Shared Clustering for My Wife’s Aunt Suzy

My wife’s brother recently took a YDNA test. I can’t do an AncestryDNA Shared Clustering for my wife’s father because he didn’t test at AncestryDNA, but I can look at Aunt Suzy’s Shared Clustering

What Is Shared Clustering?

Shared Clustering is looking at shared DNA matches. The theory if you have a bunch of shared matches that also match each other they are likely from a common ancestor. Jim Bartlett got the idea of walking back your shared clusters. That means starting with your more recent clusters and going back through the years to check on and verify your older clusters which represent more distant ancestors. Jim used Jonathan Brecher’s Shared Clustering Program.

Let’s Download Aunt Suzy

I used Jonathan Brecher’s program to download Aunt Suzy’s AncestryDNA results:

Aunt Suzy also goes by Virginia which is probably a more official name. Suzy has over 68,000 total DNA matches. That should take a couple of hours to download. Once the download is down I’ll be able to look at Suzy’s clusters.

What I Expect Based on Suzy’s Ancestry

I already know what to expect in general from this excercise. Half of Suzy’s ancesty is French Canadian. They will result in many matches. The other half is Irish and they will result in fewer matches and shared ancestors.

Suzy’s dad was from an Irish background. Suzy’s mom was more recently from French Canada.

A Test Run of Shared Clustering

Suzy has 82 third cousins. Where do I set my first cluster level? Ancestry says that Suzy should start getting third cousins at 199 cM. However, I clicked through a lot of Suzy’s actual cousins and the third cousins didn’t show up until somewhere bettween 128 and 118 cM. So I’ll set the first cutoff at 123 cM. Odd number:

This was good enough to give me a paternal and maternal view of Suzy’s ancestry:

Cluster 1 is paternal and Cluster 2 is maternal. The thing that looks like a Red Cross plus sign in the middle would be Suzy’s closer relates. They match on her father’s and mother’s sides.

I’m going to put Suzy’s cluster results in a chart sorting her clusters by grandparent:

Spoiler alert is that Suzy should have a lot of LeFevre matches. I could put in Suzy’s paternal and maternal single clusters in the chart, but that would be a waste of space. Instead, I’ll bring Suzy’s cluster level down to a maximum of 50 cM from 123 cM:

Still there are only three numbered clusters, though, as above, I can see clusters within the clusters. I’ll go lower still.

At a 40 cM Limit, Suzy Has 8 Clusters

I’ll be happy to start here:

Things get a bit blurry at this level. There are 216 matches on this chart. They are not all in clusters, but most of them are.

Cluster 1

This should be easy:

Here as a Common Ancestor, Joseph Pouliot is listed as well as Pepin. However, this relationship goes back several generations:

Maybe not so easy. The Pouliot that I was thinking of is in Cluster 5:

Three of the matches have the common ancestor of Joseph Pouliot and Josephine Fortin:

I’ve been in touch with Fred. Because there are two common ancestors, I don’t know which one the DNA goes with, so for now I choose the daughter in Virginia’s line who is Emma Pouliot:

On to Cluster 2

I put Cluster 1 on hold. Cluster 2 is quite large:

In order to tame it, I retrieved all the common ancestors from Cluster 2 and put them in alphabetical order:

This name comes up quite often:

However, this goes quite a ways back. I think I need a new set of clusters. I’ll go back up to 45 cM to see if this makes things simpler:

5 Clusters for Suzy at 45 cM

The thought is, that if these clusters are obvious, they should map to the 40 cM clusters.

Cluster 1 Is Large

By the common ancestor names, this must be a LeFevre cluster. Here is a popular common ancestor:

One step backward, two steps forward?

Cluster 2

This should be the same Cluster that Fred was in above:

Cluster 3 Goes To Old Common Ancestors

This was the problem I was having with Cluster 1 at 40 cM. In fact, I’ll go to Access to compare the 40 cM clusters with the 45 cM Clusters:

I start with the 40 cM clusters as there are more with them. I join them to the 45 cM clusters by the Test ID. Then for the join I choose option 2. That says include all the records from Virginia’s 40 cM cluster and only those records from Virginia’s 45 cM Clusters where the joined fields are equal. Then on the part below in the query screen, I reverse the order with the 45 cM results first, so it will look more like my summary table.

It is possible to do this without Access but it would take quite a bit of time. I also group my query results. This takes out the duplicates:

This shows that the Cluster 3 I was looking at with the 45 cM cutoff, maps to Cluster 2 at 40 cM. Cluster 2 at 40 was the same one I looked at above and was having trouble with because the common ancestors were so ancient. I then took the clusters up to 47 cM:

This shows Clusters 4 and 5 at 47 cM. Cluster 4 is the more recent Pouliot Cluster. That tells me that there are a lot of connections between the two Clusters and that the bigger cluster must be an ancestor of Pouliot (or Fortin).

Here are the same two corresponding clusters at th 45 cM cutoff:

Now they are Clusters 2 and 3. As the larger cluster is an ancestor of Pouliot, I’ll extend Emma Pouliot’s tree:

This brings Suzy out to her 5th cousin level. However, some of the common ancestors were out at the 6th cousin level. The confusion could be that there are two Trembely or Tremblay lines. However, both Tremblay lines go through Josephine Fortin. Here is her line with the Cluster 3 common ancestors highlighted. Actually, these are the Cluster 2 Common ancestors from the 40 cM run:

All these common ancestors funnel down through Emma Fortin. Imagine that you are John Brecher’s computer program and you had all of these ancestors. What would you do? You would probably come up with something like Cluster 3.

Bottom line:

Here I mapped Cluster3 at 45 cM to Cluster 2 at 40 cM. It’s a lot of work to map one Cluster, but I feel as though I got it right.

Cluster 4 at the 45 cM Cutoff

Cluster 4 is off to the bottom left of Cluster 3. Cluster 4 has some affinity with Cluster 3 as can be seen by some of the matches to the left of Cluster 4 and underneath Cluster 3. Cluster 4 at 45 cM maps to Cluster 1 at 40 cM. This is one that I got stuck on above.

I’ll take what I learned with Cluster 3 and apply it to Cluster 4. I’ll just say that this Cluster goes to Joseph Pouliot born 1848:

Above I highlighted the AncestryDNA suggested Common Ancestors for Cluster 4.

Cluster 5 – The First Irish Cluster

So far, I have been dealing with French Canadian clusters. This is the first Irish one.

This Cluster has both of Suzy’s Irish grandparents, so I’d rather not put it in my spreadsheet just now. In general Butler is at the top left and Kerivan is the rest of the Cluster. I note that, based on my previous Access query, this will be mapping to two Clusters at 40 cM.

Back to the 40 cM Clusters

Irish Cluster 5 at 45 cM mapped to Clusters 6 and 7 at 40 cM. I’ll start with those.

In addition, there are now Clusters 8 and 9. Due to close relatives, Cluster 6 has Butler and Kerivan still. Here is the area with just Butler:

I’ll call that 6a.

Clusters 6b and 7

Here are Clusters 6b and 7:

However, both Clusters have the same two common ancestors. It could be that one Cluster favors Kerivan and the other Rooney. I would rather assign them both to the daughter at this point.

Clusters 8 and 9

Clusters 8 and 9 are small. They seem to favor the Kerivan side. One person in Cluster 8 has a tree with 247 people:

I notice he has a Bridget Rooney in his tree. At this point, I could try to build out his tree or wait to see what happens with further clustering. I’ll create a tree as I’m curious. I’m having trouble getting back to Bridget from Alice McCusker. Here is a transcription of her baptismal record:

One of the witnesses was a Patrick Rooney.

It looks like the family was enumerated as McCarty in 1870:

In 1880, Bridget was a widow:

This record pulls things together:

From that record, I get this:

Lawrence and Suzy are third cousins.

I don’t like the look of Cluster 9, so I’ll ignore it for now:

When I say I don’t like the look of it that is because it appears that this could be two small clusters.

Clusters 3 and 4

In my mapping, the previous Cluster 1 went to Cluster 4, so that is LeFevre. Here are the listed Common Ancestors for Cluster 4:

The Butler entries are too close for clustering. Most of the Common ancestors seem to go back to Lazare Lefevre and Adelaide Boure:

However, one went back to Methot and Anger:

Ancestry would like me to evaluate this tree. I’ll bite.

I am questioning why Armand Petrelli is the son of Alphonse Moreau. The 1930 Southbridge Census has Armand as the son of Joseph Petrelli:

Actually, I see what happened.

Robert got his tree backwards:

His mother is Moreau. His maternal grandfather should be Alphonse Moreau – ot Joseph Petrelli.

Here is Jeanette in 1920:

The other problem is the Athanase I have in my tree is a man and Robert’s connection to me is shown through a female Athanase.

I think I’ll just assume that this is an earlier LeFevre Cluster rather than Methot:

That leaves the new Cluster 3:

Cluster 3 has four connections to Cluster 2 (Fortin) and two to 4 (LeFevre). I don’t have a lot of information, so I’ll just add Cluster 3 near Fortin:

This could be a long Blog, but I like that the clusters seem to be falling into place – even with the French Canadian families.

Suzy’s 18 Clusters at 35 cM

This looks like the 1,000 foot view:

In Access here is how the previous clusters map to this set of clusters:

This is interesting because the Cluster 3 I was looking at above, maps to 7 and 8 but Cluster 2 also maps to Cluster 7.

Cluster6 mapped to 9, but I had a 6a and 6b. It turns out that the Cluster 9 has not separated out yet due to Suzy’s close relatives being in that cluster. From above, it looks like a lot of the action is in the French Canadian quarters.

Looking At the Irish Side – Down to 30 cM

I’ve decided to take a new easier approach. I am more interested in the Irish side at this point. The French Canadian side is interesting, but much of the genealogy is seemingly well-defined. At least the answers seem to be there if you dig deep enough. Describing the French Canadian clusters may be interesting, but it is a lot of work. I had some luck above with Rooney, so I’ll stick with the Irish and go down another level to 30 cM.

