Finding My DNA Cousin Brenda at 23andMe

In my previous Blog, I figured out who my 23andMe cousin Kat was. I have another DNA cousin at 23andMe Brenda. I’d like to figure out where she fits in. 23andMe thinks that Brenda could be my third cousin:

Brenda and I share some DNA on 4 different chromosomes.

Here is another hint:

Brenda and I also have DNA matches with Kat and Stephen. The match with Kat is more important, because if it is right, then Brenda is a 2nd cousin to Kat. Here is a DNA matching Frazer tree that I have:

If I am a third cousin to Brenda and she is on the Frazer tree, then our common ancestors would be George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. If Brenda is a second cousin to Kat, then Kat and Brenda’s common ancestors should be William Frazer and Amanda Skoog. There are other possibilities, but that seems the most likely.

A Look at Stephen

Actually Stephen’s match is interesting also:

Stephen is on the lower left. If I’m right, Brenda is in the Frazer section in the middle. Steve and Brenda would be 5th cousins on the McMaster side. I am a closer match to Stephen on our Clarke side.

Painting Brenda

Using DNA Painter, an online utility, I can put Brenda’s matches next to my other matches. Here are some of Brenda’s details:

Here are a few possible surprises. I painted Brenda to George Frazer and Margaret McMaster based on Brenda’s match to Kat and me. However, DNA Painter has hints that Brenda is related further out at the level of James Frazer, Violet Frazer and Richard Frazer.

When I choose “show overlapping segments”, I get this:

When I look at my larger DNA map, I see this:

My cousin Paul and Brenda have a small overlap, but not enough to be picked up by DNA Painter as being significant.

Pro’s and Con’s of Putting Brenda on My DNA Tree Where I Did

I put Brenda as having the common ancestors with me of George Frazer and Margaret McMaster.


  • At third cousin to me and 2nd cousin to Kat, it seems like Brenda should be a great-granddaughter of William Frazer.
  • William Frazer had three sons. Kat descends from James Robert Frazer. That means that Brenda could descend from Albert William Frazer or Walter Stanley Frazer. I don’t know much about Walter Stanley, so that is a possibility.


  • I would expect Brenda to have more overlap with other descendants of George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. Instead Brenda overlaps with more distant Frazer relatives.
  • With Margaret’s double McMaster parentage, I would have expected more matches with McMaster descendants – though she does match Stephen.

Walter Stanley Frazer 1924-1996

On October 10, 1937, Walter was 13 and sailing out of Galway – apparently on his own:

This stone at the National Cemetery in Culpepper, Virginia gives a very short summary of Walter’s life:

The affidavits for Walter’s Petition for US Naturalization were taken in London in 1944:

Here is some more personal information from the same document when Walter was 20:

Here is some information on Walter’s wife:

Julia was flying from Paris to New Jersey with her husband and three young children in 1959. They lived in Miami. If Brenda was part of this family, perhaps she was too young to take this trip.

I did find one of the daughters. I think that this is her school photo from Vienna Virginia, but I’m not sure. The other information would be right. mentions her two brothers but not a sister. So this may not be the family for Brenda.

One Other Possibility for Brenda

I have that my great-grandfather’s brother Hubert Alexander Frazer had a son named Calvin Coolidge Frazer and Calvin had a daughter named Brenda. I will try to get in touch with at least the most likely candidate I find on Facebook. The problem with this possibility is that Brenda should be a first cousin once removed to my second cousin once removed Paul. Brenda only shows a small overlap with Paul. That may be because I show a smaller than average match with my cousin Paul.

At some point Calvin Coolidge Frazer ended up living and dying in Sacramento. That is interesting as some Frazer’s from other branches ended up in that city also.

Summary and Conclusion

  • After figuring out one of my Frazer DNA matches at 23andMe (Kat), I tried to set out to figure out how I matched Brenda. Based on how Brenda matched Kat and me I guessed that Brenda might descend from a Great Uncle of Kat. There was one person who fit that category: Walter Stanley Frazer. I looked up some information on Walter, but I couldn’t find any record of Walter having a daughter named Brenda.
  • I painted Brenda’s match to me with DNA Painter and found that she did match me on my Frazer side. However, I was expecting some more matching on the McMaster side.
  • I looked into a Brenda Frazer who was the granddaughter of Hubert Alexander Frazer. She is a good  candidate as she has the right first name. I’ll give a shot a contacting her through Facebook. I’m pretty sure given the level of match Kat and I have with Brenda, that our common ancestors were George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. However, I am still interested in confirming that belief.
  • I thought this exercise would be easier than it was. Due to the randomness of DNA inheritance, matches do not always match up with each other at the same place.
  • Even if I don’t figure out who Brenda is, I have found out some more information about two branches of the Frazer Family.


I did hear back from Brenda through 23andMe. She said I was right in my guess:

Brenda and I are at opposite ends of the tree. Brenda is also a first couisn to Paul. I had Paul’s DNA tested at FTDNA and uploaded his results to for analysis. Brenda got my painted chromosome up from 41% overall to 42%:

I changed my matches with Brenda to gold colored for those matches where DNA Painter showed we had an overlap with anouth Frazer match.

A 23andMe DNA Match with Frazer Relative: Kat

It took me a while to figure who Katherine was at 23andMe. Here is how Katherine and I match by DNA at 23andMe:

Here is what 23andMe says:

Katherine and I should be in the range of third cousins. Fortunately, Katherine posted a photo at 23andMe. After looking at Facebook photos, I found some that were the same as Katherine’s photos at a Frazer Family Facebook page we are both on. The mystery is solved.

Here is how I show Kat on our Frazer tree:

I recently wrote a Blog on Rebecca and our match at AncestryDNA. So it has been good to find these Frazer DNA matches. My blog on Rebecca showed that I matched her more on the McMaster side than the Frazer side. This was not surprising as our common ancestor Margaret McMaster had two McMaster parents. Also Kat’s grandfather James Robert Frazer born 1927 married a McMaster. The advantage of Kat’s test compared to Rebecca’s DNA test is that I will be able to see how Kat and I match on specific chromosomes.

Painting Kat’s DNA Match

There is a web tool called DNA Painter that I use to show where my DNA matches are. Here is my current DNA Map:

This shows my paternal and maternal sides. My Frazer matches are on my paternal side. This shows I am 41% painted overall. I circled some of the areas that Kat could match me.

Here is just my paternal side where I am mapped at 50%:

I have a lot of green as I have a lot of Hartley 2nd cousins.

Adding Kat to the Mix

Kat got my DNA mapping up a percent from 50% to 51% on my paternal side. I mapped our DNA matches to “Frazer McMaster 1838” because that is where our shared DNA comes from.

Next, I’ll expand Chromosome 19 as that is where our largest match is:

Kat’s match with me in maroon overlaps with Keith’s match with me in blue. Keith has McMaster ancestry. That means that my match with Kat on Chromosome 19 is from the McMaster side. But which McMaster? For that we have to look at Keith’s genealogy.

Keith descends from Fanny and James McMaster. That means that the DNA that Kat and I share on Chromosome 19 must be from Margaret McMaster. For simplicity, I didn’t make a new box for Kat as Kat and Rebecca both have similar genealogy. Here is Margaret McMaster on the left who married George Frazer :


Because I know something more specific about this DNA, I’ll make a new category for Margaret McMaster’s DNA.

I added a dark green for Margaret McMaster’s DNA.

Emily’s McMaster DNA

The reasoning is the same for Emily who matches me on Chromosome 19, but the common ancestor goes back another generation:

This match with BV seems to indicate that the DNA is coming down from the McMaster side. BV also has Frazer ancestry, but that Frazer connection is too far back in time to consider.

My Chromosome 1 Match with Kat

Most of my paternal Chromosome 1 matches are on my Hartley side:

That explains why I don’t have room for a larger match with Kat. I can’t tell if my match with Kat is Frazer or McMaster, so I’ll leave it maroon which means it could be either.

Chromosome 7

Here I have a pink arrow pointing to my match with Kat. Right below Kat is a match with my cousin Paul and I have that as a George Frazer DNA segment in yellow. If I did that right, then my match with Kat also came from George Frazer. My reasoning is based on the two blue matches. They are from Susan and Ken:

Susan and Ken are related on the Frazer side. That means our overlapping segments came from the Frazer and not the McMaster side.

Here I have turned the match that I have with Kat from maroon to gold to indicate that it is a Frazer match. Right after that I have two blue matches. That represents a crossover that my father had from his mother. My dad’s mother had a Frazer father and a Clarke mother. Where I have the arrow pointing represents the change from Frazer to Clarke in the DNA that my father got from his mother and passed down to me.

Chromosome 10 – More Frazer DNA

I have a small match with Kat on Chromosome 10 that is right below a match I have with Michael in red:

Here is Michael:

This DNA comes down from Richard Frazer to his daughter Violet Frazer. I don’t want a new entry for Violet, so I’ll say that this DNA is from George Frazer. However, the DNA Kat and I share is actually from George’s mother Violet Frazer.

Chromosome 12

Chromosome 12 gets a little tricky, but it looks to be McMaster DNA for sure:

The first maroon match is with my cousin Paul. The second maroon match is my match with Kat. The purple match is with BV. BV had that small match with Emily on Chromosome 19 above. I have the other two pink matches going back to Abraham McMaster born in 1764. There is a lot of confusion about McMaster genealogy and how all lthe McMasters fit together. This cluster of matches may be a hint to unravel that confusion.

For right now, I’ll sign over to the two maroon segments to Margaret McMaster DNA (green segments):

I also showed some of the detail of my match with Warwick and our common ancestor of Abraham McMaster.

Here is Kat’s summary from DNA Painter:

  • The maroon is George Frazer or Margaret McMaster DNA
  • The yellow is George Frazer DNA
  • The green is Margaret McMaster DNA

Kat and I have a lot more McMaster and Frazer DNA, but this is just where our DNA intersects or matches.

Summary and Conclusions

  • The fact that Kat tested at 23andMe made it easy for me to see where we matched, and by how much on each chromosome
  • Once I added Kat’s matches to my other matches using DNA Painter, I could see whether our match was on the Frazer side or McMaster side for each segment where we matched.
  • One match that I had with Kat and descendants of Abraham McMaster may be a clue as to how Abraham McMaster fits in with the other McMaster genealogy.
  • If Kat uploads her DNA results to, she will be able to see how she matches other Frazer descendants by DNA.


