appears that our Charles was at 23 South Margin. Then there is another Charles who lives and works at 135 Endicott Street. Current day Grimes Street is in South Boston. So that means that there were two Charles McGarry’s living in the same area. Our Charles did not work at 135 Endicott, but worked at 26 Charlestown Street.

A Clue in the 1871 Directory

Here is page 190 of the Boston Business Directory:

This looks to be the same Charles that lived at 23 South or North Margin Street in the North End of Boston. I needed to pan out on the 1877 Fire Insurance Map:

So Charles, based on the 1880 Census was a furniture dealer. It appears that his place of business was on Charlestown Street. From what I can tell Charleston Street is now North Washington St.

This appears to be the same Charles in the 1864 Boston Business Directory:

If my connections are correct, then Charles would have come to the US a while before 1864. I assume that it took him a while to build up a business.

I am still going backwards in time. Here is the McGarry couple in 1860:

Charles’ holdings at $1200 are substantial compared to his neighbor who had $20 to his name. Most had nothing listed next their name. For some reason, I could not find the McGarry family in the 1870 Census.

Going back 5 years, could this be Charles, Celia and Charles’ mother Bridget in the 1855 State Census?

This Charles was listed as a laborer. To fill in the gaps, here is Charles in 1857:

The Boston Almanac for the year 1861 gives a bit more detail Here are some listings for Charlestown Street:

This gets to our walk through Boston. Imagine walking down Charlestown Street North towards Charlestown. McGarry’s Furniture would be the last business on the right before coming to Cooper Street. For Charles to get home from work, he would just need to walk down Cooper Street to North Margin. From what I can tell 23 Margin was on the Southeast corner of Cooper and North Margin Streets.

Back to the McMaster Family

Charles McGarry with his wife Celia Clarke probably came to Boston in the 1850’s. Charles established a furniture business. Edward McMaster arrived in Boston about 1868. His future wife Celia Clarke arrived in Boston about 1873. I can’t find the Edward McMaster or McGarry family in the 1870 Census. It seems like Celia Clarke was able to find her Aunt Celia McGarry. As I mentioned above, they were living in the same house at 23 North Margin Street in 1880.

Going back two years to 1878, Edward and family was at 23 North Margin Street:

This was the same year that Edward’s first child was born: Frederick William McMaster. On Frederick’s birth record, his mother’s name is listed as Cecilia.

1876

There were not a lot of listings for McMaster in 1876, so I’ll show them all:

This is certainly the Edward that married Celia Clarke later in 1876.

This appears to be 93 West Cedar Street where Edward lived before he married.

West Cedar was  across Town from Margin Street. The question now is when and where did Edward meet Celia? I didn’t see a listing for Celia in the 1876 directory. Perhaps she was already living at North Margin Street?

William McMaster

William’s naturalization record says that he arrived in this country on 1 May 1869. I don’t believe that he is the same person as the liquor dealer mentioned in the 1876 Boston City Directory. Here is a photo of William McMaster and his wife Catherine Clarke.

Probably taken around 1882. Reverse of picture indicates that they were engaged “about 1881” and married October 5, 1882.

 

Here is a document from 1879.

This says that William was a cook and that he arrived at New York. I’ll check the 1879 Boston Directory to see if William McMaster is there. In 1879 there are still few by the McMaster name.

Edward McMaster married Celia Clarke in 1876. Perhaps our William is the McMasters living at 15 Grenville place. However, I don’t know where this is and it does not give a profession for William. William did marry Catherine Clarke in 1882. At that time he was also listed as a cook.

William and Edward 1889

Here is a snapshot of two McMaster families. West Cedar sounds familiar.

Edward McMaster (and Celia Clarke) 1889

At some point Edward has moved out of the McGarry House on North Margin street back to West Cedar where he lived before he was married.

The middle circle is where Edward lived before he married. The bottom circle is hwere the family lived in 1889. Perhaps he wished to be closer to the City Stables. He was after all a driver. There were no cars in that day so he must have driven horses. Did Edward have horse experience from the farm in County Sligo that he was able to use in Boston?

I have to zoom out a little to show North Russell Street where Edward McMaster worked.

North Russell is another street that no longer exists. There is now a Hotel and Whole Foods Market where North Russell Street used to be.

William McMaster (and Catherine Clarke) 1889

This is the first time I have been able to pin down William to a place. He married Catherine, Celia’s younger sister in 1882 and is living at 73 Camden Street in 1889.

Camden Street  brings me back where I left off in my last Blog:

Two years later, in 1891, the directory shows that my great-grandfather James Frazer was living at Gainsborough Street. Gainsborough is on the other side of the tracks from Camden Street. Here are a few McMasters:

The lines that I have carried down have had their DNA tested. I’m guessing that James mother said, “When you get to Boston, make sure you look up my brother, your Uncle William”.