I ran the Shared Clustering program and came up with some more large French Canadian Clusters. I notice there is a button where you can filter out the larger clusters.

I thought I wanted to use the first box, but that is for the entire file. I want the second box to get rid of the large French Canadian clusters. Without this filter I get:

  • Cluster 2 goes from row 15-266
  • 21 goes from 441 to 485
  • 22 which I want goes from 487 to 509 or about 23 rows

I’ll try setting the cutoff at 40 members. I like this because I can now see what is going on:

This reduces the number of clusters and changes the cluster numbers, but that is OK. I’ll just put another heading on my Summary Chart:

I brought these new restricted clusters into Access and compared them:

Here I have only 5 clusters. That made a huge difference. Without the 40 member cutoff, I get 31 clusters. Life just got simpler.

Above Cluster 9 goes to Clusters 1 and 2. Cluster 9 was the one that I had split previously. Here are the new Clusters 1 and 2:

Cluster 1 is the Kerivan side and Cluster 2 is the Butler side.

This is interesting because former Clusters 10 and 11 reclustered into the new Cluster 1. Now I’m curious to see how the unfiltered Clusters would have mapped:

This goes off the page above. One unexpected result is that under this configuration the previous Cluster 9 now only maps to one Cluster 4. However, now the old Clusters 10 and 11 map to their own clusters. With the restriction of the large clusters, I was expecting no effect on the Irish clusters, only on the large French Canadian clusters. However, the restriction also had an effect on the Irish Clusters.

The bottom line is that I could work with either the restricted or non-restricted clusters, however, for the purpose of looking at the Irish clusters, I would rather deal with the restricted clusters.

Irish Cluster 1

At 30 cM with a restiction 40 per cluster, I get two Irish Clusters. The first one is the Kerivan side. The first person on the list is not in the cluster but has matches to Cluster 1. He has a small tree with a Hanrahan in it. The fourth on the list shows a correclation to Cluster 1 and has a public tree. I don’t see any obvious match and would prefer not to build out this tree.

The last person before the Kerivan Cluster 1 has a curious common ancestor named Mary:

This looks worth pursuing. The relationship is shown as half first cousin, but it is likely a full cousin relationship unless Mary married two different Rooney’s. Here is Suzy’s tree starting with her Kerivan grandfather:

The Ancestry shared ancestry tree looks suspicious also because it appears to show that there were two brothers named Timothy Rooney. I’ll try to recreate Daniel’s tree to see what is going on. I was having trouble with the tree, then I found a chart I had made a while ago:

This shows John Henry descending from a first wife of Timothy Rooney. I’ll put that on my new Rooney Tree:

I’ve ended up with a half relationship after all. However, it now appears that Daniel and Suzy are 1/2 third cousins once removed. I tried to distinguish the two branches with different colors.

The next person in Cluster 1 who I haven’t looked at yet is FG:

FG has an unlinked tree:

I noticed the name McCusker:

I like the easy ones. See, I’m a Rooney specialist.

Andrew from Cluster 1

The next person in Cluster 1 with a usable tree is Andrew:

After a little snooping around Ancestry, I came up with this:

Andrew goes on my Rooney Tree:

That brings up a point. The first three matches are not Kerivan matches. Technically, that makes Cluster 1 a Rooney Cluster.

Russell and Sandra

Russell and Sandra should be easy as they show Common Ancestors at Ancestry:

Bob’s Tree Looks Hopeful

Bob, who is in Cluster 1, has this tree:

Here is a quick tree to get him on my Chart:

Donna and John

I have a note that Donna is the mother of John and that I wrote a Blog about John. Here is John at Ancestry:

It looks like a good time to start a separate Kerivan Tree:

I found Donna’s sister in the mix also.

H6 and a More Challenging Tree?

H6 is in Cluster 1 with a match of 141 cM:

These families lived in New Jersey and some came from Sweden or Italy, so I had trouble getting this back to Kerivan easily.

On To Butler Cluster 2

The first two with small unlinked trees are Kerry and Janice.

Kerry’s tree:

Janice’s tree:

 

I’m thinking it would be a lot of work to track these trees down. Here is some more on Mary Ann:

I decided to look into this tree based on the fact that I also found a Rooney in the ancestry. Mary Ann’s mother was Rose Rooney.

That could explain the link of Cluster 2 to the Rooney Cluster 1:

Butler’s I’m Already Tracking

 

I already had Donna, Janice and Barbara. I added Harry also from Cluster 1.

Suzy’s Clusters of 40 Members or Less at 25 cM

I checked Suzy’s clusters at 25 cM without the 40 member limit and she had 69 clusters. With all those clusters, I couldn’t see all the clusters on the chart even at the minimum 10%. With the 40 member limit, Suzy had 12 clusters:

 

 

I’m curious what these clusters will show.

Running the 25 cM Clusters by Access

I’ll compare these clusters to the 30 cM clusters in Access.

This says that Clusters 1 and 2 both split three ways. That means that there were also 6 new clusters. I expect the new clusters were a mix of Irish and French Canadian. It seems odd that only the two Irish Clusters that I was working on at the 30 cM limit mapped as I had 5 clusters previously. I’m guessing that the other three clusters mapped clusters of over 40 members, so were screened out.

Cluster 1

I don’t like how Cluster 1 doesn’t cluster well, but I’ll take a look anyway:

In looking over these 4 mathces, I don’t see an obvious connection. Something more may show up at the 20 cM Cluster run.

Cluster 2

This Cluster seems to have an affinity with part of Cluster 7, which looks like a Kerivan Cluster.

Cluster 3

This mapped from previous Cluster 1. I see one person who has a Rooney in their ancestry. This is a person I looked at in the previous Cluster 1:

I’ll put Cluster 3 here:

However, I’ll have to go back and check in Access to see if that looks right:

It is right as it mapped back to Cluster 11 at the 35 cM limit. Also I see that the Cluster 1 at 35 cM that I had looked at above came from the previous Cluster 2 at 30 cM which was a Butler Cluster.

Cluster 4

Cluster 4 is new. Here is the tree for Suzy’s first match in Cluster 4:

Ancestry has Rooney in green as it notices that name in Suzy’s tree. Thomas Rooney above was said to be from County Roscommon. Here is the largest tree from Jean of Cluster 4:

 

Timothy Rooney from Suzy’s tree is supposed to be from Leitrim. Daddy Mick Roone is supposed to be from Galoway (Galway?). Thomas above shows from Roscommon. They could all be right and all be related.

Cluster 5

The person above Cluster 5 seems associated with Cluster 5 and has a tree. However, that person also has connection with Rooney Cluster 3. Here is some Rooney information from the tree:

Here is more of the tree:

Suzy has both Rooney and Sullivan ancestry:

The question is whether Cluster 5 is a Sullivan or Rooney Cluster.

I’ll build out the other unlinked tree from Kerry in Cluster 5:

I’m guessing the connection is on the Gilmartin side as that name sounds familiar. However, I couldn’t get the tree to match with a familar surnam, so I gave up for now.

Anyway, based on the Clusters, I should be looking on the Bulter side for these Cluster 5 matches:

It is easy to get thrown off my conmon surnames. That is why we have to pay attention to the shared clusters. However, having said that Cluster 5 did seem to match both Clusters 4 and 6. So for now, I’ll put Cluster 5 on the Butler side:

Cluster 6 – A Butler Cluster

This is an interesting Cluster because it includes a Cincinnati branch of Butlers who are related to Suzy’s Butlers, but we don’t know how yet. Here is my guess how they could match:

The George Butler Branch from Cincinnati is on the left. The Edward Butler branch who lived for a while in Cincinnati ended up in the Boston area.

Within Cluster 6 is the Boston group and the Cincinnati group:

The last two matches that I don’t have a green box around are closer Butler relatives.

Cluster 7 – Back to the Kerivan Side

I don’t see any new matches in this group, so no new news.

Clusters 8-12

These are all new clusters:

I don’t know if these are Irish or French Canadian Clusters.

On to the Final Clustering at 20 cM

In this run, I’ll choose 6 cM and have a maximum cluster size of 40 keeping in mind that Ancestry’s shared matches are generally at the 20 cM size or larger. This gives me 20 Clusters and some greater detail on what I had already.

First I’ll pull this new information into Access to see how the Clusters map:

This cut off a few clusters at the top. First I see in the 7th row from the bottom, Cluster 2 that went to 1 has no cluster in the last row. That was the cluster that I was wary of.

Here is a sort by the previous run of Clusters:

This tells me the new Cluster 1 is from the previous Cluster 2. The new Cluster 2 had no precedent. One large tree in Cluster 2 had a Crowley ancestor from Cork, but that may be a coincidence.

Cluster Three maps to previous Cluster 9 which I haven’t looked at. I see another Gilmarting in Cluster 3. His ancestry goes back to Leitrim, Ireland. After clicking through a lot of connections, I would guess that the connection is through Ireland. Also a lot of the connections are in Leitrim and I found one tree with a Rooney in it from Leitrim:

Here is an interesting match between Clusters 3 and 4:

This wants to tie together the Jeremiah and John Rooney Lines.

ThruLines suggests another Rooney Line:

Skipping Down to the Butler Clusters

The new Cluster 11 mapped to the previous Cluster 6:

There is nothing new in Cluster 11 itself, but the interesting part is outside Cluster 11 proper:

However, there are four matches above Cluster 11 that show association with Cluster 11. The first person is managed by Patty who I already know about:

Patty is on the George Butler Line. George Butler came to live in Cincinnati.

The third person in the group of matches that are correlated to Cluster 11 is Regina. Here is her tree:

I recognize the Branch name above.  Here is the marriage record for Alma from 1925:

Another person in the group that is correlated with Cluster 11 is Ryan. Here is his tree:

Both of Ryan’s parents were born in Cincinnati. I need to build yet another tree to see if I can find a match:

With a little snooping around, I was able to get back to Alma Branch:

Christy is on the other side of the Cluster 11:

She fits in on the Boston George side:

Emily married an unrelated Butler.