A New AncestryDNA Match with McMaster and Frazer Ancestry and My Sister Lori’s Shared Clusters

I was checking my new matches at AncestryDNA and came upon a match named Rebecca who has a Frazer ancestor from Sligo. This got me interested.

Rebecca’s Frazer Genealogy

Rebecca has a small tree. Here is Rebecca’s maternal side:

I sent a message off to Rebecca, but I’ll also try to build out her tree. It seems like this James may be the James Robert Frazer I have in my tree:

The death date is close.

My guess is that here is how I am related to Rebecca:

That makes us third cousins. She is also the first DNA match that I know of from the William Frazer Line. I did hear back from Rebecca who confirmed that James Robert Frazer was her grandfather.

My DNA Match with Rebecca

Rebecca and I match at 64 cM over 6 segments. Rebecca shows on my list as a 4th cousin, however, the AncestryDNA table for a match of 64 cM shows this:

We have a 37% chance of being third cousins and a 4% chance of being fourth cousins. Rebecca and I don’t share Whitney as a DNA match. Whitney also tested at AncestryDNA:

It gets complicated because Rebecca’s grandmother was also a McMaster. Here is Rebecca’s grandmother’s McMaster side:

I also descend from James and Fanny McMaster. Here is another way to show this:


This shows that Rebecca is Keith’s 1st cousin once removed. Also Rebecca is both my third cousin as well as my fourth cousin. This shows how Rebecca would be related to me on my McMaster side. Rebecca descends from Margaret and Hubert McMaster who were the children of Fanny and James McMaster. The people in green have uploaded their DNA results to If Rebecca did this, I should be able to tease out the Frazer DNA from the McMaster DNA. A further complication is that Fanny McMaster who is at the top of the tree is the daughter of Margaret Frazer. However, this Margaret Frazer is from a different Frazer line than George Frazer who is in the tree.

Shared Matches With Rebecca

Here are my shared DNA matches with Rebecca in addition to the shared matches of my siblings and Rebecca at AncestryDNA:

I have information on how I match BV:

BV is a third cousin, twice removed to me, my siblings and Rebecca. This seems to indicate that the DNA connection is on the McMaster side.

Lori and Marshall

In doing the shared matches, with Rebecca, Lori and Rebecca have a shared match with Marshall:

Here is what Marshall has about George McMaster – his 2nd great-grandfather:

It would be nice if I could fit George into the William McMaster/Margaret Frazer Tree above. Margaret Frazer moved to Ontario with most of her children. The best way I know to review Marshall’s tree is to create my own Marshall Tree.

Here is Frederick McMaster with his family in 1911:

Father George was a farmer and Frederick Herbert appeared to be a young twin.

1871 Census

Here is Abraham McMaster and probably his father George in the 1871 Census:

1861 Census

I am finding the 1861 Census difficult to interpret:

There is a note by Abraham which appears to say married. These appear to be the same people as in the 1871 Census. However, the last name is spelled McMastrin. Also Jane shows an “m” for married but also appears to be only 10 years old! I assume that this is the same Jane who shows as 27 in the 1871 Census. A little squiggle in the 10 could be interpreted above as an 18. Here, at least George and Catherine are the same age.

1851 Census

The 1851 Census is stranger still:

Here are 5 McMasters and the oldest is 12. Did the family leave them temporarily? I assume that this is the same family, but I am not sure. If this is correct, and two year old James McMaster was born in Ireland, then that means that they must have moved to Canada around 1850.

The assumption is that Abraham was born about 1837. This seem born out by this grave marker from St. Mary’s Anglican Cemetery in Osprey, Ontario:

Getting from Abraham Back to George McMaster

If Abraham was born in Kilmactranny Parish, that would have been during the time when records were missing. Here is one George shown in the Kilmactranny records:

William son of George and Jane McMaster

Born                                      Bapt. Aug 18, 1843

However, the timeframe is off for the William above unless he was born a while before he was baptized.

Here is where Osprey or Ospry is:

Another George McMaster?

I mentioned another George McMaster in this Blog. This George was married to a Jane and had a son named George Arthur McMaster:

This George was in Vaughan as early as 1847 when his son George Arthur was born:

Vaughan is in York County a little above Toronto.

The question is, was this George, the same as the father of Abraham above? Or put another way, did this George and Jane McMaster have a son named Abraham? The George from my previous Blog married Jane McMaster. The Jane above is believed to be Jane McMaster who is a sister of my ancestor.

Just to confuse things further, Ancestry gives this hint for the George in my Tree:

That hint was based on this tree:

I put a box around my ancestors.

Any Conclusions?

From the above, I would say that the George McMaster who married Jane McMaster is most likely not the same as the George McMaster listed above in the 1861 Census along-side of Abraham McMaster. Two trees at Ancestry have the George who married Jane McMaster dying in 1847. This is likely right as Jane marries William Thompson in 1851.

The fact that Abraham was living in the same or next house as George McMaster in 1861, implies but does not prove that George was the father of Abraham:

My further guess based on the genealogy and DNA is that the shared match between Lori, Rebecca and Marshall goes back further into McMaster history. I have been unable to connect all the McMasters, but the DNA seems to be pointing in the direction of that connection.

More DNA

It seems I have made this simple match with Rebecca into a complicated Blog. That is because Rebecca’s DNA match with my family seems to point to the McMaster side of my genealogy which is a bit convoluted – not unlike the Frazer side.

Here is some more detail on Rebecca’s shared DNA matches with my family:


Here I have added my match numbers with Rebecca as well as my siblings’ match numbers. I have also add match numbers where they appear with shared matches. In scanning from left to right, it appears that Lori has the most shared matches. After that, I added whether the match had an Ancestry Tree. CA means that they have a tree and Ancestry indicates that we share a common ancestor. I share common ancestors with Rebecca, but either Ancestry hasn’t picked up on that yet or Rebecca’s tree is not detailed enough. There are few directions I could take at this point. I could look at more trees or at more DNA. I’ll try the DNA route.

My Sister Lori’s Shared Clusters

Jonathan Brecher has a utility called Shared Clustering. I’ll run Lori through that program as she has the most shared DNA matches with Rebecca. Here is how the Lori’s shared clusters look at a limit of 40 cM:

At that level, Lori has 4 clusters. Cluster 1 represents her paternal grandfather side. Cluster 2 represents Lori’s maternal side and Clusters 3 and 4 on Lori’s paternal grandmother’s side. Rebecca’s match is right in the middle of Cluster 3. Right above Cluster 3 is a match with Michael. He and Lori have a Frazer common ancestor, but because Cluster 3 appears to be a McMaster Cluster, Michael is not in Cluster 3.

I have circled the different Clusters in green.

Whitney also shows up in Lori’s Cluster 3:

Melanie, Emily and Paul don’t show up because they had their DNA tested at different companies. Melanie doesn’t show up on Lori’s shared match list with Rebecca. However, because both Rebecca and Melanie match other who are in the Cluster, they are included in Cluster 3.

Bringing Lori’s Shared Clusters Down to 30 cM

I’ll try Lori at 30 cM to see who we pick up along the way. At this point, I’m just interested in the Cluster Rebecca ends up in:

Now Rebecca is in Cluster 1. A new Cluster for Frazers has appeared in Cluster 2. A few matches who were previously in Rebecca’s cluster jumped ship to the new Cluster 2 at this level. The last two members of Cluster 1 appear to be fairly closely related to Cluster 2.

Here is a summary of Lori’s clusters so far:

Bringing Lori’s Shared Clusters Down to 25 cM

At this point, Lori has gone from 9 clusters to 19:

Rebecca is now in Cluster 9 with a Frazer Cluster 10 right below.

Bringing Lori’s Shared Clusters Down to 20 cM

At this level, I should see Marshall. I had looked at his Irish/Canadian McMaster ancestry earlier.

Believe it or not, I find this cluster detail very interesting.

Clusters 27 – 33

Here is my markup:

There is a connection between the two pink squares. These represent Lori’s Frazer ancestry.

It appears that Violet Frazer and James Frazer were first cousins. The second pink chart above Represents Richard Frazer and his daughter Violet. That leaves the first pink box in the Shared Cluster Chart which should represent the James Frazer side.

However, notice that the second pink square is split into two. A possible explanation is that one of the two clusters could represent the unknown spouse of Richard Frazer born about 1777. I would assume that Cluster 30 could represent Richard’s unknown spouse. Whitney is in this cluster, so I am proposing that Whitney may have gotten more of the DNA from Richard Frazer’s wife:

It’s a theory.

A Clue to Marshall’s Ancestry?

Marshall is in Cluster 29 which subtly separated from Cluster 28. However, notice that Cluster 28 has more matches with other clusters. Cluster 29 has fewer matches. That leads me to believe that Marshall’s genealogy goes back on the James McMaster Line.

This leads me to another observation. That is that Cluster 29 appears to match up better with Cluster 33:

I had that Clusters 32 and 33 probably represent William McMaster and Margaret Frazer. So that tells me that William McMaster could be represented by Cluster 33.

Lori’s Final Shared Clustering

Lori’s final shared clustering should look the same as the 20 cM clusters. The difference is that small matches are added in down to 6 cM. My understanding is that these matches will generally be outside the clusters but associated with the clusters. Let’s take a look:

Here is the detail for Rebecca and Marshall. They are now in Cluster 40 and 41. In the past two runs Lori had 46 clusters. However, in this final run, the clusters got shuffled around – I suppose due to the smaller matches being added in.

Well, I could keep on going, but I’ve gone on too long already.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was happy to find a DNA match with Rebecca. We are third cousins through our common ancestors of George William Frazer and Margaret McMaster.
  • Based on the DNA, Rebecca and I are more related on the McMaster side. That is not a surprise as our common ancestor Margaret McMaster had two McMaster parents and Rebecca’s grandmother is also a McMaster.
  • I also looked at some more distant DNA matches going back William McMaster born about 1790 and his wife Margaret Frazer. They left for Ontario in the 1800’s with their children but left one daughter Fanny stayed behind in Kilmactranny Parish, County Sligo, Ireland.
  • I then did a somewhat complicated cluster analysis focusing in on my sister Lori, her match with Rebecca and their common matches.




