Category: Frazer

Posted on

Walking the Streets of the Boston of My Ancestors and Relatives

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

Frazer, Clarke and McMaster

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

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

It is a bit confusing.

The McMasters

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

McMaster and Clarke in 1880

Here is the 1880 Census

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

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

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

The North Boston Years

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

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

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

Going Back in Time – McGarry’s

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

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

Let’s see if the 1870 Directory clarifies things:

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

A Clue in the 1871 Directory

Here is page 190 of the Boston Business Directory:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Back to the McMaster Family

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

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

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

1876

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

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

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

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

William McMaster

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

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

 

Here is a document from 1879.

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

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

William and Edward 1889

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

Edward McMaster (and Celia Clarke) 1889

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

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

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

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

William McMaster (and Catherine Clarke) 1889

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

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

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

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

1893 McMaster Update

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

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

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

Back to Celia Clarke McGarry 1902

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

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

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

So Where Are We?

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

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

Summary and Conclusions

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

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

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

Statistics: Known and Unknown

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

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

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

Known and Unknown

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

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

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

A Woman with Margaret

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

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

Face Recognition Software

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

These two got an 86% rating:

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

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

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

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

Here is a different combination:

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

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

These two did slightly better:

These two women at least scored over 70%:

Tricking PicTriev

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

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

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

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

Here is the highest match so far:

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

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

Photos by Studio

Here is a summary sorted by studio:

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

James Frazer 1892

Here is James in the 1892 directory:

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

 

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

Here is James in 1893, showing his married address:

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

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

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

Add in the CE Deane Studio

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

 

Gray Studio

The Gray Studio was fairly close by also:

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

The Frazer Family 1894

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

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

1895 showed the same entry:

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

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

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

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

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

Elmer Chickering Studio

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

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

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

Gendron – 13 Tremont Row

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

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

The Frazers in 1896

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

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

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

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

Summary and Conclusions

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

My Grandmother’s Picture Book: Frazer, Clarke, McMaster and ?

This should be a different Blog as it will be more on the genealogical side. This is photo book that I recall from my childhood that my grandmother had. It has thick pages, a sort of velour cover with a fancy spring clasp on the right.

I got the idea for this Blog after hearing from Fred. Fred is third cousin on my Clarke Line. My grandmother’s mother was a Clarke. We have the same 2nd great grandparents by the name of Clarke and Spratt. Fred sent me this photo recently.

This was from a small tin type photo that Fred had enlarged and enhanced. According to Fred, “…that appears to me to be a picture of Catherine Clark McMaster, Violet McMaster, George McMaster and Margaret Clark”. This reminded me of the photo book my grandmother had. It had larger photos in the back, but the smaller tin types in the back. I believe that Violet is Fred’s grandmother. He supposed that the photo was taken about 1888. That is interesting, because that would be about four years before Margaret Clarke married my great-grandfather. Margaret probably arrived in the Boston area around 1884 from Ireland at about the age of 18. It would be interesting to find out where she lived before she got married.

The Photo Book

Although I said that this book was my grandmother’s, it has people in it that lived before she was born. The photos seem to favor the Clarke side of the family. My grandmother lost her mother in 1902 when my grandmother was about 8 years old. I’ll try to reproduce the photo book as well as I can.

Page 1

I almost missed the first photo. This photo slipped out of the page easily. Under the photo on the page were the initials Raa. I don’t know if this is random or significant. I might assume that this person was important, being on page 1 of the book. A wild guess would be William McMaster, but I would have to compare this with a known photo.

Here is a photo of William from Fred’s sister’s tree:

This photo is a 3/4 view, so it is difficult to compare. I can’t tell for sure that the two are not the same person.

[Edit: January 2020. I believe that this man is William McMaster 1859-1899. He married Catherine Clarke, the sister of my great-grandmother. This was sent to me by Fred who is a descendant.]

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

I take by the note that this is Catherine Clarke in the photo also. This may help in identifying other photos.

Fred also sent me this photo:

This is a better version of the photo above. Fred also sent me a photo I show later in the Blog:

These are William’s children: George, Bert, Fanny and Violet.

While I am off my grandmother’s book, I should bring up this photo which perhaps was in the book:

This is a photo of James Archibald Frazer. I had previously had thought that this was taken after his wife had died and Catherine Clarke’s husband William McMaster had died. However, I now see that James looks too young for that. Also this doesn’t look like the Catherine in the photo above.

Here is a side by side look:

Maybe? Another cosideration is that Catherine married in 1882. James married in 1892. Perhaps the photo on the left is how Catherine looked 10 years later when James married?