Next under Christy is Larry:

Larry matches clusters on either side. Here is here small tree:

The tree is interesting as both parents are from Wexford. Some of the Butler ancestors were also from Wexford. Unfortunately, the tree is a bit confusing to follow. Was Bridget’s maiden name Browne or Hesse?

Larry has shared matches with Suzy, Brian, Barbara and Janice:

That seems to make Larry a sort of missing link.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I did a first shot at looking at Suzy’s Shared Clusters
  • Not too far into looking at Suzy’s clusters, her French Canadian Clusters got very large.
  • I restricted the size of Suzy’s clusters so I could look more at her smaller clusters on her Irish side.
  • This lead me to some interesting finds on her Kerivan and Butler side.
  • One Butler match was very interesting as it was shared with two Butler branches that I have been trying to connect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My Wife’s Theories of Relativity and DNA Painting

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

DNA Painter

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

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

Marie’s Theories of Relativity (TOR)

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

Marie and Jo-Ann match here:

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

When I do this, I notice a potential problem:

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

Another Look at Sarah

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

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

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

Caroline and the LeFevre/Boure Line

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

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

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

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

Pierre -Luc and an Older Pouliot Ancestor

Here is how MyHeritage shows the connection:

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

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

The Problem with Daniel: Too Many Ancestors

Here is how MyHeritage shows Daniel:

But also like this:

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

Here are the hairs we are trying to split:

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

 

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

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

Irma with PEI Ancestry

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

Painting this brings up more problems:

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

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

Here is another path for Jo-Ann:

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

 

The Problem with Marie’s DNA Matches

Marie has four grandparents as do we all:

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

Summary and Observations

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

 

 

Edward H Butler May Not Be the Son of Michael Butler and Margaret Croke?

In my previous Blog, I wrote an update on Butler DNA. In that Blog, I discussed a match between my wife’s Aunt Lorraine and Brian:

Brian shows up at AncestryDNA as a potential third cousin to Lorraine. That means that unless there is an unusual circumstance, my proposed DNA/genealogy chart cannot be right.

That chart shows Brian and Lorraine as 4th cousins once removed. However, reported data indicates that sharing 147 cM of DNA is outside the range of 4C1R possibilities, but is within the realm of likelihood (albeit on the high end) for a 3C1R:

As we have a birth record for George Butler, but not for Edward H Butler, that suggests that Edward H (likely Henry) Butler could have been the son of Henry Butler and Ann Russel.

Playing With the Butler Family Tree

There, I just made Lorraine and Brian third cousins, once removed. However, Edward H just lost MIchael Butler as his father. Here is the family tree that Butler researcher Peter has:

HENRY1 BUTLER was born in 1800 in Wexford. He married Ann Russel on 02 Jul 1824 in Wexford.

She was born in 1800 in Wexford.

Henry Butler and Ann Russel had the following children:

i. GEORGE2 BUTLER was born on 03 Oct 1826 in Wexford, Ireland. He died on 23 Dec 1890 in Hamilton County, Ohio. He married (1) MARY WHITTY, daughter of Richard Whitty and Margaret, on 12 Jun 1849 in Mountain Gate Rathangan Wexford. She was born on 03 Dec 1824 in Rathangan Wexford, Ireland. She died on 11 Jan 1865 in Hamilton County, Ohio. He married (2) MARGARET SINNOTT on 11 Nov 1868 in All Saints Catholic Church Cincinatti. She was born in 1845 in wexford Ireland. She died in 1887 in Hamilton County, Ohio.

ii. NICHOLAS BUTLER was born on 23 Apr 1828 in Wexford. He married Christina Lambert on 06 Oct 1848 in Wexford Ireland. She was born in Wexford.

iii. ELIZA BUTLER was born on 06 Mar 1830 in Wexford.

HENRY BUTLER was born on 29 Mar 1832 in Wexford.

MARY ANNE BUTLER was born on 23 Mar 1833 in Wexford.

BRIDGET BUTLER was born on 15 Jul 1836 in Wexford.

vii. ADAM BUTLER was born on 24 Jul 1839 in Wexford. I think this is a Baptism date

Peter also found another daughter for this family born in 1842:

Peter notes that George’s other name also appeared as Adam on his baptismal record and that the Adam born in 1839 went by Edward. There are a few reasons why Edward H may have been part of the Henry Butler/Ann Russell family:

  • The large DNA match between Lorraine and Brian
  • The fact that Edward did not name any of his children after Michael nor after Margaret
  • Edward did name his first son George and lived in Cincinnati for several years where the (presumably) elder George Butler lived.
  • The middle name of Henry which was carried down could have been for the Henry Butler born about 1800 in the genealogy above.
  • There has been no birth record found for Edward as son of Michael (nor as son of Henry).
  • Most records for Edward’s sons list his father born in Kilkenny. However, one record lists his father as being from Wexford.

Under my scenario, Edward is born to Henry in Wexford but is adopted by Michael Butler of Poulrone, Killkenny for some reason.

James Butler Born About 1823 Kilkenny, IRE

I have noted before that it appears that Edward was a brother to a James Butler. This was inferred from the US Census of 1910:

Here Mary Mellie is actually Mary Butler, the daughter of James Butler and Mary Quinn. She was born in 1858, though she would like us to think that she was born in 1880. That is quite a difference. Joanna, born in 1860 would have liked to have us think she was born in 1877. Edward Butler was clearly not Mary’s father. That lead me to believe that Edward and James could have been brothers and Edward was acting as Mary’s father. If Edward gave his correct age, he would have been born about 1832 (see below).

However, I note that this James Butler’s eldest son was Michael Butler:

Perhaps this James actually was a son of Michael Butler. James’ son Matthew could have been named for his brother.

Here is Mathias or Matthew Butler who is recorded as a son of Michael Butler and Margaret Croak:

So under this scenario (likely or not), Edward goes to live with and Uncle and considers the Uncle and Aunt his parents. He also considers James and Matthew his brothers.

So Where Does Edward H Butler Fit In?

Peter recently discovered  Naturalization papers for an Edward Butler from Poulrone:

In those papers, he gives his birth year as 1825. However, if he is the same as Henry born in Wexford in 1832, that would fit in better with other recorded birth years for Edward:

If Henry was named for his father, it would make sense that he might go by a different name to avoid confusion. One problem with the timing is that if Edward came to the US in 1843, he would have been only 11. That leaves a few possibilities:

  1. Edward was actually born 17 August 1825. To do that, he would have been squeezed in between his parents’ marriage and the birth of George in 1826.
  2. Edward was born in 1832, came to the US, say in 1848 when he was about 16 and was naturalized at about age 18. That would results in several fibs as his witnesses were supposed to have known him for 5 years before his naturalization.

More DNA Analysis

As I mentioned above, the DNA match between Lorraine and Brian has lead me to the above scenario. Here is an AutoCluster I performed for Lorraine earlier in the year:

These clusters are difficult to see. Clusters are where you match people in a group and that group of people match each other for the most part. Lorraine is part French Canadian and part Irish. The French Canadian took over for the most part. Lorraine’s Irish clusters are in the bottom right. Brian is in Cluster 35 which has 7 members.

Here is a closeup of the Clusters 33-36:

 

Brian is the second person in Cluster 35. He matches Barbara, Donna, Patty and Kim:

That means that in Cluster 35, there are three descendants of Edward H and three descendants of George Butler. I don’t know if the fact that there are three people on each side make the proposed tree more likely or not. To me, it suggests that it could be more likely.

Cluster 34

Brian also matches two people in Cluster 34. That is a Kerivan Cluster, but Edward H’s son Edward Henry born 1875 married a Kerivan, so that explains the connection. Brian is matching on the Butler side of the Kerivan Cluster. Brian matches Amanda and Dawn in Cluster 34. Unfortunately, Amanda and Dawn either have no tree or not enough to figure out their ancestors.

Analyzing the Size of DNA Matches

There are two ways to do this. One is by the Chart I showed at the top of the Blog. It is possible to analyze the possibilities at Ancestry also. Here is how AncestryDNA shows Brian and Lorraine:

Their most likely relationship given the match would be 2nd cousin once removed. However, they have a 1% chance of being 3C1R. I’ll put that into a chart:

I’ll be looking at my wife’s Aunt Lorraine and her sister Virginia as I manage their DNA results. Here is how the results look:

Were it not for the match between Lorraine and Brian, I would say that the results are inconclusive. However, there appears to be no chance that Brian and Lorraine could be fourth cousins once removed.

Looking at Gedmatch

I can also look at Gedmatch, however, there is not a one-to-one correlation between AncestryDNA and Gedmatch. Here is how the match between Lorraine and Kim looks at Gedmatch:

Gedmatch expresses it’s guesses in generations. So a 4.5 means generations to a common ancestor. That would be equivalent to a third cousin once removed. The green above represents the new chart that I have with George Butler and Edward H Butler as brothers. The yellow represents George Butler and Edward H Butler as first cousins.

Here is some more data, though, again, I don’t see any clear conclusions:

Summary and Conclusions

  • A high DNA match between Lorraine and Brian in conjunction with lack of some key birth records has lead me to believe that George Butler born 1826 and my wife’s ancestor Edward H Butler could be brothers.
  • That would mean that Edward H Butler’s parents would be Henry Butler and Ann Russell.
  • The why would tradition and records on the Edward H Butler line have his parents as Michael Butler and Margaret Croke? One possibility is that Michael and Margaret were Edward’s Uncle and Aunt and that he went to live with them and considered them to be his parents. Perhaps MIchael needed help on his farm or Edward had some falling out with his family.
  • This should lead to a renewed interest to find out more about the Henry Butler and Michael Butler families.
  • I would be open to other interpretations, but due to a high DNA match which indicates that George Butler and Henry H Butlers should be brothers, no other clear possibilities come to mind right now.
  • I still surmise that Henry Butler and Michael Butler could be brothers. I have a birth record for Matthew, son of Michael and my assumption is that Michael Butler had a son named James. James had several children. One of his daughters was Mary who married a Mellie and housed Edward H Butler in Newton, Massachusetts according to the 1910 Census.