1893 McMaster Update

Before I closed out the 1893 City Directory, I took a peek to see where the McMaster families were. I was a bit surprised:

William the cook was now living at 9 Gainsborough. He moved in when his nephew James Frazer moved out to Westminster Street.

Edward moved from one side of the M.E. (Methodist Episcopal?) Church to the other with his wife and five or six children. In 1895, Edward was listed at 44 Garden Street. I checked the 1900 Census and they were still at 44 Garden Street for the Census. This is a hilly street and one of the streets that I used to do hill training on when I worked in Boston.

Back to Celia Clarke McGarry 1902

Celia Clarke died in 1902 at the home of the Edward McMaster family:

Here we have gone full circle. Celia took in her niece Celia  and family in the 1870’s and now the McMaster family is taking care of the elderly Celia apparently between the time that Charles McGarry died and Celia’s death.

Here is Celia’s will. Celia was the one who started the ball rolling for my family and others by moving to Boston with her husband.

So Where Are We?

  1. Charles McGarry and Celia Clarke leave Ireland after becoming part of a frowned-upon mixed marriage.
  2. Charles apparently does well in the furniture business in the North End of Boston.
  3. Celia Clarke, niece of Celia Clarke McGarry comes to the US after her mother dies. She apparently lives with the McGarry’s.
  4. Celia Clarke marries Edward McMaster, a Hack Driver, who is also from County Sligo and lives on West Cedar Street. They both live for a while in the same house as the McGarry’s in Boston’s North End. The family then moves back to West Cedar Street and Grove Street then to Garden Street in the Beacon Hill area of Boston.
  5. William McMaster who I believe is a first cousin of Edward McMaster arrives in Boston and works as a cook. He marries Celia’s sister Catherine McMaster and they live on Camden Street not far from the current Northeastern University. William signs as a witness on Edward McMaster’s Naturalization Papers.
  6. William’s nephew arrives in Boston in 1887. He is my great-grandfather James Archibald Frazer. He presumably lives with his Uncle until he gets his bearings and finds a job. James then rents a place on Gainsborough Street not far from William. Around the same time James moves from Gainsborough Street to neaby Westminster Street, William moves into the same adress where James lived.
  7. James Frazer marries Margaret Clarke in 1892. Margaret arrives in Boston in 1884 and is the youngest full sister of Celia and Catherine.

Here is Margaret Clarke with an unidentified man and James Frazer on the right.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I have tried to write a summary of some of the events that lead up to some of my Irish relatives’ arrival to Boston and how their lives were connected.
  • This is a bare bones structure and I’m sure some more details could be filled in. For example, what happened to the other Clarke sister, Jane? Why does the marriage record for Catherine Clarke give her father’s name as James and not Thomas?
  • I am doubly related to Edward McMaster/Celia Clarke and William McMaster/Catherine Clarke descendants.
  • James Archibald was a Tea Salesman and later got into real estate. He was preceded by a furniture dealer, a hack driver and a cook.
  • Descendants from Edward McMaster/Celia Clarke have taken a DNA test. I would be even more closely related to descendants of William McMaster/Catherine Clarke. I would like to see some of those descendants take a DNA test.
Posted on

Fun with Photos: Clarke, Frazer, McMaster and ? in the 1890’s

In my previous post, I published a book of photos that was in my grandmother’s possession. They were photos taken around the time of my great-grandmother’s short time of being in the US. Margaret Clarke arrived in the US about 1884 at about age 18. She died in 1902 at age 35.

Statistics: Known and Unknown

The photos that I posted can be put into two categories: those that I know and those that I don’t. Most of the known photos were of James Archibald Frazer, born 1867 and his wife Margaret Clarke, born 1866.

  • Known photos – 15
  • Unknown photos – 31
  • Both known and unknown – 2
  • Repeats – 5
  • Missing slot – 1

That means there should be 54 places in the book. There are more than two times the photos that are unknown compared to the recognizable photos. Sometimes there is more than one person that is unknown on a photo.

Known and Unknown

A photo with a known and an unknown should be helpful.

This man in the tintype above also has his own photo here:

My previous guess was that he could have been the best man at my great-grandparents’ wedding.

A Woman with Margaret

This picture appears twice – both in tintype. A guess could be Margaret Clarke’s bridesmaid?

This photo is in the book right after the previous photo. The woman on the right looks to be the same woman as the one with Margaret in the previous photo. In addition, I wonder if these two are sisters as they have similarly shaped faces.

Face Recognition Software

I don’t know how good the software is, but it should be fun to play around with it. I first tried Pictriev. It seemed like photo 33B were two brothers:

These two got an 86% rating:

These two from the same photo that I thought were sisters get a similar rating:

While I was changing over, I still had the man above on the right and the woman on the left. The two got a 0% rating, for comparison.