Figuring Out a Frazer Photo From Ballindoon, County Sligo

Recently I posted a photo at the Frazers of Roscommon, Sligo and Leitrim Facebook Page. Joanna who started the Page asked me if I could identify the people in the photo. That is a fair question, so I thought that I would give it a shot in the Blog. Also other may chime in. Here is the photo:

I got this photo when I visited Eileen McMaster Frazer in Ballindoon in County Sligo. She generously loaned it to me so I could make a copy.  It looks like the photo has been folded in the past and that someone scribbled on the face of George Frazer, the father. Here is what I have at my web page:

For some reason, these children are out of order.

The Two Girls in the Photo

I show above that there were only two daughters in this family and the rest were boys. That means that it should be easier to start with the girls. My assumption is that as the family had two girls and that there are two girls in the photo that these two girls are:

  • Violet Frances born 1872 and
  • Susan Jane born 1887

That tells us that Violet was about 15 years older than Susan. First, I need to get the Frazer children in chronological order.

Fixing My Frazer Ancestry Tree

Fixing trees is always good:

This is better, but I have no date for George Frazer. I suspect that George Russell Frazer died in 1875:

Perhaps George Russell was named after his uncle:

George William’s older sister Sidney or Sydney married John George Russell in 1869.

Here is a better list:

I’m just missing death dates for William and Susan. So far, this tells, me that out of the six children in the photo, I know that George Russell Frazer had passed away and that my great-grandfather was in the US. He arrived in the US in 1887.

Back to Violet Frances and Susan Jane Frazer

This is my top choice for Susan:

Joanna’s tree has Susan born 27 Oct 1886.  How old is Susan here? If I guess 12, then Violet would be 27. That would also date the photo at about 1899. But then there is a younger person with George and Margaret. I have that Susan was the youngest. If she is the youngest, then is that a grandchild with George and Margaret?

This appears to be a boy to me.

Violet Frances Frazer 1872-1934

I was told by a relative that this is Violet on her wedding day:

Violet married on 7 Jan 1901. That would mean that Violet was 28 in the above photo.

In the other photo, the person who I assume to be Violet is on the crease:

So I’ve gotten myself into a pickle.

Where Were the Frazer Children in 1899?

One guess is that the photo I’m looking at was taken in 1899. Where were all the children around that time? There was a Census in the US in 1900 and one in Ireland in 1901, so that might help. I know that my great-grandfather James Archibald Frazer was in the US at the time. Here is James in the 1899 Boston Directory:

William Frazer

William Frazer married Amanda Skoog in Boston in 1910:

He must have been living with my great-grandfather James then as James had a house at 35 Alaska Street in Boston. It looks like William and Richard made their way to Boston in 1896:

They planned to stay with their brother in Boston:

So that makes me think that neither William nor Richard were in the photo in Ballindoon.

Frazers in Ireland

So that leaves these potential children in the photo:

We know that Violet was in Ireland as she married there in January 1901. Next is Hubert.

Hubert Frazer 1878-1954

Hubert made his way to Boston in 1901. So he could be in the photo. It looks like William and Richard went to Ireland to bring him to Boston:

Both these ships left from Queenstown which is current Cobh, Ireland:

Which One is Hubert?

That leaves me with these two choices for Hubert:

Then that leads me to this photo:

I’m not sure who labelled this photo, but if they were right, it would appear that Hubert is in the upper right. Here is my version of the same photo:


My vote for Hubert is on the left in the photo of this Blog:

Because Hubert and George were close in age, I guess the the brother on the right was George:

If the photo was in 1899, then George would have been 20 and Hubert would have been 21. That seems possible to me.

John Edward Frazer 1882-1870

Here is where I run into a problem. If the next boy was John Edward and the photo was taken in 1899, then John Edward would have to be 17 years old. The boy on the left doesn’t look 17 to me.

According to the 1911 Census:

Edward is 21 so he would have been born about 1890. The 1911 Census further indicates that Edward is younger than Susan:

This is consistent with the 1901 Census:

That means that I need to adjust the birth date for John Edward. The website agrees with a later birth date:

That gives me a revised birth order:

My Current Guess

I have tried to identify these six children previously. This time I went into a little more depth in identifying them.

Hopefully, I came up with the same answer last time.

More on the Dating: 1897?

Now that I have identified John Edward, I would like to date the photo on him. My original guess for the photo was 1899 on how old I thought Susan Jane might be. Here is a chart using 1897 as a possibility:

John Edward looks fairly young. He seems sort of clingy. I’m not sure a 10 year old would be that way. That would put Susan at 10. She looks fairly tall, though girls can can tend to grow faster than boys. David is looking to me like a young 13. George and Hubert at 18 and 19 doesn’t look wrong. Violet at 25 could be right also. One temptation would be to say that everyone was dressed up for Violet’s wedding. However, that doesn’t seem to make sense given the look of  the age of the children.

More on David Frazer 1884-1953

Violet Frazer married James Fairbanks in January 1901. That means that David would have been about four months short of being 17 years old:

Also David is wearing the same style of boots tucked into his pants as in the earlier photo. According to this ship record, David made his way to Boston in November 1912. David is the second person on the list.

This record shows that David had previously been in Boston in July of that year.

A Frazer Chronology

With all that was going on with this family, it would be interesting to do a chronology. This may tell an interesting story. It appears that George moved to Ballindoon in 1866:

Charles Sproule was living in Lot 5a. His name is crossed out on the sheet and George Frazer’s name is added. In the right column titled Observations is 66 which I take to mean 1866. This was probably right around the time he married Margaret McMaster who was from the area and before my great-grandfather James Frazer was born. I was told that the previous person occupying the house could not afford to live there. The Immediate Lessor is listed as John Gethen.

George Frazer 1879-1960

For some reason I am having trouble finding some records for George Frazer in the Irish Census and for his marriage.  However, Frazer researcher Joanna has these records in her tree:

George helped out his Aunt Isabella Frazer at the Derrycashel farm:

George took over the Derrycashel farm in 1917. He had five children that were presumably born at that location.

David Frazer 1884-1953

I seem to be missing some information on David Frazer also. We have two photos of David. The second was taken around the time of the 1901 Census:

According to this record, David married in 1915 in Norwood:

Here is David’s petition for naturalization:

Here he says he arrived in the US in 1908. David’s petition was signed by his brother James and Robert McMaster:

I’m curious as to who this Robert McMaster is. Here is a Robert McMaster who is a Chef in Boston on 1910:

Here is Robert on one of my web pages:

Here is Dereentunny in Roscommon near the County Sligo border:

Ballindoon is to the NE of Lough Arrow. Another interesting thing about Robert is that he stated his intentions to be a citizen in the State of Michigan:

This next record shows that Robert went back to Ireland and traveled with some of his Johnston relatives in 1912:

Robert lists a John McMaster in Ireland that he visited. This was probably his brother John James McMaster born 1858.

Back to David Frazer After a McMaster Detour

David had a daughter named Eleanor Maude Frazer. One reference has her mother as Annie Gray which doesn’t seem right:

I believe that David death certificate also has Annie Gray as David’s mother, so there is some confusion. Eleanor’s mother should be Eleanor Taylor Frazer:

David is shown on the previous page of the 1920 Census. Here is a definitive record:

More on John Edward Frazer 1889-1970

John Edward was the little boy in the photo. He married Margaret Lillie McMaster in 1917 and had a daughter Lily Margaret Frazer in 1918 in Ballindoon. That same year, John Edward’s wife died. John Edward married Waitie Covell in New Hampshire in 1931. John Edward who usually wend by Edward died in Marlborough, Massachusetts in 1970.

Here is Edward in 1940:

Edward was a cook at a private school in 1940. I’m curiouis who Walter Stanley was. In 1935, he was living in Ballindoon. This was actually Walter Stanley Frazer, son of William Frazer and Amanda Skoog. According to the 1940 Census, Edward was naturalized.

At 5 foot 11 inches, Edward is no longer the little boy standing between his parents. Edward is living at 38 Batavia Street. That sounds familiar. I’m guessing this was Edward in the 1923 Directory:

Unfortunately, I can’t find Dover or Batavia in a current Google search. Here in 1926, Edward was in Roxbury:

There was also another Edward Frazer who was a fireman in East Boston at the time.

Apparently Batavia Street is now Symphony Road:

Apparently Dover Street is now East Berkeley Street:

However, there was an Edward Frazer who was a cook at Dover Street in the 1920 Directory. Edward’s petition says he showed up in the US in 1922. Here is the other cook Edward Frazer who was born in Rhode Island shown in the 1920 Census:

Forest Street in Roxbury would have been near where my great-grandfather James lived:

Here is more Naturalization information:

Edward is listed as a chef living at 26 Montrose Street, Boston in 1928. The affidavits were signed by Edward’s brother, my great-grandfather and Edward’s nephew George Frazer:

James’ son George Frazer was born in 1896, so he was actually a little less than three years older than his Uncle Edward. This shows that Edward had a close relationship with my great-grandfather’s family.

In fact, James lived at 26 Montrose Street in 1927, so Edward must have been living with him at the time.

I believe that was this house that I have a photo of:

This looks to be the same house today:

In the older photo there was a porch over the entranceway. Here is another view:

When Edward arrived in New York City from Ireland, he was 33 years old. Edward gives this for his nearest relative in Ireland:

He also knew that he was headed for Roxbury in Boston.

Edward appears to have a lot more money than the average traveler if the handwritten amount is right The story I heard was that my great-grandfather was sending money back to help get his brothers to the US. Interesting to note also that Edward intended to stay in the US for 10 years.

The Chronology

Here is what I have up to 1900:



The last entry was meant to be 1975. I have something in every decade except for the 1850’s. This would have been during the height of the potato famine. Margaret McMaster had these siblings born around that time:

Summary and Conclusions

  • They say a picture is worth 1,000 words, and I have proved that to be true in this blog two times over.
  • I feel as though I have been able to identify each person in the photo.
  • This lead me to identify David Frazer in the Frances Violet Frazer wedding photo.
  • I also updated some information on each of the children of George William Frazer and Margaret McMaster
  • I came up with a timeline of what was going on in Ireland and in the US.