 

 

 

 

2019 Updates on Butler DNA

I recently posted an update on Butler genealogy. Here is an update on Butler DNA. I have found that DNA matches work well to get good genealogical results. For the Butler project, the two main relevant test are YDNA and the autosomal DNA tests. I have discovered new relatives through both the YDNA tests and the autosomal DNA test results.

Butler YDNA and the BigY Test – I-Y128364

The two major YDNA tests are the Big Y and the STR testing. Two Butlers have taken the Big Y test. One is my late father-in-law. The other is Peter from England. This has placed my wife’s Butler family (and Peter’s) on the YDNA tree. That Place is called I-Y128364. This is actually an I2 Group. This is further broken down to I-M223 (or I2-M223). One way to show I-Y128364 is on FTDNA’s Block Tree:

The discovery of I-Y128364 is important as it describes the specific branch of Butlers that Peter, my father-in-law Richard’s family and other related Butlers belong to.

I-M223 was formed about 15,000 years ago. There is more branching that goes on, but this just shows the direct line from I-M223 to I-A427. At that point it shows additional branching. One way to get a rough date for the common ancestor is to take their average number of private variants (shown in the green boxes above) and multiply those by 144 years. This results in a common ancestor for Peter and Richard of about 288 years. Richard was born in the 1930’s, but we’ll use 1940 as a starting date. That would give a rough date of 1650 for a common ancestor between Peter and Richard. The average man has his middle child at age 34, so 288 years turns out to be about 8.5 generations.

Here is a migration map for the I Haplogroup:

The question is how the Butler’s got to Ireland. One possibility is through the Normans. These were Norse men who lived in France and invaded England. Some of those would have ended up in Ireland also. Other routes are possible.

Here is a more detailed look from SNP Tracker:

The Butler ancestors were in Southern Germany from the later Paleolithic to the early Neolithic. The one Bronze Age SNP is shown in the water. I take this to mean that these people could have been in Scandinavia or around the North Sea where the blue dot is. Iron and Roman Ages are missing and then we end up in Ireland in the Medieval period. The Medieval period was from 476 to 1450 AD. So between the blue dot and orange dot above, a lot of time goes by. The light dot in the North Sea represents a tester by the last name of Batt. The common ancestor between Batt and Butler was about 700 years ago.

Butler YDNA and the STR Test

Here is how Peter and Richard match on their STR test:

Peter and Richard match on all but 6 STRs out of the 111 tested. Plus they match on all but 6 STRs on the 412 STRs identified by the BigY results. Here is the TIP Report for Richard and Peter:

Richard and Peter have a 60% chance of having a common ancestor within 8 generations.

Neil – the Newest STR Match

Neil, who has Butler ancestors from Wexford has taken the 37 STR test. His results came back in July 2019. He matches my father-in-law Richard exactly at the 37 STR level. Here is the TIP Report between Neil and Richard:

I put in the report that Richard and Neil did not share an ancestor within the last three generations. The 37 STR test is not as accurate as the 111 STR test, so more variation may be expected in the results. Neil, Richard and Peter are all in the Butler YDNA Project at FTDNA:

Neil’s ancestor is Richard Butler born 1817 in Wexford. Neil and my father-in-law Richard share at value of 32 for a STR called DYS389ii. None of the other Butler testers share this value, so this value likely defines the specific branch of Butlers that Neil and Richard are in. Likewise, Peter and the descendant of Laurence Butler born 1830 Wexford share a value of 23 for a STR called DYS570. That STR likely defines their Butler Branch.

Neil is very likely a closer match to my father-in-law Richard than Peter is. He may also be a family finder match by autosomal DNA. Peter suggests that the older Butler line was from Wexford and branched out from there. It appears that the limited DNA matches would support that also. Based on the closeness of Neil’s DNA test to my wife’s Butler family, renewed effort is being made to make a genealogical connection.

Butler STR Overview

There are 576 members in the FTDNA Butler YDNA Project. These represent most of the Butlers and related families who have had STRs tested. Of those 576, most of the Butlers and associated families are R1b. These are probably what are considered traditionally as the more Celtic or native people to the British Isles. Of those 576, about 49 or 8.5% are I1. According to FTDNA, I1 has a common ancestor of about 4,000 to 5,000 years ago. 25 Butlers or associated families are listed as I2 in the Butler YDNA Project. This represents 4.3% of the people in the Butler YDNA project. Of those 25 I2’s, all but three are I-M223. According to FTDNA, the I-M223 Tree is about 17,400 years old. That means that the Block tree I showed earlier in this Blog represents well over 17,000 years of “Butler” history. Of course, the Butler name was only attached to this history since some time in the last 1,000 years.

How does this compare to Ireland in general? Here is part of a Eupedia.com Chart:

From what I can tell, this represents percentages of Haplogroups. Above, I found that 4.3% of the Butlers were I2. From the above chart, it appears that about 6% of Irish are I2 (adding I2a and I2b). A review of the Butler YDNA Project results shows that the Butler’s in general were from many different Counties in Ireland and had many different Haplotypes. That means that no one Haplotype can be associated with the Butler name. However, different branches of Butlers can be associated with specific haplotypes.

Butler Autosomal DNA

In general, it could be said that the YDNA tests take over at the point that the autosomal DNA tests fade away. What that means is that autosomal DNA matches may be found with this probability:

The hope is that once these matches are found that there would be a genealogical connection or possible connection. Around the point where the autosomal results fade out, say about the 5th cousin level, the YDNA tests are helpful for establishing relationships going back hundreds and thousands of years. With the BigY tests, and closest matches for the STR tests, these results may overlap.

Finding New Butler Relatives Through DNA

I have found new Butler relatives through DNA matches in the following three categories:

  • Relatives who have common Butler ancestors that we already knew about
  • Relatives who have Butler ancestors that we hadn’t known about previously. Right now, the main Butler ancestor that we found out about is George Butler born in Wexford, Ireland and died in Cincinnati. It is clear that he was related to my wife’s ancestor Edward Henry Butler. But we don’t know exactly how. They may have been first cousins.
  • Relatives who have common ancestors with Butlers, but those ancestors perhaps go back beyond the time when there were good records kept – or the connection has not yet been discovered. Therefore, the connection to a comman ancestor may not be clear, but the connection to an area may be guessed at – such as Weford, Ireland. A good example of this category would be with Peter who is a YDNA match, but we don’t know who the exact common ancestor is.

Here are some lines that were discovered by autosomal DNA Matches:

This tree represents two branches that are real branches. Some of the descendants of the Henry Branch on the left match some of the descendants of Michael Butler Branch on the right. I have put the two together as potential brothers to explain the DNA matches.

Brian and Nathan (Butler/Whitty LIne)

Brian and Nathan descend from George Butler and his first wife Mary Whitty. This couple moved from Ireland to Cincinnati where they had Mary Ann. Mary Ann moved to St John, New Brunswick where she married and had descendants including Brian and Nathan who have had their autosomal DNA tested.

Nathan is in green because he has uploaded his DNA results to Gedmatch. Here is how Nathan matches my father-in-law, Richard:

A MRCA of 4.5 suggests a third cousin, once removed. By the tree above, Richard and Nathan would be fourth cousins, twice removed.

Brian tested at AncestryDNA and has a large match with my wife’s Aunt Lorraine:

The Problem with Brian and Lorraine

Ancestry predicts that Lorraine and Brian should be third cousins by the amount of DNA they share. By my proposed chart they would be fourth cousins, once removed. It seems like Lorraine and Brian share too much DNA to be 4th cousins, once removed. Here is part of a 2017 chart showing reported ranges of DNA matching for different relationships:

The highest reported DNA match for a 4C1R is 117 cM. That seems to rule out the chart I have above unless Brian and Lorraine match on another line such as the Crowley line. If Lorraine and Brian are actually third cousins, once removed, that leads to some strange conclusions. That would mean that Henry Butler is actually Michael Butler and that Ann Russel is actually Margaret Croke. Or that Henry/Michael Butler had two wives and that Lorraine and Brian are half third cousins once removed. I don’t know of DNA statistics for 1/2 3C1R, but 147 cM seems like it would be high for that relationship also. Another possibility is that Edward Henry Butler was the son of Henry Butler and Ann Russel but adopted by Michael Butler and Margaret Croke.

Here is how Brian matches my wife’s Aunt Virginia:

Ancestry suggests a 4th cousin match which is more in line with the proposed tree that I have showing that Lorraine and Brian could be fourth cousins, once removed.

Patty and Kim (Butler/Sinnett or Sinnott Line)

Patty matches Lorraine at 39 cM and Virginia at 30 cM which is more in line with my proposed chart. My proposed chart showed Lorraine and Virginia as 4th cousins. 35 cM is an average match for a 4th cousin.

Here is Patty’s tree:

Patty has a shared match with Terri. Here is Terri’s tree:

My guess is that Elmer could be a brother of George. Based on this 1920 Marriage record, that was the case:

That means that I can expand the Butler DNA match/genealogy tree:

Terri matches Virginia by 26 cM and doesn’t match Lorraine.

Kim at gedmatch

Kim’s DNA results are at Gedmatch. Here are three of her DNA matches with people on my larger chart:

Summary and Conclusions

  • In this Blog, I tried to give an overview of all the different types of applicable DNA matching results to my wife’s Butler Line
  • These DNA matches have resulted in finding new Butler relatives and a renewed effort to find genealogical connections.
  • One surprising result is that Brian and Lorraine match by too much DNA for them to be fourth cousins, once removed. If Brian and Lorraine don’t match on other family lines, then it would appear that their ancestors George and Edward Henry would have been brothers rather than 1st cousins. One scenario would have Edward Henry as the son of Henry Butler and Ann Russel and adopted by Michael Butler and Margaret Croke. This would explain why no birth record has been found for Edward H as the son of Michael Butler and Margaret Croke.Although this explanation answers some questions, it also raises other questions. If Edward was the son of Henry Butler, then why does family tradition say that he was the son of Michael Butler?