Here the woman on the left is the one holding the black back with Margaret Clarke.

I thought that these two would be the same, but they got a lower rating. The woman on the left is at a little angle. I don’t know if that is enough to make a difference.

Here is a different combination:

This at least gives a bit of a subjective meter, rather than “I think they look like the same person”.

This woman is still in the 50’s for similarity:

These two did slightly better:

These two women at least scored over 70%:

Tricking PicTriev

Here are two that I am quite sure are both my great grandmother Margaret Clarke:

When I click the identity button, it says that they are not the same person.

Both these photos are straight on, but the score is even worse.

Above is a different score, but PicTriev still says that they are different people.

Here is the highest match so far:

PicTriev still has them as different people. I hadn’t realized that I have three photos of James Frazer without a mustache. I will assume that those are the earliest photos: 3, 6, and 33C.

My conclusion is that PicTriev is fun to play with, but not very accurate.

Photos by Studio

Here is a summary sorted by studio:

CE Beane wins the prize with 9 photographs. Following that are Elmer Chickering and Gray with four each. However, Gray has two different addresses. Perhaps they moved at a certain point. There were two photos taken at Gendron. The rest of the Studios took one photo each.

James Frazer 1892

Here is James in the 1892 directory:

This was the same entry as the year before, so I suppose where he lived while single:

 

Here I mention the James above my James A. as he appears in earlier Directories also as living and working in East Boston. I show this to indicate that it was not my James living in East Boston and working as a steward.

Here is James in 1893, showing his married address:

Here his place of work is not mentioned. Was he out of work or in transition?

Here is how that area looked on the 1888 Directory Map:

To the left of Gainsborough is Northeastern University. It is interesting that my father and I both graduated from this University. 1961 Washington Street is just below the corner of Thorndike Street. Thorndike is one Street to the SW of Newcomb.

Add in the CE Deane Studio

The Street to the bottom of the lower part of the lower circle was Warren Street. Cousin Fred did some research on C.E. Beane:

 

Gray Studio

The Gray Studio was fairly close by also:

I have circled it in purple. Here is some more from Fred:

The Frazer Family 1894

In 1894, now James is not merely boarding as he was in 1892, but has a house:

A peek down below at a later Directory shows that the Wharton Tea House was at 1971 Washington Street.

1895 showed the same entry:

Here is where an old map of Boston comes in handy.

There is no longer a Westminster Street in this area. It appears that when my grandmother was born, the Frazers were living between two photo studios and James’ place of work on Washington Street. I would imagine that 1971 Washington Street where James was either a clerk or a salesman would have been about one building away from 1961 Washington Street.

Oddly the birth record for my grandmother mentions that the family was living at the Hotel Westminster at the time:

With Hotel Westminster in quotes. There was a famous Hotel Westminster at Copley Square:

I can’t imagine that the Frazers were living there.

Elmer Chickering Studio

I would not want to leave out any studio. Elmer Chickering is listed at 21 West Street.

Perhaps while in downtown Boston, the Frazers would have their photos taken. I also circled Temple Place as Ritz Portraits was there. In addition, Margaret Clarke had a photo taken at The Ideal Photo Studio on Washington across from Temple Place. I am familiar with the area as I worked at 1 Winter Street for many years.

21 West Street appears to be vacant but I have eatenat Fajitas and Ritas which is the building on the left.

Gendron – 13 Tremont Row

I had wrongly read this as 13 Tremont, Rox(bury). Interestingly, this was a female photographer, Miss Addie M. Gendron.  Tremont Row also no longer exists. Here is where it was:

This area is in the Sculley Square area that was removed for Government Center. A portion of Boston Common and the State House can be seen in the top left of the map for reference.

The Frazers in 1896

This was the year that George William Frazer was born. At this time, James was listed as a grocer. I would think that the 1997 Directory would better reflect what James was doing in 1996. There are two entries:

My guess is that James A had two jobs. The first one just appears to list the work place. The second entry lists his house. I do think that I recall James being called a tea dealer. Perhaps he bought and sold tea at 1971 Washington Street.

Looks like my guess was wrong. Here is the 1896 Directory:

This shows that there were two James A Frazers. Thankfully, the Boston Athenaeum web site has many Boston City Directories. I wonder if these two James A Frazers knew each other?

Summary and Conclusions

  • I have taken a look at some of the early years of my Frazer and Clarke great-grandparents.
  • I had trouble using one facial recognition program. It didn’t seem very accurate.
  • I looked at the studios where my great-grandparents had their photos taken.
  • I also looked at City Directories locating where James Archibald Frazer lived right before and after he married Margaret Clarke in 1892.
  • Using street maps, I was able to virtually walk the streets of 1890’s Boston with my ancestors.