Here is a color-coded timeline:

Addendum – William Goes Back to Ireland

This was an important event. On the 8th of February 1919, William and his family arrived in Liverpool on their way to Ballindoon with his wife Amanda and three children after sailing from Portland, Maine:

This brings up another point. I don’t have Elsie in my tree. She was born 30 Jun 1914 in Mansfield, Massachusetts:

The William Frazer story is quite compelling. William moved to the Boston area in 1896. After living in the US for 18 years, he decides to go back to Ireland with his now American family. In a sense, he went against the trend and against those staying in the US for economic improvement. He left his new friends and family in the US for his parents and family in Ireland and a simpler but more difficult economic situation.

Addendum #2 – Telling the Stories

  • George William Frazer and Margaret McMaster – They remained on the farm in Ballindoon. In 1901, they have David, Susan and John Edward at 16, 14 and 12 helping out on the farm. In 1911, George William is listed as 75 and Susan and Edward are with them listed as 23 and 21. Susan and Edward each married in 1918. Edward has a daughter born May 1918 but Edward’s wife dies less than a month after the birth of their daughter. In February 1919, George and Margaret’s second oldest son William returns to the farm in Ballindoon with his wife and young family. Edward’s infant daughter Lilly dies within days of the return of William Frazer and family. Edward leaves Ireland for Boston in 1922 two months after the death of his mother. George Frazer the father lives to an old age until 1928.
  • Violet Frances (1872) She married James Fairbanks in 1901. After marriage, she went to live on James’ mother’s farm in Drumvoney, County Sligo. I have that she had four children and died in County Sligo in 1934. Violet’s husband James died in 1912.
  • Hubert (1878) – He came to the US in 1901 shortly after his sister Violet married. He married Annie McKinnon in 1917. He had three boys and two girls and became a store owner in Squantum, Quincy, Massachusetts.
  • George (1879) – He moved in with his Aunt Isabella and worked his grandfather’s farm in Derrycashel, County Roscommon. He married Annie Craig in 1915 and had one girl and three boys and died in 1960.
  • David (1884) – He arrived in the US in 1908. He married Eleanor (Elsie) Taylor in 1915 and had a daughter born in 1919 in Boston. David’s wife died in 1927. He married Annie Gray in 1931 in Milton, MA and died in Milton in 1953. David was a cook in 1920 and also have that he was a grocery clerk, but I am missing some information about him.
  • Susan Jane (1887) – She married Edward Crawford in 1918. He was likely the son of Joshua and Kate Crawford from Derreenasoo, County Roscommon.  Edward was present at the death of his mother there in 1931. My notes say that they moved to Northern Ireland. Edward, also known as Stuart Edward died in Linaskea, Fermanaugh in 1963. Susan died there at the age of 85 in 1972.
  • John Edward (1889) – I mentioned some of Edward’s earlier life surrounded by tragedy above. After moving to the Boston area, Edward married Waitie Covell in 1931. Edward was a chef. He died in Marlborough, MA in 1970. I don’t have any record of surviving children of Susan Jane or John Edward.
  • I don’t mention the three older Frazer brothers directly as they are not in the photo. However, I have already mentioned James and William Frazer. The other brother Richard has a son who marries David’s daughter.

A DNA Review of Joanna’s Paper on Her Ancestry

In this Blog, I’ll do something that I don’t usually do. I’ll be looking at the DNA aspects of Frazer researcher Joanna. Here is the title of Joanna’s paper:

I feel I’m in a bit over my head on the land deeds as well as the surnames other than Frazer, but I’ll look at some of the paper’s DNA aspects.

Joanna’s Family Tree

Here is Joanna’s tree on her paternal side:

We see Joanna has Frazer and Fitzgerald in her tree. I don’t see McDermottroe or O’Farrell in her tree, so those must be collateral lines. As such, I won’t need to consider them while looking at the DNA aspects. That should simplify matters.

Joanna’s DNA Match of Concern

Joanna’s sister Janet matches a Marcas which Joanna finds significant. Here is a depiction from Joanna’s paper of Janet and how she matches Marcas and other Frazer relatives by DNA on Chromosome 14:

Janet and Shared Clustering

Before I look into Chromosome 14, I will look at Janet’s Shared Clustering at AncestryDNA. Shared Clustering is a program developed by Jonathan Brecher that is similar to AutoClustering. First I download Janet’s matches and shared matches at AncestryDNA. This is what Janet shows for DNA matches at Ancestry DNA:

In theory, the shared clusters should break down into four categories. Those would represent matches for Janet’s four grandparents. I don’t have Janet’s grandparents memorized, so I’ll have to look them up:

They are:

  • Frazer
  • Seymour
  • Dickins
  • Williams

Here is Janet’s match with Marcas at AncestryDNA:

Marcas shows as a distant cousin at 16 cM. Here is Marcas’ McPartland side:

Marcas and Janet have one shared DNA match who is Gail. Gail is Janet’s second cousin:

Starting Janet’s Shared Clustering

Picking a level to start Janet’s shared clustering is a bit of trial and error. I’ll try 40 cM:

This results in four clusters. However, this does not necessarily mean that these four clusters have a one to one relationship with Janet’s four grandparents. Clusters 1, 2 and 3 seem to indicate that they are related to each other. However, part of the reason for this is that Shared Clustering includes Janet’s two siblings.

Next, I like to open up the Common Ancestor column:

I blurred some common ancestors out, because they are still living. It looks like Cluster 1 could be Edmonds, Cluster 2 Dickins and Cluster 3 Frazer/Palmer. Cluster 4 is not identified. As Janet’s Seymour side is missing some ancestry, that is a possible area for Cluster 4.

Summing up the first run, I have this:

Putting Cluster 4 on the Seymour side is a guess. Fortunately, Dickens had more than one wife, so we can trace the common ancestor to him specifically in at least one case.

Janet’s Shared Clustering at 30 cM

This brings Janet up to five clusters.

I was able to trace four of the five clusters. Cluster 5 is now the Frazer Cluster.

Two identified common ancestors go back to Archibald Frazer in 1795:

The fact that both these matches are in the same cluster seem to support the genealogy.

Janet’s Shared Clustering at 25 cM

Now the Frazer Cluster is #11. There are 12 Clusters. Cluster 12 seems like it could be related to the Frazer Cluster:

Janet’s 23 Clusters at 20 cM

Now the Main Frazer Cluster seems to be Cluster 10. Janet’s close relatives are in Cluster 11:

The Correlated Cluster column is important. Cluster 10 has some connections with Clusters 2, 4, 17 and 19. However, there is only one connection with Cluster 2.

Here are Clusters 17 through 19:

These are interesting because Cluster 19 is the McPartland Cluster.

Here Cluster 10 is at the top left and Cluster 19 is at the bottom right.

Janet’s Clusters Down to 6 cM

At this level, Janet won’t have any more clusters than at 20 cM, but she will have more matches, such as Marcas. However, when I look for Marcas on the 6 cM, he doesn’t show up. So what does that mean? At the top of the Blog, I mentioned that Marcas and Janet only had one shared match who was Gail. Gail is in Cluster 10. The McPartlands broke away from Cluster 10 to form their own McPartland Cluster 19. However, Marcas doesn’t show obvious affinity to either of those clusters.

Marcas’ McPartland Genealogy

Marcas has his ancestor Thomas or Hugh or Michael McPartland being born in the early 1800’s and coming from Arigna, County Roscommon:

The McPartland Cluster 19 Group have their earliest ancestor as Patrick McPartland:

Here is a map of Derreenargan:

This is not far from Arigna. However, I believe that this McPartland family actually lived in Dereenagan:

These were ancestral lands of the Frazers and would explain why Owen McPartland born 1813 would have married Ann Frazer.

I see one problem with the McPartland connection. The first, is that there is no obvious connection between the two McPartland families. However, even if there was it wouldn’t matter, because the Cluster 19 connection to Janet and other Frazers is through Ann Frazer and not the McPartlands.

What all this means is that Marcas’ connection to Janet and Gail is likely not on the Frazer side like Cluster 19 connection is. It is likely due to a McPartland marriage into a non-Frazer family.

Back to Shared Clustering

I notice that Judith who was not in a cluster previously is at the level of 20 cM:

Judith is found here in the Frazer tree:

Cluster 7 appears to represent the whole Michael Frazer Born 1764 Branch of Frazers. It might be interesting to try to build out the trees of the other Cluster 7 matches to see if they lead back to the Michael Frazer Branch.

Janet and Marcas at Gedmatch

Here is how Janet and Marcas match at Gedmatch:

When I run who is matching Janet and Marcas at Gedmatch, I recognize Betty, Kim, and Rodney:

As there are no other shared matches from known Frazer descendants, it makes me wonder if the match between Janet and Marcas could be happening on Janet’s Palmer side.

Janet and Marcas at MyHeritage

The first person that Janet and Marcas triangulate with at MyHeritage is Gerry:

Gerry also shows up at Gedmatch and Ancestry. My suggestion would be to try to triangulate between Gerry’s, Marcus’ and Janet’s family trees to see if there is a connection between the three – either in name or location. That may give a clue as to where the common ancestors came from.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I ran shared clustering for Janet hoping to figure out in which cluster Marcas fit in.
  • It turned out that Marcas didn’t fit into any of Janet’s clusters. However, the fact that he doesn’t fit in could be significant.
  • I looked at Janet’s and Marcas’ McPartland genealogy. Janet has no known McPartland ancestry and her connection to them on another McPartland Line is only by marriage. That means that Janet’s match by DNA to Marcas should not be on the McPartland side. In addition, it is probably not on the Frazer side as other known Frazer descendants would probably be matching also.
  • I then looked at Janet and Marcas’ shared DNA matches at Gedmatch. Those known shared matches were only within Janet’s known second cousins. Because other Frazers were not involved with this match, it seemed possible that the match could be somewhere down the ancestry of Janet’s Palmer side.
  • I then looked at Janet and Marcas’ DNA match at MyHeritage. Janet and Marcas triangulate with Gerry there. Gerry also has his DNA at Ancestry and Gedmatch. It may be possible to triangulate between Marcas’, Janet’s and Gerry’s tree to find a common ancestral location and/or ancestors.