 

Updates on Butler Genealogy

I had an email recently from Butler researcher Peter with a big find:

While I was getting ready to write this Blog, I came across another surprise. This was from the Charlotte County, New Brunswick records:

Anne Butler

Let’s start with Anne. I think that this record should say that her parents were Edward Butler and Mary Crowley. Perhaps this is Julia Ann who was three in 1860 in Cincinnati. If they are the same, This Anne would have been born about 1857 and would be about 44 in 1904.

But was Julia born in New Brunswick or Elizabeth City, NJ?

Here is a Julia in Nelson, New Brunswick:

William was widowed.

This is likely Annie who was a single laundress in 1901:

This is also likely the same person in 1896 in St John:

Just to be confusing, FamilySearch has a different version of the marriage license:

Now Anne is from Boston. I thought that this would be a lot easier.

Anne’s Death Record

One genealogy has Anne dying in Taunton, MA in July 1918. I did find a death record, but is this the right person?

This is a very confusing record. I’ll look at this closely:

  • Taunton was known as Taunton Mental Hospital. Could she have been in Taunton for the ‘senile psychosis’?
  • Husband Silas B. Deshon – As far as I know, there was only one Silas B Deshon. There is a listing for Silas in the 1919 Taunton Directory:

  • ‘Hannah’ was in the hospital for one year and two months. Silas apparently moved to Taunton for part or all of this period to take care of his wife.
  • Hannah is about 63. That would put her birth at 1855. I have about 1857. By the way, this is the first time I have seen her name as Hannah.
  • Birthplace: Elizabeth, NJ – This matches with one of her marriage records.
  • Father: Daniel O’Leary – No idea where this came from.
  • Mother: Mary Croak – This matches her marriage record. Julia Ann’s mother was Mary and her grandmother’s maiden name was Croak or Croke.
  • Place of Burial: New Britain CT – I don’t know the reason for this. This could be something to follow up on.

My conclusion is that this is the same person as the Julia Ann Butler in the 1860 Cincinnati Census – assumed to be the daughter of Edward H Butler and Margaret Crowley. The informant was hospital records, so that may explain some of the confusion.

Edward Butler’s Naturalization Papers

I had assumed that Edward Butler would have applied for Naturalization some time while the family lived in the Chicago area in the 1870’s. It turns out that he applied for US Naturalization much sooner than I realized.

This means that Edward was in the US for the 1850 Census. It also means that he came from Ireland to New York in 1843 then to Boston to St John to Cincinnati to Chicago and back to the Boston area.

Here is one possibility for Edward:

That seems to be this Boston couple from 1855 but the age differential has changed:

Here are the two that vouched for Edward:

These two look to be John Ryan and Hugh Gray.

or

Here is a 27 year old Edward in working at a farm in Dedham:

This is possibly the same Edward in 1855:

Edward Butler in the Boston Directories

Here are the entries for 1848-1849:

Here there are only three choices. Edward was probably a laborer and not a clerk. Below, I show that the Edward I’m interested in lived at 9 Belmont next to Hugh Gray at 8 Belmont Street. That means that the 44 Vine Edward is not ours. That means that the Edward at 18 Washington moved to 9 Belmont or moved out of the area and our Edward moved in in 1849.

Here are some Edward Butler’s from the 1849 Boston Directory:

My assumption is that the Edward I am looking for was a laborer. 9 Belmont seems to be in Charlestown:

There is a 44 Vine Street in the South of Boston:

1851 Boston Directory

This list is similar except there is an additional laborer at 18 Stillman in the North End of Boston:

Here is Hugh Gray in 1851:

Fortunately, there was only one Hugh Gray in the Boston Directory. That means that our Edward must have lived at 9 Belmont Street – unless this is a great coincidence.

There are many more John Ryan’s:

Here is Hugh Gray in the 1850 Census in Boston Ward 8 right next to Edward Butler:

Hugh married Ann Carr in Roxbury in 1847:

One would think that Ward 8 would be in Charlestown, but it isn’t:

Sorting Out Belmont Street

I assume that there was a Belmont Street in Boston that isn’t there today. Charlestown is not in Boston. The 1848-1849 Boston Directory gives the location for Belmont Street:

Here is where Edward and Hugh lived:

 

I would say based on proximity, that our Edward lived at 18 Washington Ave in 1848. That would be when he was 21. In 1856, this area was in Ward 7:

Edward Butler in 1850 and 1855

Unfortunately, the 1850 Census does not show relationships? Who was Bridget Butler – a sister or wife? Also Hugh Gray was from Canada. Would Hugh have influenced Edward going to Canada?

There is an Edward Butler and Bridget in the 1855 Massachusetts Census which reflects June 1 of that year. I have that Edward Butler married Mary Crowley on 1 May 1855 in St John. That means that at least the Edward Butler in the Massachusetts Census of 1855 is very unlikely to be the one that I am interested in.

The Boston Directory 1852

This is back down to four entries.

1856

I see Edward is still at Belmont in the 1856 Directory. Does this mean we have the wrong person?

It could mean that the 1856 Directory was a bit behind the time?

In 1856 Edward’s friend Hugh is here:

1865 Boston

I didn’t expect to see Edward at 9 Belmont.

Edward’s living in Boston could explain why he put down Boston for his wife’s and daughter’s birth in the 1870 Cincinnati Census:

Summary and Conclusions

  • The big news is the finding of Edward Butler’s Naturalization papers. This ties him down to Poulrone, Kilkenny Ireland and Boston around 1850 and gives some specifics as to how he got to the US.
  • Previously, I had thought that Edward had emigrated from Ireland to St. John, New Brunswick, as that would have been a normal point of entry. Edward apparently went against the tide and went from Boston to St John, married, had two daughters there and then moved to Cincinnati, then Chicago and then back to the Boston area.
  • The discovery of the Naturalization record lead to the discovery of Edward Butler in the 1850 Census in Boston where he was living with a Bridget Butler, one year younger than Edward. She also was born in Ireland.
  • Julia Ann Butler was born in New Brunswick about 1857 and showed up in the Cincinnati Census of 1860. After that I did not see her and suspected that she had died young. However, I discovered that she married Silas DeShon in St. John in 1904 at about the age of 47.
  • I further followed up on an Ancestry Tree lead and found a death record for Julia Ann (Hannah) Butler DeShon.

 

Edward Butler Son of Henry Butler and Ann Russel Born 1839 Wexford

Thanks to my fellow researcher Peter from England. He, with the help of Neil, has unearthed Edward Butler. This was no easy task as this Edward was baptized Adam:

George Butler Born 1826 Wexford, Ireland

Adam must have been a popular name in this family as George was also baptized as Adam:

George is important because he moved from Ireland to Cincinnati. He had two wives and descendants who have taken DNA tests. Those DNA tests have linked George to my wife’s ancestor Edward Butler (different than the Edward above). Here is my tree from Henry Butler showing those on the bottom who match my wife’s Butler family by DNA:

Above, I have added in Edward Butler (baptized Adam) next to George.

The Ireland, St John, Cincinnati, and Boston Connection

  1. My wife’s ancestor Edward was born in Ireland. He married in St John, New Brunswick. He moved to Cincinnati, then to the Chicago area and then to the Boston area.
  2. George Butler above was born in Wexford and moved to Cincinnati. However, his daughter Mary Ann who was born in Cincinnati moved to St John where she married Thomas Joseph Murphy. This implies that the family had previous connections with St John.
  3. The Edward of this Blog was born in Wexford, and died in Boston. However, his funeral notice in the newspaper mentions that the funeral arrangements would be of interest in St John, NB.

Here is Edward’s Boston Globe funeral notice thanks to Peter:

Edward Butler Born 1839 Wexford, Ireland

Perhaps this Edward who was baptized Adam can shed some light on these connections. I’ll start with Edward’s death which Peter already found. Edward was listed as married and a longshoreman. He died of pneumonia at the Boston City Hospital:

I found this 1908 marriage:

This Julia A married a man from Digby Nova Scotia. Her parents were Edward E Butler and Catherine Murray. Julia A was said to be born in Boston, but her husband’s naturalization papers say she was born in Ireland:

I can’t be sure this is the right family. It appears that Julia could have been from Cork:

However, other Ancestry trees seem to think that this is the right person:

City Directories

I’ll try some City Directories. Here is Newton, Massachusetts in 1893:

This is at 220 California Street where Edward’s funeral was at in 1891. I assume that b means boards. That would mean that this was a boarding house.

Here is the 1891 Newton Directory:

I get the sense that Edward (Adam) lived in Boston, but had the funeral at a boarding house where Edward H Butler lived in Newton.

Who Was Edward H Bulter, Clerk at 220 California Street?

Hopefully this is more than a wild goose chase.  In 1895, this Edward H was a canvasser:

Here is a bit of a breakthrough in the 1897 Directory:

Here, Edward H makes the switch from clerk to canvasser to machinist. This is important because my wife’s great-grandfather was Edward Henry Butler, a machinist.  In the 1899 Newton Directory, the entry is exactly the same.

By the time of the 1900 Census, Edward H had moved to 26 Crescent Street, Newton:

Here Edward is shown as being born in Massachusetts, where other records have him born in Chicago.

That leads me to an interesting conclusion. My wife’s great-grandfather was living in Newton at least as early as 1891. At that time he was 16 years old, working as a clerk and hosting the funeral of Edward (baptized Adam) Butler who was born in Wexford in 1839. Edward later was a canvasser shortly and then a machinist and moved to 26 crescent street.

[Edit: After further thought, it would make more sense if the Edward H Butler in the Directory and holding the funeral service was the elder Edward H Butler born in Ireland. Subsequent evidence has come to light based on DNA testing that the two may have been brothers. That means that they would have been brothers of the elder George Butler who lived in Cincinnati also.]

In November 1901 Edward H married Lillian Frances Kerivan. However, it seems the marriage got off to a rocky start. Here is a note from the Newton marriage intentions dated 6 November 1901:

This note is in the column titled “married when, where and by whom”. This would usually give the name and address of a priest. Apparently the marriage took place but in Boston, not in Newton where the Intentions were recorded:

Here is the person who married them:

This is also a bit unusual. CL stands for Clergyman. PR stands for priest. That means that this was not a Catholic wedding. Perhaps that is why Edward destroyed the original certificate?

Back To Edward Butler Born 1839 Wexford, Ireland

Other than Edward’s birth and death, not much can be found out about him. Here is a detail from Edward’s death record:

Boston City Hospital was not at 24 Clark Street, so I assume that is where Edward lived prior to his death. According to Google maps, 24 Clark Street is the address of the Society of St James. However, that Society began in 1958. The Society of St James is part of St Stephens Church:

Ancestry has this listing for Edward Butler in the Boston Directory of 1890:

Here is my guess from 1889:

Here is another guess:

The above is from the 1879 St John Directory.

Then, if we want to accept that he was a seaman, we can consider this record:

Summary and Conclusions

  • I am fortunate to have Peter working on my genealogy as he has come up with so many leads.
  • Peter’s finding of this other Edward Butler has lead to more important clues for my wife’s family.
  • Edward son of Henry Butler had his funeral at the boarding house where my wife’s great-grandfather Edward H Butler lived. Edward was the grandson of Michael Butler of Ireland.
  • I suspect that Henry and Michael Butler were brothers.
  • It was difficult finding clues for Edward, son of Henry other than his birth and death records. However, looking at his information shined some light on details of my wife’s family.
  • While working on this Edward, new information has been brought to light by Peter concerning my wife’s immigrant ancestor Edward. I’ll Blog about that soon.

 

 

 

Updates to Butler YDNA

I see my last Blog on Butler YDNA was about a year ago.  A little or a lot can happen in a year. Turns out some things have happened.

Three Big Y Testers: 2 Butlers and a Batt

There are three Big Y testers that show that they have a common ancestor in the past 700 years. Here is the simplest way to show how these three are related:

Note that while Batt’s SNP is I-Y238315, I didn’t put Batt in that box. That is because Batt and Butler both descend from I-128315. In other words, Butler does not descend from Batt, but both names descend from a common ancestor. This shows that the three testers have a common ancestor who was born 700 years ago. This also shows that the two Butlers who have tested for the Big Y have a common (likely Butler) ancestor from about 225 years ago. Here is how the YTree shows it:

These are the dates that I didn’t have as of my previous Blog. Previously, we were just up to 700 years ago. This new information thanks to the new Big Y Butler tester brings us 475 years closer to the present date.

However, there is a catch to these dates.

SNPs Vs. STRs

The above trees are based on SNPs. FTDNA also tests for STRs. The STRs show that Batt is more closely related to my late father in law Richard Butler than to the other Butler. So which is right? Whenever there is a conflict between SNPs and STRs, SNPs are always right.

Here is how my father in law Richard matches Batt and the other Butler by STRs:

Based on STRs, it looks like Batt is a closer match than Butler. However, by SNPs my father in law matches Batt 700 years ago and Butler 225 years ago. This is due to the variability of STRs or back mutations. Also the Butler above could have had more STR mutations than usual and/or the 225 year estimate for common Butler ancestors could be on the low side

A New Butler STR Match

I was notified recently that there was a new Bulter 37 STR match. That is good news. Also this Butler has ancestors from County Wexford. Peter, who has been researching Butlers feels that Wexford is a likely origin for the Butlers. Here is my father in law’s match list at the 37 STR level:

The new Butler match at the top is a perfect match with my father in law at the 37 level. However, that could change as more STRs are tested. My guess is that the three Butlers on the list are I-Y128364 and the non-Butlers on the list are not. Also notice that the first two Butlers matching my father in law have Wexford roots.

Here is a partial map of Wexford:

I believe that my father in law’s family came from County Kilkenny just North of Waterford. However the distance from that area to Wexford is not far. At any rate, this new YDNA Butler match seems to suggest that a common Butler ancestor could be from Wexford.

What’s Next?

The new Butler match may want to take an Autosomal DNA test. This could be done at FTDNA or at AncestryDNA. The advantage of AncestryDNA is that they have more people who have taken that test. That means a bigger chance of finding matches. The DNA matches will be looking for genealogical connections. The new match could do further YDNA testing, but that is a bit more expensive than the autosomal DNA test.

 

 

AutoClustering My Wife’s Aunt Lorraine’s AncestryDNA Results

AutoClustering is working well. I have previously run an autocluster report for Lorraine’s sister Virginia:

Here are some comparisons:

Virginia’s number of 4th cousins or closer and her SAHs are as of today and I did her autocluster about a month ago. I changed the upper limit for Lorraine to 600 cM because I was having trouble identifying some of the clusters. I had set the lower limit down to 12 because I was looking for distant Butler relatives.

Lorraine’s AutoCluster

Since the time I ran Virginia’s autocluster, the clusters have been arranged differently to show connections between the clusters. This has been a very helpful innovation.

Adding Names to Lorraine’s Clusters

I’ll start with a table:

This table starts with each of Lorraine’s clusters. That is followed by the top match name in the cluster and the amount that top match has in cMs. I just need to fill in which grandparent side each cluster belongs to and which common ancestors the cluster seems to point to,

Lorraine’s Ancestors

These are some of the ancestors that I will pick from:

I am interested mostly in the top part of the tree. The bottom part is where most of the matches will be. The bottom represents the maternal French Canadian side.

Name Those Clusters

To get the ball rolling, I’ll start with Fred. I have have been in touch with Fred who a second cousin on Lorraine’s Pouliot maternal grandparent side:

Turns out that is Lorraine’s largest Cluster:

That’s a lot of Pouliot’s. These could be all descended from a certain common ancestor along the Pouliot or Fortin Lines.

The Second Largest Cluster: LeFevre

Sandra shows up a lot in my analyses. Here she is:

Sandra is also in Lorraine’s Cluster 1:

Skipping Down to Clusters 34 and 35: Kerivan and Butler

These are the Clusters I am more interested in.

Clusters 34 and 35 are the purple and tan Clusters. They show a lot of connections between those two Clusters.

Cluster 34 – Kerivan

Amanda is the first person in Cluster 34, but she has no tree. Donna is the third match in Cluster 34. Here is the paternal side of her tree:

Turns out Donna is a second cousin to Lorraine also:

Cluster 35 – Butler

The top match for Lorraine in her Cluster 35 is Barbara. Barbara has a short tree:

Here is Barbara in a tree with other Butlers:

 

 

She shows up as Lorraine’s 2nd cousin. What is interesting about Cluster 35 is that it includes Butlers from Cincinnati. My guess is that they are related this way:

There is a branch on the left of Cincinnati Butlers headed by a George Butler born about 1826. My wife’s ancestor Edward Butler was also living in Cincinnati for a while. His first son was named George – perhaps after the Cincinnati Georg Butler. I haven’t worked out all the details yet, but the DNA is showing a definite connection.

Lorraine’s Cluster Summary

Here are the bones of Lorraine’s clusters:

It is possible that there are 33 French Canadian Clusters and 3 Irish Clusters. I would have to look at all the clusters to be sure. However, as I scan the clusters, it looks like that could be the case. Here is my best guess:

That means that finding the 1/2 Irish side among the French Canadian half, is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Comparing Lorraine’s Clusters to Virginia’s Clusters

Here is a comparison of the two sisters’ clusters:

This shows that Virginia split in two both of Lorraine’s Clusters 34 and 35. Here are some of the clusters that I tried to identify for Virginia:

So with that comparison and looking at some of Lorraine’s Shared Ancestor HInts at AncestryNDA give me this cluster chart for Lorraine:

It is possible that Cluster 16 is wrong based on the placement within Pouliot’s.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Lorraine’s AutoCluster Chart looked like a mess at first but seemed to sort out between her four grandparents.
  • I didn’t look at why there were so many matches between the Kerivan and Butler Lines.
  • I compared Lorraine’s Clusters to her sister Virginia’s Clusters
  • The new ordering of clusters makes a lot of sense and makes the identification and organization of clusters much clearer.

 

 

 

 

 

AutoClustering My Wife’s Aunt’s Ancestry DNA

My wife’s father had his DNA tested at FTDNA before he passed away. I also had his two sisters’ DNA tested at Ancestry. I’ll use his sister Virginia’s AncestryDNA results for Autoclustering as a stand-in for my later father-in-law Richard.

AutoClustering Virginia

I could have picked either sister, so I picked Virginia for no special reason. Actually, my thought was to pick Lorraine, as she is closer in age to Richard, but I picked Virginia. I chose a low threshold of 12 cM for the AutoClustering.

First the Genealogy

Virginia and siblings have half French Canadian and half Irish DNA. In my experience, the French Canadian DNA tends to take over. This is due to the common ancestry of French Canadians, and many descendants who have tested.

The top part of the tree is Irish and the bottom is French Canadian. I am more interested in the top because there are some missing black arrows. Those are the places where there are missing ancestors. The ancestry is filled in to the level of 2nd great-grandparents. The column on the right represents third cousin, but in many matches this should show as third cousin, once removed.

Looking at Virginia’s AutoCluster

Here is the key for Virginia’s Clusters:

The Key is on the Chart, so there are grey dots representing those that didn’t fit well into the clusters. Cluster 1 is no doubt French Canadian. Between Cluster 18 and 19, the cluster size goes down from three to 2. These numbers do not include Virginia who is in every cluster.