Looking at Stuart’s Big Y-700

I told Stuart (his last name for privacy) that I would look at his Big Y-700. I hesitate to write this Blog, because I am not an expert on Big Y-700 and describing the differences between Stuart’s Big Y-500 and Big Y-700 is likely to be difficult. Stuart is not part of the Frazer YDNA Project that I am part of, but he is in a line that has had a common ancestor with the Frazer’s before the Frazer were Frazer’s. I am also interested in learning about the Big Y-700 as none of the Frazer testers have tested to that level yet. That makes Stuart a pioneer in this area of YDNA testing.

Stuart at YFull

Stuart has uploaded his Big Y-700 and previous Big Y-500 results to YFull. This is helpful in giving probable dates on when the different family lines had their origin. In the big picture, Stuart is R1a.

I see one difference already due to Stuart’s Big Y-700 test. Here are Stuart’s pre-Big Y-700 results:

Before, the number of years to Stuart’s common ancestors were lower. Stuart’s common ancestor with my Frazer relatives used to be 700 years ago. Now it is 800 years ago. Stuart’s common ancestor with his closest group of R-BY26344 used to be 225 years ago. Now it is 425 years ago. That has implications as there is a Stuart and a Grant in that group. The obvious implication is that the mixup in names could have happened up to 200 years further back in time than previously thought.

Stuart’s Big Y at FTDNA

Here is the same tree shown as a block tree at FTDNA but only up to the YP6479 level:

The thing I don’t like about the FTDNA tree is that it filters out too much. For example, I had my Frazer cousin tested shown as YF09981 at YFull above, but he doesn’t show as a match to Stuart at FTDNA. FTDNA shows a stingy 4 Big Y matches for Stuart

By comparison, YFull does a better job at matching SNPs and gives Stuart 71 matches:

More is better. My 2nd cousin with the Irish Flag shows correctly above, ahead of Hayes who has a common ancestor with Stuart of 1150 years ago.

Stuart’s Private Variants at FTDNA

Stuart shows an average of 13 Private Variants with his match Grant above. I would expect that Stuart would have more private variants than Grant as the Big Y-700 is supposed to pick up more than the old Big Y test.


This is the first page of Stuart’s Private Variants. He has 19 altogether. These Private Variants are shown above as position numbers. Once they find a match in another Big Y tester, they will be given a name. In order for Stuart and Grant to have an average of 13 Private Variants, Grant must have 7 Private Variants. As there are two in this YP6488 group, it would be helpful to have a third Big Y tester. This additional tester should refine the results in make a new branch for Stuart or Grant.

Tie-Breaking Candidates

Here is a group from the R1a Project:

The two testers with the green R-YP6488 results above are the ones who took the Big Y tests. The other two testers with the red R-M512 results would be the best bets for an additional Big Y test to match with the existing 26 Private Variants to form a new YDNA Branch on the tree of all mankind. I note that the one with the ancestor of Arthur Grant has genealogy that goes back the furthest. However, this is still within the 425 year timeframe for the common ancestor. In other words, there could have been an adoption or other name-changing event before the time of 1683 which separated Stuart from Grant.

Stuart At YFull

Stuart has two kits at YFull.

Big Y-500

I assume the shorter numbered kit is the Big Y-500. Here are Stuart’s 3 Private Variants:


This shows on Stuart’s original Big Y-500 test, he had one best quality Novel SNP and two that were acceptable. This SNP has two different position numbers based on the old system (HG19) and the new system (HG38). Due to newer technology and new SNPs being found, there had to be a new numbering system. It appears that this Private Variant already has the name of Y14660. However, different companies may have different names.

Here are the other two  private SNPs or Novel SNPs as YFull calls them:


They are of Acceptable quality. The last Novel SNP has a check by it:

It says that someone did a single test for this and it came up negative. Apparently the person who tested for this was someone other than Stuart.

Big Y-700

I’m curious to see any differences here.

Here are some huge differences. Now Stuart is up to 13 Best quality Novel SNPs. I can see the checked SNP from the previous Big Y-500. This has moved up from Acceptable to Best Quality.

Note that 6 Novel SNPs are marked as Homologous. I’m not sure what this means. I think it means that there is a SNP in a totally different haplogroup that looks the same.

One other difference is that YFull used the VCF analysis for Stuart’s Big Y-500. I checked the Big Y-500 test I had done for my Frazer cousin and the BAM file was used for that. My understanding is that the BAM file should be the one to use if possible.

Note that at FTDNA, Stuart had 19 Private Variants. At YFull, Stuart has 13 Novel SNPs of best quality and three of acceptable quality. This seems to be due to differences in how FTDNA and YFull choose which SNPs they should use.

Here is the side by side comparison between YFull and FTDNA:

For the YFull list, I only used the best quality list. That means that there were 7 Best Quality SNPs that YFull found that weren’t used by FTDNA.

Upon further review, I see that FTDNA has a second page of SNP Variants:


Now the comparison is closer. FTDNA has 19 Private Variants and YFull shows 15 Novel SNPs that match FTDNA’s. YFull has 13 SNPs of best quality and 3 SNPs of acceptable quality. These private SNPs are measuring Stuart’s non-matchedness. In other words, these are SNPs that are waiting to be matched, so that Stuart can form a new YDNA branch.

When I look at SNPs under different categories at YFull, it adds one SNP that FTDNA had. This brings up the importance of YFull. It is not necessarily showing that FTDNA is wrong but gives a second independent opinion to the analysis of the results.

YFull STR Matching

Here are the results of Stuart’s STR Matching at YFull:

When I try to choose Stuart’s old Big Y test, I get no results, so these are based on the more recent Big Y-700 test. The results are interesting, though generally not as precise as SNP results. Stuart’s closest match is correctly with Grant with a distance 0.03. After that, there are two Frazer’s, a Hayes and another Frazer. The last Frazer with the Irish Flag is my 2nd cousin once removed. Clearly the Hayes connection is much further back than the Frazer connection:

Extended STR Matching at FTDNA

This is available, but not in one place like YFull has it:

Here are Stuart’s 111 STR matches. If they have taken the Big Y test, then those results will show also. YFull showed 5 extended results. These are all the Frazer results. The rest of the group can be found at Stuart’s 67 STR match page:

For whatever reason, my second cousin once removed seems to have more than the average number of mutations, or that STRs that changed were the faster moving STRs to begin with.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Based on YFull, Stuart had a large increase of Private Variants or SNPs between his Big Y-500 and Big Y-700 test. Based on the Big Y-500, Stuart had 3 Private SNPs. This went up to 16 Private SNPs with the Big Y-700 test.
  • Stuart’s original YFull analysis was based on his VCF file and his Big Y-700 YFull analysis is based on his BAM file. My understanding is that the BAM analysis is more detailed.
  • Stuarts dates for a common ancestor to his Grant match and to his Frazer matches increased. This is apparently due to the increase of Stuart’s newly found Private SNPs. The more unmatched SNPs you have, the further you have to a common ancestor.
  • The new date for the common ancestor of 425 years before present between Stuart and Grant has genealogical implications. That goes back to before the year 1600. That means that the mixup between Grant and Stuart could go back that long, or it could be that these surnames were less set in stone at that time.
  • I don’t know how to look at Stuart’s old Big Y-500 results at FTDNA. It doesn’t seem like the old results are kept separately like YFull does.



The DNA of Effie Jean (Jane) McMaster Born Ontario 1861

In my previous Blog on Effie, I looked at some possible parentage. In this Blog, I’ll get into some genetic genealogy, looking at the DNA of Effie’s great-granddaughter, Jean. Jean recently uploaded her Ancestry results to Gedmatch for comparison.

Effie’s Possible Ancestry

Based on reasons I presented in my previous Blog, it seems like Effie’s grandparents should be William McMaster and Margaret Frazer. Here is a pre-Effie tree that combines DNA-tested descendants of William and Margaret McMaster with an ancestry chart:

I had guessed that Effie was the daughter of Isabel McMaster who should fit in on the second row above. I note that Jean told me that she matches Keith by DNA. So that is further evidence that Jean and Effie may belong on this chart.

Here I entered Jean’s line in a different color as we are still figuring this out.

Jean and Keith

It turns out that Jean is Keith’s fourth highest DNA match and my brother Jim is Keith’s fifth highest DNA match at Gedmatch. Here is how Jean and Keith match:

The DNA doesn’t tell who the common ancestor is, but suggests that Jean and Keith have a common ancestor. On the chart above, Keith and Jean’s common ancestors are 5 generations away. Gedmatch is guessing that the common ancestor could be as close as 4 generations away. By the chart above, if I am right, Keith and Jean would be 4th cousins.

By comparison, here is where Keith and my brother Jim match:

If Jim, Keith and Jean all matched on overlapping areas, then we could say that the three triangulate and share the same common ancestors. However, the fact that they don’t all match on the same segments doesn’t mean that they don’t share common ancestors. Sounds confusing, I know.

Jean and Emily

The next person I recognize on Jean’s DNA match list is Emily. Here is how they match:

Jean and Paul

Jean has a smaller match with my cousin Paul:


None of my family has DNA matches with Jean but that is not unusual for a 4th cousin once removed. However, one could say that we are related in the sense that Paul and Emily are related to Jean as my siblings and I are 2nd cousins once removed to Paul and Emily.

BV – Descendant of Mary Ann McMaster

BV had uploaded her results to Gedmatch, but now I don’t see them. It could be that there was a problem with the results or a private button was turned on. I wrote a Blog about BV’s DNA here. It’s too bad that those are missing as I would have liked to have seen how Jean matched BV. Right now the only DNA uploaded to Gedmatch is from Jean and descendants of Fanny McMaster. [However, see below in the Blog.]