Name That Cluster

The game is to name the clusters. Before I do that, I notice that there are not too many grey dots between the first and second Cluster. I take that to mean that these two groups are not closely related. Perhaps the green Cluster is Irish and the orange is French Canadian.

Identifying Cluster #1

This should be easy as there are so many people. First I go to the list of people below the chart and search for Virginia’s second cousin Fred who is an avid genealogist. He is there in Cluster #1.

Fred’s shared ancestors with Virginia are here:

However, there are 120 members in Cluster #1. Next, I went down the list of people in Cluster #1. The last person I had notes for was Girard. Here is Michel’s Shared Ancestor Hint (SAH) with Virginia:

Michel has 72 people in his tree. The problem with that is that Michel and Virginia could have shared ancestors on other lines. Here is Louis Marie Henri Girard and his wife on Virginia’s tree:

I would say that Louis Girard is a hint as to where the cluster is going. I’ll try another SAH. The next person going up the list has six SAH’s and a large tree. Here is the most likely source of the DNA that is shared between Virginia and this match:

These matches so far tend to be around the bottom of Virginia’s French Canadian Tree:

I’ll try one more. The next SAH has over 1,000 people in his tree and his common ancestor with Virginia is Francoise Gagne:

So far, I would say that these are all ancestors of Elizee Fortin and Rosalie Gagne. It is even possible that I could name this Gagne/Girard if the person with six SAH’s has an ancestor there. It turns out our six-matcher has these ancestors also:

That means I would tend to call this a Gagne/Girard Cluster. I like to get the name as far back as possible to be the most specific name for the cluster.

I’ll look at one more SAH to make sure. Lucie has a good tree, but six SAH’s. For some reason her first hint puts her at 6th cousin once removed to Virginia and her second hint puts her at 6th cousin to Virginia. I’ll choose the 6th cousin which goes to Pierre Girard and Marie Anne Vesina. This ancestral couple is also on the Gagne/Girard Line. This is not a life or death decision, so I’ll go with the Gagne/Girard Label for Cluster #1:

That’s one down and 33 to go. I like to keep track of these clusters in a spreadsheet:

This way I can expand to the right for Richard at FTDNA eventually.

I’m Guessing Cluster #2 Is Irish

However, as I look at my notes nicely displayed by AutoCluster, I see that this cannot be:

This means that the LeFevre side is not as closely matched to the Pouliot side as the Pouliot side matches some other names. This makes sense also.

Name That Cluster #2

It is obvious that Cluster #2 is on the LeFevere side. However, I want to be more specific as in Cluster #1 above. The match at the bottom of the list shows a SAH of Maguerite Anger. The husband is not shown as he is shown as marrying her three times. However, I assume that the husband should be there also:

The husband is Joseph Methot. I am now just showing the line of Virginia’s LeFevre grandfather Joseph Martin as we know that this cluster is along the LeFevre Line. If I were to name this Cluster based on a sample size of one, it would be Methot/Anger. However, I want to be more sure and it is easy to look at these SAH’s by just clicking on a link from the AutoCluster list of matches in Cluster #2.

Going up the Cluster 2 Match List from the bottom, the next SAH is here:

This brings the name of this cluster one generation towards the present:

Based on a sample size of two, I would name this cluster LeFevre/Methot.

I’ll call in Jane for a tie-breaker:

I can see that Jane adds evidence to my previous guess:

Cluster #3 – French Canadian?

By looking at the Cluster Graph above, it appears that the red cluster will be more closely allied to the Pouliot side. There are not as many linked trees for Cluster #3:

Judy has an unlinked tree:

Cousin Fred is not in this Cluster even though he is closely related. This could be a case that he is too closely related to Judy. Judy’s tree shows that she is a second cousin to Virginia on the Pouliot/Fortin Line. This seems to be the best name for this Cluster:

Cluster 4 – Slim Pickings on Trees

Cluster 4 has very few linked trees:

The match names appear to be French Canadian, so that is a hint. The largest tree above is private. From the above three clusters, it appears that I am getting different flavors of French Canadians. Match #3 has a small unlinked tree:

I really don’t want to build out this tree, though I could. I see Gobeil in Virginia’s tree here:

Alexandre is Virginia’s match #6 on Cluster 4. He also has an unlinked tree:

Here is another small tree from Match #8:

Again, I’m not willing to build out his tree. Match #9 had an unlinked tree and Match #10 had a small tree, but they were not helpful. I’ll go with Pouliot/Gobeil for now.

Cut to the Irish Side

This is going slowly, so I’ll start looking for Irish matches. Here is a Leeds color analysis that I did for Virginia about three months ago:

I need to pick out some of these green and blue matches and see where they cluster. The first match is Donna. She matches at 417.5 cM, so this is a case where I set the upper limit too low. The four in a row green Kerivan matches are also all too high for the upper match limit that I picked. Here is part of the tree of the first Butler match that didn’t get filtered out:

The common ancestors are Edward Butler and Mary Crowley. This match is in Cluster 12:

Based on the notes, I can see that I have been tracking three out of four of these matches. I wrote a message to John to see if he has any family history. It may be that he pre-dates the Butler/Crowley connection by one generation.

This Butler/Crowley Cluster is small, but important.

Is There a Kerivan in the House?

The green in the Leeds Color Analysis above stands for Kerivan. Here are some Kerivan descendants in Cluster 11:

I have written about Gaby already as a Kerivan relative. She is Thomas’  Aunt. Here is the tree showing how Virginia and Gaby connect:

Virginia is a second cousin once removed to Gaby and 2nd cousin twice removed to Thomas. Here are the common ancestors on Virginia’s tree:

David: Match #2 in Cluster 11

Here is David’s tree on his maternal side:

I am interested in David’s tree enough that I will build it out a bit. I’m curious to find the common ancestors. I start with David and mark the tree private at Ancestry.  Here is David’s maternal grandmother Joan Kerivan in 1940 Newton, Massachusetts:

Here I use a split screen for working on David’s tree. The tree I am making is on the left and David’s tree is on the right:

I accepted Ancestry’s Joseph Edward Kerivan hint but not his wife as it was different than what David had. It seems like it should be an easy tree. I have the DNA match, the Kerivan name and the right area (Newton, MA).

Here’s David’s great-grandfather in 1910:

Next, Joseph’s birth record comes in handy:

I see on George E Kerivan’s marriage record, that his parents are John Kerivan and Alice. These are the couple that I am looking for. Here is part of my selective tree for David:

Alice is no doubt my wife’s ancestor Alice Rooney.

As an added bonus, I color-coded the Clusters in my summary spreadsheet based on my wife’s Aunt’s grandparents. These are the same colors I used in the Leeds Color Analysis.

The clusters are now taking shape. The magnitude of the French Canadian matches compared to the two Irish clusters is obvious.

Comparison with the Leeds Color Method

Next, I put the cluster names by the appropriate names from the previous Leeds Analysis I did:

I see that one of the people from the Butler Cluster was not in this analysis, so he must have gotten his test results since I did this analysis three months ago. The first green block that doesn’t have an assigned cluster represents Russel. Russel is in Cluster 7.

Cluster 7 – Kerivan?

Here are Virginia’s seven Cluster 7 relatives:

Here is Russell’s tree on his mother’s side:

Time for a Quick Tree for Russell

I found this hint at Ancestry for Thomas Kerivan:

This gets me to where I want to be. Here is my quick tree for Russell:

One might wonder why there is another Cluster for this same couple. It could be that one Cluster is Kerivan and one is Rooney.

Here is Sandra. She has the same mother as Russel, so I could have saved myself some time:

Actually, there is a Rooney in this cluster, so I’ll call this the Rooney/Kerivan Cluster.

There are a few new people in the Rooney/Kerivan Cluster that I should get in touch with.

Cluster 19 – A Butler Cluster on the Outskirts

Here are Brian and Michael:

I associated Brian with the Butler family due to a shared match with Patty. Neither Brian nor Michael have family trees, but it would be worthwhile to follow up with these two.

My guess is that the Cluster 19 Butler predates the Cluster 12 Butler/Crowley families. This is a good place to be as I am trying to pin down a place in Ireland where the Butlers came from.

Where is Patty?

One Butler DNA match I have been tracking is Patty. I couldn’t find her in the AutoCluster. Based on her shared matches at AncestryDNA, I would have expected her to be in Cluster #12. AutoCluster provides a list of names that didn’t match other people. I didn’t see her in that list either.

Summary and Conclusions

  • AutoCluster by Genetic Affairs continues to be a fun and useful tool to use to sort through your DNA matches.
  • The program is similar to the Leeds method but is more useful and takes the guesswork and human error out of the equation for the most part.
  • AutoCluster gives a visual as to where the bulk of the DNA matches are
  • In this Blog AutoCluster highlighted some important new matches. It would be worthwhile to contact these new matches.
  • The list of people in the Ancestry Clusters is especially helpful. I can click on each name and quickly go to their AncestryDNA match and see if they have a SAH or linked or unlinked tree.
  • Even though AutoCluster is one of the best things since sliced bread, it is not perfect. I could not find Patty in the clusters. Also the runs that I get are spotty. It seems to work about half the time for me. I would like to get better results at Ancestry for myself and my mother, but am not able to get results at the thresholds that I want. It may be that these glitches will be fixed as this is such a new tool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Painting My Wife’s Chromosomes

In this Blog I’ll paint my wife’s chromosomes. I use DNAPainter for this. This utility requires a subscription for over one painting, and I’m over that now, so I subscribed. Painting DNA is taking all your DNA matches and painting them onto your chromosomes. The match that you have shows that you have DNA from a common ancestor. So what I will be showing is where my wife, Marie, inherited her DNA on which chromosome and from which ancestor. Hopefully, it will become clear as I go along.

Right now I have profiles for my mother, myself and two siblings:

Next, I’ll create a profile for Marie. DNAPainter just needs to know her name and that she is a female. This makes a difference for the X Chromosome as women have two of those.

Which Matches Do I Paint for Marie?

I will look at painting no matches closer than those that represent Marie’s grandparents. That means that I don’t want to count matches from 1st cousins. Full 1st cousins share two grandparents. The first two people who I will paint will be Marie’s father’s 1st cousins Patricia and Joe. That makes them first cousins once removed to Marie.

Marie’s match with Patricia and Joe will show up on her map as DNA from Joseph LeFevre and Emma Pouliot. That is because we don’t know who the DNA came from. It should be part LeFevre and part Pouliot. Here is Marie’s match with Patricia from Gedmatch.com:

Here is what that looks at DNAPainter:

The DNA is on Marie’s paternal side, so that is on the blue bar. The key at the bottom says who the DNA is from. Now Marie has gone from zero to 7% of her chromosomes painted with adding just one cousin:

Marie also matches Patricia on her X Chromosome. So I added that. Next I need to add Patricia’s brother Joe. This time I’ll paste in his X Chromosome match along with the other matches. Gedmatch has you do a different query for the two. Adding Joe brings Marie’s painted DNA up to 10%. Now we can expand the Chromosomes to see the details:

 

The X Chromosome expands to this:

This shows that Joe shares more X Chromosome with Marie than Patricia does. Next I added RL who matches only on the LeFevre side as far as I know. This added 1% to Marie’s map and got her up to 11% mapped.

Here is Marie’s match with RL on Chromosome 12. Where RL matches Joe, that is likely all LeFevre DNA. On the right where RL does not overlap with Joe and Patricia, we don’t know if the DNA was from the LeFevre side or Pouliot side.

[Note: I have RL in the wrong color which I correct later in the Blog.]

Adding Some Pouliot DNA

Marie has some matches with Pouliot only DNA. These matches are with Fred, Don and Sleuth:

Now, wherever Marie has a match with Fred and Patricia and those matches overlap, that will show that the match with Patricia was on the Pouliot side and not the LeFevre side.

Here is a new color and this gets Marie’s painted chromosomes up to 13%. Here is Don on expanded view on Chromosome 1:

The green overtook the pink in the expanded view. This is OK as Pouliot is the more specific match and the older one. This tells us that Marie’s match with Patricia on Chromosome 1 is from the Pouliot side and not the LeFevre side. Next I added Don’s two siblings to bring Marie’s painted DNA up to 14%

So far, I have painted 6 matches to Marie’s paternal side. This represents only one of her grandparents – the LeFevre side. This 14% represents 27% of Marie’s paternal side DNA.

Starting Marie’s Maternal Side DNA Painting

Marie has Ellis and Upshall grandparents on her maternal side. Marie matches her half great Aunt Esther on the Upshall side. The half part is important as it narrows down the match to one of Marie’s great-grandparents.

This brings Marie’s mapped DNA up to 20%. So we are one fifth complete.

Here I wanted Frederick on the bottom as he is on the maternal side. I also added a line by choosing Joseph LeFevre/Emma Pouliot. I then chose Edit Group and I checked a box saying I wanted a line below this group.

More Painting

I don’t want to stop now. Marie’s next match at Gedmatch is a first cousin once removed, but he is a younger cousin. He shares two of Marie’s grandparents as common ancestors, so we won’t map him. After Nick is Gaby. Gaby is Marie’s second cousin on Marie’s paternal side. This match represents Marie’s Irish side.

This brings Marie to 23% mapped:

Next: More LeFevre DNA

Sandra has been a big help in uploading her DNA to Gedmatch. She tells me that she is a third cousin to Marie. Their common ancestors are  Edmond Lazare Lefevre and Leocadie Methot.

Sandra manages three DNA kits including her own that are close matches to Marie. I assume that they all have LeFevre and Methot common ancestors. I mentioned RL above but didn’t put in the correct common ancestor.

Here I will want to move RL to another group, but I haven’t set up that group yet, so I’ll add KK first.

Here I have added a new pair of ancestors for Marie on her maternal side with a splash of tangerine. I moved the ancestral pair down one on the key so they would be with the other LeFevre’s. Next I moved RL to the Edmond LeFevre Group. I see now that I could have created a new group before also.

I then added Sandra which brings the mapped number of segments up to 116.

Adding Anne to Marie’s Maternal Side

As I go down the list, it takes a little bit more to figure out where the people fit in. This looks to be the right tree for Anne:

Marie is Joan’s daughter, so that makes Marie a second cousin twice removed to Anne. So we are quickly back to about 1812 with Marie’s DNA.

This is only the second maternal ancestral pair. Unfortunately, I don’t have a last name for Elizabeth. Crann would be a guess. We still have no ancestors for Marie’s fourth grandparent: Ellis.

Ronda: An Ellis Match for Marie

Ronda is next on the list at Gedmatch:

Ronda is a third cousin to Marie. Note that there is another shared ancestor hint. However, it is further out and also on the Ellis line.

As this is a new grandparent match, it means that there will be no overlaps with any other matches and this brings Marie’s painted DNA up to 26%.

An Unknown Upshall Side Match

The next match going down the Gedmatch list is Leslie. Unfortunately, I can’t see an obvious common ancestor for Leslie and Marie. I’ll have to wait until I find one.

After the unknown is Sarah. I was able to find her at AncestryDNA. She has a Shared Ancestry Hint with Marie:

This is Marie’s first painted DNA from the 1700’s. The new matches are on the maternal sides of Chromosomes 2, 4, and 6.

On Chromosome 6, I circled one of Marie’s crossovers. That is where her DNA crossed over from her Upshall side in light blue to her Ellis side in teal and orange. The actual location of the crossover is where the blue changes to teal.

Next is another unknown match. This is with Bobby. I can tell that the match is on the Ellis side, but not exactly where. I do see that Bobby also has his DNA at FTDNA. However, the tree is not all filled out there either.

Next is Danielle. I can tell by Shared Matches at AncestryDNA that she is related on the LeFevre side, but the detailed tree is missing also.

Karen and Martha with Newfoundland Roots

Newfoundland Roots means the Upshall side for Marie. I don’t have a good tree for Karen, but I have blogged about her. Based on her DNA, I have theorized this tree:

 

We’ll say I’m right. I have that Henry Upshall married Catherine Dicks. I added Karen’s match on Chromosomes 8 and 9 in lilac:

 

For Martha, I have another best guess tree:

Actually, this is double made up as we cannot easily prove that Peter Upshall is the father of Henry Upshall. However, this is a best fit tree. Marie would be a third cousin once removed to Martha’s maternal aunt. I believe that M.B. is Martha’s maternal aunt.

The good news is that I’m getting more maternal side matches for Marie. The bad news is that paperwork in Newfoundland is missing and it is hard to verify the last two matches.

Michelle at FTDNA on the LeFevre Side

I mentioned FTDNA above. Marie has matches there also. Here is an interesting one with Michelle. Michelle is related to Marie only on the LeFevre side:

Michelle’s maternal grandparents were Martin LeFevre and Mabel Ford. Marie’s great-grandparents were Martin LeFevre and Emma Pouliot. Emma died and Martin remarried Mabel. Here is Marie’s match with Michelle at FTDNA:

Transferred to DNAPainter:

I now have an entry for Joseph Martin LeFevre by himself as well as the couple of Joseph LeFevre and Emma Pouliot.

More Maternal DNA for Marie on the Upshall Side: Edward

Edward and Marie have this common ancestor:

Here Marie and Edward are fourth cousins. They have a common ancestor of Christopher Dicks and Elizabeth Crann. I’m not positive about the Crann. Here I made a couple of mistakes:

First I forgot to assign this to the maternal side and secondly I already had an entry for Christopher Dicks. Fortunately, DNAPainter had a way for me to merge this group into the right one on Chomosomes 9 and 11 (Chistopher Dicks in purple).

This gets Marie up to 150 segments mapped.

Marie and Wallace at MyHeritage

Marie has a good match with Wallace at MyHeritage. I uploaded Marie’s results there while writing this Blog.

Here is where I have Wallace:

Wallace is a 2nd cousin once removed to Marie. At this point, Marie’s maternal chromosomes are 22% filled in and her paternal chromosomes are 36% filled in. A lot of paternal LeFevre relatives have tested. Here is Marie’s maternal side only:

That is what 22% filled in looks like.

Adding Cheryl and More of Martha’s family

Cheryl has Dicks ancestry. I have written many Blogs on this family and how their descendants match up by DNA.

Cheryl is on the bottom left. She is a fourth cousin once removed to Marie. As there are some missing lines in Marie’s Newfoundland genealogy, there may be other ways Marie is matching some of these Newfoundland descendants. Here is how Cheryl compares with some others on Chromosome 9:

The light blue represents Christopher Dicks born 1784 or his wife Margaret. Many people descend from this couple.

Next, I’ll add Martha’s brother and Martha. Some of these matches are not adding new DNA.

Back to LeFevre

Here is a match on the LeFevre side:

This is on the French Canadian side. Note that there are two other pairs of shared ancestors. However, this is the most recent.

This is Marie’s first mapped French Canadian DNA from the 1700’s (in red). It is interesting that Marie and Kbou also match by XDNA. In order for this X match to occur, there cannot be any two males in a row in Marie’s or Kbou’s ancestries. Looking at their trees above we see that is indeed true. This match brought Marie’s mapped chromosomes up to 30%.

I could keep on going, but I’ll stop here.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I mapped 30% of Marie’s chromosomes using DNAPainter and matches from Gedmatch, FTDNA and MyHeritage. AncestryDNA was helpful to provide trees but it does not provide the detailed DNA information needed to map the chromosomes.
  • I was able to paint 10% of Marie’s chromosomes with two of her first matches. After that, things went more slowly.
  • Of Marie’s four grandparents, Butler matches are the most rare. Marie had one Butler match.
  • I gave an example of a crossover.
  • Marie has DNA mapped on every chromosome. However, a paternal or maternal side may be missing.
  • It would be interesting to create a DNAPainter map for Marie’s mother and father and see how they compare to Marie’s map.