Jean and the X Chromosome

Jean probably would be a good X Chromosome match with others, but her X Chromosome DNA did not get uploaded to Gedmatch. The reason that she would be a good match is that the X Chromosome is never inherited by a son from the father. So for example,

The places that I have red boxes, show where there cannot be an X Chromosome passed down. This means that BV can match Jean, my sisters,  or Emily by the X Chromosome. In order to show this, we would need to get BV’s DNA back up on Gedmatch and get Jean’s X Chromosome results to Gedmatch.

Jean’s Matches with Frazers

I have a Frazer DNA project, so I’ll check some of these people to see if Jean mathes any of them. Here Jean matches Cathy:

Here is Cathy’s tree as it relates to the Frazer family:

Jean and Cathy’s common ancestors could be Frazer, Stinson, Parker, Moore, or someone not even on this chart. Cathy is on the Archibald Line of the Frazer family. The best guess for Jean’s ancestor Margaret Frazer is that Margaret is on the James Line of the Frazer family.

Jean and Jamie

I found a small match here:

Jean and the James Line of the Frazers

Here Jean matches Toni:

Here is where Toni is on the DNA/genealogy chart for the James Frazer Line:

This means that if I Margaret Frazer placed right and Toni placed right, they would be on opposite sides of the James Line Chart. That means that Toni and Jean would be about 6th cousins, or something may be wrong in the chart. The other possibility is that they match on a  different line.

Rodney and Jean’s DNA Match

Here is Rodney on the Chart:

All the same caveats are in effect for this match that were in effect for Jean’s match with Toni above.

Frank and Jean

I’m looking for trends here. So far the trend is that Jean is matching more Frazers on the James Line side as compared to the Archibald LIne.

Here Frank shows as a closer relative to descendants of Margaret Frazer based on where I have her placed in the tree.

Keith and Jean

I already mentioned Keith above.

However, above, I was thinking about the McMaster side. The assumption is that Keith and Jean match on the McMaster and Frazer sides, so we wouldn’t know which side the matches above are on.

Barbara and Jean

It’s a good thing that I went through my list twice, as I missed Barbara the first time:

Finding BV

It turns out that the Barbara above is actually the BV I was looking for. If I search for BV at Gedmatch by her kit#, Gedmatch tells me that there is no such kit. But if I put in her kit number into Gedmatch for comparison, I can find matches. This is the missing information that I was looking for.

Based on the proposed tree, BV and Jean are third cousins, once removed.  Based on Gedmatch’s best guess, BV and Jean have a common ancestor 4.4 generations away. William McMaster and Margaret McMaster are 4 generations from BV and 5 generations from Jean. That averages out to 4.5 generations. Seeing as a common ancestor would never be 4.4 generations away, that is pretty close.

Triangulation, Crossovers and Chromosome 8

If BV, Jean and Emily each matched each other on Chromosome 8, that would be a strong indication that they each received that DNA from the same ancestor. However, look at what happened. BV and Jean match each other on Chromosome 8 between positions 57M and 71.  Emily and Jean match each other between positions 71 and 104M:

This could indicate a crossover. A crossover is where the DNA we inherited from one ancestor cross over to the DNA we inherited from the spouse of that ancestor. In this case, the crossover could be between William McMaster and Margaret Frazer. Our crossovers are inherited from our grandparents. So, if this is a crossover between William McMaster and Margaret Frazer it would be a crossover that came down to BV or Jean either through Elizabeth Shannon or Effie McMaster.

Here is Elizabeth:

Here is Effie:

Summary and Conclusions

  • Jean uploaded her DNA to Gedmatch for comparison. That comparison shows that she matches BV, Emily and Paul. These four descend from William McMaster and Margaret Frazer.
  • By a proposed chart, Jean would be third cousin once removed to BV. She would be fourth cousin to Keith, Emily and Paul. She would be 4th cousin once removed to me and my five siblings. Jean and my direct family do not show shared DNA, but that is not uncommon for that level of relationship. However, our family has matches to BV, Keith, Emily and Paul and the genealogical connection is more secure.
  • Jean’s X Chromosome results did not get uploaded to Gedmatch. A comparison of those results should give further evidence that Jean shares the common ancestors of William McMaster and Margaret Frazer with BV, Keith, Emily, and my direct family.
  • I was not able to triangulate Jean’s DNA matches. Triangulation would indicate a specific common ancestor. However, the fact that Jean’s matches didn’t triangulate does not mean that the proposed genealogy is wrong. I also looked at a possible crossover between DNA inherited from William McMaster and DNA inherited from Margaret Frazer.
  • In general, the DNA results support the assumption that Jean descends from William McMaster and Margaret Frazer. In order for that to be the case, Effie McMaster would have to have been the child of one of William and Margaret’s children. I had proposed Isabel as that child. However, I have no direct proof that Isabel is the child of William and Margaret and no proof that Effie is the daughter of Isabel. Having said that, there is a likelihood that Isabel could be the daughter of William and Margaret and that Effie could be Isabel’s daughter.
  • So what I am saying is that the DNA gives more evidence that William and Margaret are the grandparents of Effie, but do not supply additional evidence that Isabel is the mother of Effie. The evidence that Isabel may be the mother of Effie has to do with the fact that Isabel was in the right place at the right time and had the last name of McMaster.


Comparing Grant, Stuart and Frazer by YDNA

In my previous Blog, I looked at Frazer STRs and came up with a STR Tree. It is a bit of a mess, but it tries to show where the STR mutations are:

I like one explanation I read about STRs. STRs are short for Short Tandem Repeats. This excerpt is from an FTDNA article called Understanding YDNA Matches:

Our bodies work as copy machines when it comes to the Y-DNA. You can have a copy machine doing 1,000 copies without a problem, and then, the 1,001 copy may have an “o” that looks more like an “e”. And when we use this copy to make additional ones, all the new ones will now have an “e” instead of an “o”. This is a simple way to explain how mutations occur in our Y-DNA when it’s transferred (copied) from father to son. Mutations don’t happen frequently, on the contrary, very seldom, but they can happen randomly in time, which means that I could be one mutation off of my father. That is why all those matches or close matches on 12 markers will in most of the cases go away when they happen between different surnames, and we increased the numbered of markers that are compared: more mutations showing up, which means way back in time when the common ancestor lived.

Ancestral and Derived – What’s the Big Deal?

STRs are either ancestral or derived. That means that they are older or newer. Older or newer is important if you are trying to figure out timelines. It is also important in creating trees and figuring out who belongs in which branch of the tree.

Grant YDNA

In my previous Blog, I noted that the Frazer marker of DYS710 with a value of 34 was probably ancestral:

Assuming that to be the case, that meant that DYS710 = 33 would define the James Line of the Frazers above.

I wrote to Grant to get the STR values from his Grant BigY test. However, it appears that the Grant STR value for DYS710 is missing along with the STRs from 68-111. I don’t know if this is a mistake by FTDNA or not:

Grant Matches Paul by BigY but Not by STRs

Another surprise is that Grant matches one Frazer by the BigY and not by STR matching. Here is my cousin Paul’s matches by BigY:

Here are Paul’s 67 STR matches:

Here Paul matches a Grant, but not the same one who took the BigY test. Note that the Grant above doesn’t show that he had Big Y tested.

How Does Grant Match Jonathan?

Jonathan had fewer STR mutations, so perhaps he matches Grant. Below, we see Jonathan matches many Grants, including the one who took the BigY test:

There is one interesting thing to note here. Look at Jonathan’s match with Stuart who took the big Y. At 67 markers, there is a Genetic Difference (GD) of 3. With Grant the GD is twice as much at 6. However, when the BigY markers are added in, the differences between Jonathan and Stuart are 12 and only 11 with our BigY Grant.

Comparing Grants Extra 435 STRs with Jonathan

Thanks to the Grant family sending me the Grant BigY STRs, I can now compare them. In my previous Blog, I noted these differences between the Frazer Archibald Line and the James Line:

Paul is from the Archibald Line and Jonathan and Rodney are both from the James Line. Grant could be the tie-breaker to tell which values are older for these markers.


What do you think? Based on the above, and knowing nothing else, I would say that 12 is ancestral and 13 is derived. That puts FTY299 as a marker for the Archibald Line. I’ll add that to my STR tree after I look at the other two markers.

DYS523 and Good Old FTY269


Here we go again. The mutations seem to be skewed more toward the Archibald Line. However, recall that these are mutations that Paul has, so they could have taken place any time between Archibald in 1715 and Paul:

If Rick had taken the BigY test, we could have narrowed that down a bit.

A New BigY 500 STR Tree

With this new information, I can build a New BigY STR Tree:

Here I wrote Paul’s results a little differently as I didn’t have room at the top. The first number is ancestral and should apply to Archibald Frazer born around 1690. The second is Paul’s value. This mutation could have happened between about 1715 and when Paul was born.

Any Other Differences?

It seems that there must be. Jonathan had 5 additional differences in the BigY STRs. However, these may be differences between Grant and Frazer in general.

Here in DYS514, we see a difference between Frazer and Grant. We can’t tell which one is older, because we need a tie-breaker.

Parallel Mutation or Back-Mutation

Let’s consider DYS516. I had said that the value of 18 for STR DYS516 represented the overall Frazer line because it was shared by Paul and Jonathan whose common ancestor was the original known Irish Frazer from about 1690. However, Grant has a value of 17 shared with Rodney. In other cases, we had considered the value to be shared by Grant and Frazer to be the older one. What happened? This is a case of back mutation or parallel mutation. It could be that the old value shared by Grant and Frazer was 17. Then sometime before 1690 it went up to 18 for Frazer. Then Rodney’s branch went back down to 17. That would be a back mutation. For a parallel mutation, the original value that Grant and Frazer shared would have been 18. Then at some time Grant mutated down to 17. In an unrelated (or parallel) way, Rodney’s branch also went down to 17. By getting more information on other people’s BigY results, it might be possible to figure out which happened.

There is a less likely scenario where 17 would be ancestral. That would have to mean that Jonathan and Paul had independent or parallel mutations. As this would have happened over a shorter period of time, it is less likely that this happened.


Here is another of Jonathan’s 5 of 435 STR mismatches with Grant:

Note that Grant and Frazer have a difference of two. Again, we don’t know if 12, 13 or 14 was the ancestral value. It could be 13. In that case Frazer would have mutated up and Grant mutated down.


This should be the 4th out of 5 differences between Jonathan and Grant.


This should be the 5th difference or GD.

Grant Vs Rodney

I would suspect that Grant and Rodney’s results should be similar to Grant and Jonathan’s results.

They are the same except the number of BigY STR results tested are slightly lower.

FTDNA Block Tree Vs YFull’s YTree

Both FTDNA and YFull have SNP trees. Sometime one gets ahead of the other. Here is the FTDNA Block tree from Jonathan’s perspective:

Jonathan matches two Frazers at YP6489. Further out he matchs Grant at YP6488. At at more distant level he matches Hayes at YP6479. That doesn’t mean that Frazer descends from Grant and Stuart who descends from Hayes. It just means that these families descend from a common ancestor.

Another point to note is that the Frazer SNP of R-YP6489 is probably a family SNP. That means that this SNP probably applies to just our Frazer branch. YP3189 is one step below YP6488. That means that it is more recent. YP6488 is older and represents Frazer, Grant and Stuart. Because there is more than one family that shares this SNP, it would not be considered a family or surname SNP.

Here is the YTree version:

R-BY26344 Is for Grant and Stuart

This tree goes back one more level and includes dates. Then there is one important detail I missed previously. It appears that Grant and Stuart have a new SNP called R-BY26344. YFull uses IDs, but it appears that those IDs are for Grant and Stuart. This is the part where YFull’s YTree goes ahead of FTDNA.

My interpretation of the YFull YTree above:

Again, this does not show that Stuart, Grant and Frazer descend from Hayes, but that all four surnames descend from a common ancestor born around 900 AD. This shows that the tested Stuart, Grant and Frazer had a common ancestor from around 1300 AD. I assume at that time, surnames may not have been settled or commonly used in Scotland. According to

The use of  ‘fixed’ (or recognized) Scottish surnames appeared occasionally as early as the 10th or 12th centuries, but didn’t begin to be used with any sort of consistency until the 16th century.

Even this, this practice was slow to ‘catch on’, and it took until the late 18th and early 19th century to spread to the Highlands and northern isles.

A New Terminal SNP for Grant and Stuart and a New Mystery

In my previous Blog, I had missed that Grant and Stuart have a new Terminal SNP. They are now BY26344. However, YFull gives a common ancestor for Grant and Stuart at 225 years before present. I roughly called that 1775. The problem is that if Stuart and Grant had a common ancestor in 1775, was it Grant or Stuart? Also, it appears that the Grant and Stuart genealogies don’t match up as to where these families lived at that time.

Grant and Stuart Genealogies

This is an area where I have very little knowledge. I have that the Grant BigY tester’s earliest verifiable ancestor was James GRANT “of Carron”, 1728 – 1790. From a quick Google search, this appears to be Carron:

The Stuart tester has this information:

Charles Stewart/Stuart b. abt 1695 d. 1753 Virginia

This is the problem. If Stuart and Grant had a common ancestor around 1775, then how could Stewart have been in Virginia in the early 1700’s and Grant been in Scotland in the early 1700’s? This suggests that one of the genealogies is wrong or that the common ancestor dating is wrong. The closest reconciliation that I could make up is that Charles Stewart was actually Charles Grant. He had James Grant in Scotland, then came to Virginia and changed his name. I feel uncomfortable making wild guesses for others’ genealogies that I know little about, so I will not go further in this direction.


What if YFull is wrong with their date of most recent common ancestor? Here is the 6488 Branch:

I don’t totally understand YFull’s dating. However, the reasoning is that the more SNPs in your branch, the older your branch. That makes sense to me. For example, the Frazer R-YP6489 includes 6 other SNPs. The Grant/Stuart branch of R-BY26344 has only two other SNPs. It stands to reason that BY26344 would have a more recent common ancestor than YP6489. The Frazer date checks out well, but three people tested. We think our common ancestor was born in the vicinity of 1690 which is about 329 years ago. YFull gives 375 years as a date. That seems pretty close to me.

A scroll-over of the 375 years before present for the Frazer common ancestor shows this:

This gives a pretty wide margin of error.

For BY26344, there is a larger margin of error:

I assume that the reason is that only two people tested for BY26344.

FTDNA is not as helpful with dates. In addition, FTDNA does not have Stuart and Grant as BY26344. Perhaps if they update their tree, they will and there may be a way to estimate a common ancestor then. However, having said that, the a YDNA project administrator has made this prediction for Grant and Stuart in an email to Stuart:

You had 19 Unnamed variants and now you have 19 – 2 = 17 left over. 

Out of these 17 SNP’s there was 1 SNP which you share with Grant.

So both of you create a new Subclade BY26344 downstream YP6488

(btw. FTDNA has not identified this new subclade yet)

Now my best estimate for your MRCA with Grant is about 1200 AD. 

This is interesting because this is an earlier date than what YFull has. The discrepancy may be due to the fact that Stuart did the Big Y 700 and other testers have only done the Big Y 500. Also, I don’t think that Stuart has uploaded his Big Y 700 results to YFull. It will be interesting to see if that makes a difference with YFull’s common ancestor calculations.

The FTDNA administrator further writes to Stuart:

Up to now you are the only one in subclade YP432 with a BigY-700, thus we will only know where these SNP’s are exactly located when they are willing to upgrade from BigY-500 to BigY-700.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Grant and Stuart are the closest YDNA matches to the Frazer family
  • I used some of the Grant and Stuart STR results to find out which of the STR vaules were older or newer for the two Frazer Lines.
  • Grant and Stuart are in a new Branch of R-BY26344
  • There are discrepancies for the date of the common ancestor between Grant and Stuart. These calculations were done by YFull and an FTDNA administrator. These dates may be fine tuned by Stuart adding his Big Y 700 results to YFull and/or by others in the YP432 Group doing Big Y 700 testing.



Frazer YDNA STRs Compared

Blaine Bettinger recently has started a project comparing STR differences to known relationships. It turns out in our Frazers of Roscommon DNA Project, we have four people who have tested where we know their relationships. Here are those relationships:

Rick has tested 67 STRs and Paul, Rodney and Jonathan have tested for the BigY 500. Here is how the numbers look:

Generally, what we see is that going from top to bottom, the further out the relationship is, the more differences there are in the STRs. The numbers between 0-5 above are the genetic differences. Then as the test gets higher there should be more differences going from left to right as more STRs are being tested.

Paul’s Odd Results

However, Paul’s number goes down when he is compared to Jonathan between the 111 STR test and the BigY 500 test. Why is that? My assumption is that the Big Y test missed one of the STRs tested in the 111 STR test. It should be possible to find this STR looking at the results.


Checking Paul’s result, he has a different result from Rodney and Jonathan for marker DYS710. DYS710 is the first marker tested in the 111 STR test. Paul has 34 and Rodney and Jonathan have 33.

Here is Paul’s BigY STR result for DYS710:

Here is Jonathan’s result:

So that is not the answer. I can’t explain how FTDNA came up with a lower genetic distance for the BigY 500 STR results.

A Frazer STR Tree

Over a year ago, I came up with this tree:

This shows the genetic differences. It basically shows that there is a difference of three between the two Frazer lines of Archibald and James. In general, the two lines differ over DYS391 and CDY. At some point between Archibald Frazer of 1720 and James Frazer of 1804, there were two mutations that defined the Archibald Line from the original ancestral Frazer DNA. Then under the James branch of 1804, there are two branches. Rick’s branch is defined by DYS444 and Paul’s branch is defined by DYS576 being 19. However, we don’t know when these mutations occured. For Rick’s branch it could be anyone starting at Richard Patterson Frazer down to Rick. For Paul’s branch it could be anyone between Paul and George Frazer.

An Updated Frazer STR Tree with DYS710

However, the above Frazer STR tree doesn’t explain all the differences. Paul and Rodney have a difference of 5 STRs at 111 markers. I need to add in DYS710. Recall that Paul had a value of 34 for DYS710 and Rodney and Jonatham had 33. But which is ancestral? Or which came first?

The last time I looked for ancestral STRs, I looked at the Frazers more distant relatives: the Grants and Stuarts:

Note that their SNP is R-YP6488. FTDNA now has a block tree:

This block tree was taken from Jonathan’s perspective. However, it shows that R-YP6488 represented by matches with Grant and Stuart is an older SNP. Hayes is from an even older group represented by SNP R-YP6479. I had originally thought that 33 was the older STR for DYS710 but Stuart has a value of 34. Hayes would make a good tie-breaker but he only tested out to 67 STRs.

Checking YFull

Perhaps Hayes has uploaded his results to YFull.

Under Paul’s distant STR matches I see someone who shows as R-YP6479. This is likely Hayes. However, it doesn’t tell me what his value was for DYS710.

Back to the Updated Frazer STR Tree

Assuming that there were no parallel mutations, I’ll try this:

This shows a value of 34 for DYS710 as ancestral. Then on the James line, somewhere between James and Thomas Henry Frazer DYS710 changed from 34 to 33. That means that at least the Thomas Henry Frazer branch is characterized by a value of 33 for for DYS710.

In order to check my tree, I look at Paul and Rodney:

They have a Genetic DIstance (GD) of 5 at 111 STRs. Looking at the tree, we see that the STR differences add up to 5.

  • The Archibald Line has 381 = 11 and CDY = 35-40
  • The George McMaster branch has 576 = 19
  • The James Line has DYS710 = 33
  • The William Frazer branch has 552 = 24

The Mystery of Paul and Jonathan Solved

I posted my question to the Genetic Genealogy – Tips & Techniques Facebook Page. Skip tells me that the 3 of 425 differences are additional differences. That adds up to 7 of 536 STRs. That leads to this observation. Rodney and Jonathan have a GD of 2 of 427. Paul has a GD o f 3 of 425 with Jonathan and 5 of 415 with Rodney. That seems to indicate, if my logic is right, that the extra two mutations are on Rodney’s side.

A BIgY 500 Frazer STR Tree

This leads to another change in the Frazer STR tree. In order to find the GDs between Rodney and Jonathan, I downloaded all the results. These appear to be the two extra differences:

These were on Lines 425 and 475 of my Excel Spreadsheet. This shows that the mutations belong to Rodney. The mismatch column was just to point out any differences between Jonathan’s and Rodney’s STR results.

Here I ran out of room to describe Rodney’s branch at the top of his branch, so the extra descriptors went on the bottom. Keep in mind that STRs can mutate up or down in number. These last two mutations that Rodney had went down in number. In fact, it appears that all the STR mutations on the James Line are going down.

Any Other STR Differences?

Yes. There are a few more differences between the Archibald and James Branches of the Frazers:

Here, Paul represents the Archibald Line and Jonathan and Rodney represent the James Line. Unfortunately, as the newer STR results are not posted on-line, I would not know how to figure out which values are ancestral and which are the newer values.

The Big Picture: SNPs and Haplogroups

The Big Picture is that our Frazers have the haplogroup of R1a:

Most Frazers in general are R1b and not even closely related by DNA. However, before Frazers became Frazers, some of our Scandinavian R1a’s made their way to Scotland and became Frazers when the R1b Frazers were also becoming Frazers.

The R1a Tree

Here is an outdated R1a Tree. It is still nice as it has images on it:

Here is another shot of our Frazer Block Tree:

The trick is connecting the two trees. The Block tree listing at the top mentions R-M198. The “picture’ tree has that at about 6,000 BC, so that is a start.

R-M417 shows as 4800 BC on the picture tree. Next is R-CTS4385:

This shows that before our Frazers were Scots, they were Germanic. Next were the L664 Group:

Our L664 ancestors entered the scene about around 3,000 BC. They still have plenty of time to make it to Scotland. They could have hopped over to England around then, but likely made their way up to Western Scandinavia first.

From there, our ancestors kept branching as families do:

That brings us down to the bottom of the picture chart. S2880. S2880 is right above R-YP432 where the Frazer Block Chart starts:

This shows flags. My interpretation is that during the time of R-YP432 our ancestors were living in Scandinavia. The flag on the right that connects to YP432 is the Swedish flag.

The YFull YTree dates YP432 at 3100 years before present.

Between looking at the Block Tree, the YTree and the R1a Administrator’s Tree, it could be that our ancestors could have made their way to Scotland around the time of Christ. At the time the Frazer Clan was formed, our ancestors were in the area of what is now Inverness, Scotland.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Getting data to a project which compares YDNA STR matches to known relationships gave me a chance to look at our Frazer YDNA STR matches.
  • This lead to a better understanding of what the BigY 500 STR results mean.
  • For the four people who have taken the YDNA test and especially the three Frazers who have taken the Big Y test, I was able to refine the YDNA differences between the different lines and branches.
  • After that I gave a rough overview of how our Frazer ancestors made their way to Scotland from Scandinavia perhaps around the time of Christ.
  • Based on the YTree and other DNA sources, our own Frazer branch of R-YP6489 began around the early 1300’s, but our common ancestor in that branch was from the early 1600’s.



Penny’s Frazer ThruLines

My last Blog on Penny is here. That was prior to ThruLines. I also wrote a Blog on Penny’s sister Toni here. Toni’s DNA is not linked to her tree, so she does not have ThruLines.

Penny’s Genealogy

Penny is in red in the lower left. She descends for William Fitzgerald Frazer. This tree is based on research by Frazer researcher, Joanna.

William Fitzgerald Frazer Born 1821 Ireland

I am interested in William Fitzgerald Frazer:

Penny mentions a biography in her Ancestry Tree:

This was from An illustrated history of Sacramento County, California. Containing a history of Sacramento County from the earliest period of its occupancy to the present time published in 1890. Penny further gives this chronology for William:

This raises questions as to the mother of the first three children. Penny also mentions another daughter Angelina G Frazer as mentioned in William’s will. She is named as Angeline G Law. That gives a hint:

In 1911, Angelina is listed as Gracella. I assume that was her middle name:

This puts William Fitzgerald in Leitrim in the 1840’s. Here is another interesting record:

In this record Angelina “Gracenda” is listed as Augustine. Here is Angelina’s wedding publication from 1872 – not long after her father’s divorce:

This more specifically puts William in Drumkeerin:

That means that William Fitzgerald Frazer lived in Drumkeeran. He had Angelina Gracenda around 1843. His second daughter appears to have been Mary Ann Frazer. Penny has her born in 1844.

Mary Ann Frazer

Mary Ann married in 1864:

About a year later, these two were living in Poughkeepsie, New York:

Thomas Quinton may be William’s father. Margaret Frazier is Mary A’s sister. Poughkeepsie is on the Hudson River:

How Can the DNA Help Us?

Right now on the James side of the Frazer Tree, descendants have been placed into two main branches:

There is an Archibald Branch on the left where Penny is. There is a Michael Branch on the right. There is an Elizabeth branch in the middle also. However, her daughter Catherine Knott married Archibald believed to be the son of Michael on the right side. We can use the DNA matches to test the genealogies above. First, I try to see if the DNA supports that the people within the box on the left match each other. Then I see if they match the people in the box on the right at the appropriate levels.

Penny’s ThruLines

Penny’s first cousin level ThruLines are good:

89% of the time Penelope’s match with Pamela should be a 1st cousin once removed or similar relationship:

Penny’s ThruLines with William Fitzgerald Frazer

At Penny’s Frazer great grandparent level there are no new ThruLines. There are some at the 2nd great-grandparent level:

These matches are from the descendants of Mary Ann Frazer. I’ll start a chart for Penn y:

Penny and Frazer Third Great-grandfather ThruLines

This part goes beyond Penny’s Ancestry Tree to work that Frazer reasearcher Joanna has done:

Here there are 7 matches to Penny on the Thomas Henry Frazer Line. Joanna has that Thomas Henry Frazer was born in Drumkeerin, so there is that connection. Joanna is on the Edward F Frazer Branch. I should point out that Penny has no matches on the Edward Wynn Branch:

Edward Wynn is the brother in the middle group above.

Penny’s Distant ThruLines

When I put the common ancestor up two more generations to James Frazer born about 1720, I pick up two additional matches for Penny:

These two matches were recently added under Michael to explain DNA matches. It would make sense that Penny could match these two, as the theory is that Mary married William Frazer:

Adding Penny’s ThruLines to Madeline’s and Charlotte’s

Although Penny doesn’t share any ThruLine matches with Madeline and Charlotte, they both match some of the same matches as shown in blue below:

I think that Charlotte’s match to JS above is really Janet. The question is: if Penny, Charlotte and Madeline have many of the same ThruLines, then why doesn’t Penny match Charlotte and Madeline? I suppose there could be many explanations:

  • The common ancestor is Archibald born 1792. Charlotte and Madeline may be related on the Archibald side and Penny may be related on Archibald’s wife’s side. That would result in Penny not matching Charlotte and Madeline.
  • Another variation of that is that Archibald may have had more than one wife. Penny may descend from one wife and Charlotte and Madeline from another.
  • It may be that we have the genealogy wrong.
  • There may be other connections on collateral lines.

Adding In Joanna

If I add in Joanna to the mix, I’ll have representatives from the three brothers:


These are William Fitzgerald, Edward Wynn Frazer and Thomas Henry Frazer (Joanna’s great-grandfather). Here is a partial list of Joanna’s ThruLines:

I’m more interested in the matches at the third cousin level. Here we have the two brothers plus Ann. The third brother doesn’t show here as he shows at the 2nd cousin level for Joanna. For some reason, the ThruLines seemed to skip a generationbetween William Fitzgerald 1821 and Minnie Jane born 1895. I have written quite a bit about the McPartland Branch. They have the Ancestor Ann Frazer who has been difficult to place. Joanna has made a guess that she was the daughter of her 2nd great-grandfather Archibald born 1792. I have been going back and forth as to whether Ann should be under Archibald or Michael Frazer.

Another interesting point is that Edward Archibald born 1867 ended up in Poughkeepsie, NY where Mary A Frazer Quinton and Margaret Jane Frazer lived in 1855. I don’t know if this is a coincidence or not.

I see that Joanna matches WG. WG is on the Edward Wynn Branch where Madeline and Charlotte are. Joanna has a good match with WG but Madeline and Charlotte do not. This may be a coincidence, but I would keep my eye on this situation. For Charlotte and Madeline the level that they match WG indicates a second cousin once removed only <1% of the time:

I added WG into the tree here:

Joanna and James of Clerragh

I didn’t see any additional ThruLines for Joanna at her Archibald/Peyton level. However, there are some new ones at the level of James of Clerragh:

The odd thing with this ThruLine is that Archibald born 1690 who is usally the father of James of Clerragh is shown as James’ son. However, the relationship shown is correct at 2nd cousin once removed.

When I add the results in with the others, I get this:

Those are a lot of numbers to look at. Basically:

  • Penny had no ThruLine matches at her 2nd cousin level.
  • Joanna shows good match levels at the 2nd cousin level. That is, except with Chris
  • Madeline and Charlotte show poor 2nd cousin match levels. However, the matches are just with one person. Perhaps there are not many descendants on this line who have had their DNA tested.
  • At the third cousin level out of all the matches, there are no perfect scores. I am not sure why that is. If I add up all the percentages for the relationships and divide by the top percentages in the third cousin range, I get 42%. As these ThruLines are somewhat new, I don’t know how usual or unusual that is. The results seem anemic to me. It is as if Archibald Frazer had each of his sons by different wives.

Here are the rest of the results:

At the fourth cousin level, Penny has matches with the Thomas Henry Branch, but not the Edward Wynn Branch.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Looking back at my Blog on Penny’s sister Toni, it appears that Toni had better Frazer matches. However, Toni has not linked her DNA to her Ancestry Tree and therefor does not show up on ThruLines.
  • If Toni links her DNA to her Ancestry Tree, we should get a fuller picture of the situation.
  • I had fun getting a better understanding of Penny and Toni’s genealogy.
  • Perhaps as a result of Penny’s less than average matches on the Frazer side, the DNA matches looked a bit anemic.
  • However, having said that, at the third cousin level there are a lot of matches under Archibald Frazer born in 1792. However, they appear to be all less than perfect matches, with only one match that I see that is above average. That is the match between Charlotte and Gail at 97 cM.