Page 2

 

The pages are about 8 inches by 10 inches and the photos are smaller. I’ll try to scan a smaller area.

This is my grandmother’s mother. I am not sure if this would be before, during or after she was married.

Page 3

My guess is that the first two photos could be wedding photos.

PAGE 4

I’m not sure if this is the same woman as the one in the photo from Fred. It looks like I caught a thread of the book in the scan. I know that there was an older Aunt Celia in the area, a sister Celia, Catherine and Margaret. I also thought that there may have been a sister Jane.

Page 5

Margaret again.

Page 6

James Archibald Frazer again. Looks like this could use sume touching up. I haven’t enhanced any of these photos.

Page 7

I’m guessing one of the Clarkes.

Page 8

Margaret Clarke Frazer

Page 9

George William Frazer and her sister ( my grandmother) Marion Margaret Frazer. I seem to remember a large colorized version of this or a similar photo. I don’t know where it ended up.

Page 10

I did enhance this a bit. Another shot of Margaret. My grandmother lost her mother at about age 8, so I’m sure these photos were important to her.

Page 11

I was able to slip this photo out and add a little constrast. My mother’s brother George William was born 1896, so that would put this photo at 1897.

Page 12

This photo was taken at the Elmer Chickering Studio at 21 West St., Boston. I think the original is a bit clearer.

Page 13

Great grandma is stylin’ in this photo.

Page 14

My guess is that these are the same two children that Fred sent me in his tintype picture. If Fred’s photo was 1888, perhaps this was 1889.

Page 15

If I had to guess, I would say another one of the Clarke sisters or Aunt Celia? I quite like the composition whoever it is. It reminds me somewhat of a colonial painting.

Page 16

Again, I am going with my standard Clarke female guess. The man to the left is perhaps a husband? He looks as if he could be a brother, but I have no record of a brother visiting or living here.

Page 17

I’m tempted to call this one the serious baby. I can only assume that this was the baby of one of the Clarke sisters.

Page 18

.

Here is an unusual photo. I might guess that she would have been a maid or nanny for my great grandfather James Frazer. I note that the photo was taken at a different studio. This woman has what appears to be a wedding ring. She is holding a book and has her finger inside the pages as if to say that she is educated. I can’t make out the name of the book except for the word, “power”.

Page 19

I am a bit past halfway in the book.

My guess for this person is Richard Frazer born 1875. According to my web page, ” He married Elizabeth Lenore Rice, daughter of Ivory Fogg Rice and Mary McCartee, on 12 May 1902 at Portsmouth, New Hampshire.” Note that the photo was taken in Portsmout, NH. This could have possibly been a wedding photo.

Page 20 and 21

Page 20 is the same as page 3. Page 21 is the same as page 2. These are the two photos that I supposed to be wedding photos.

Page 22

Can’t have too many photos of one’s great grandfather.

Page 23

Here I’m leaning toward business associate. Here are a few guesses from James’ Naturalization papers dated 18 October 1905:

Page 24

This person is a bit of a mystery. The best clue is that he had the photo taken in Franklin, MA. He also appears a bit older than some of the men in the other photos.

Page 25

Page 25 is the same as page 6.

Page 26

No idea. This person bears no resemblance to some of the others. He appears to be wearing a military uniform.

Page 27

Here there is a clue. The photo was not taken in Boston, but Gorham, NH. All we have to do is search in Gorham, NH for a relative. A search for Gorham shows it to be just North of Mount Washington.

Page 28

I’m hoping that someone will come accross this Blog and tell me who some of these people are. This is the studio where the black woman had her photo taken.

Page 29

I am associating the curley hair with the Clarkes.

Page 30

I think this is a boy? The light hair could go with the guy in the military suit, but there was some light hair in the Frazer family also. I can see a cross on this little person. I also have a photo of George McMaster (brother of Violet) that looks a little similar to this person. I believe that Violet’s granddaughter sent this to me.

I suppose that it might even be possible to look at where each of these studios were to see if that made a difference compared to where some of these people may have lived.

[Edit: January 2020] I see in my McMaster File, I have this photo labeled: George, Herbert, Violet McMaster. I also have the following photo in my McMaster file:]

This photo is named George, Bert, Fanny, Violet. These were all children of William McMaster and Catherine Clarke.

That was the last of the larger photos. Following this are six pages with four smaller photos each in them.

Page 31A

Do I have relatives in Taylorville, Il?

Page 31B

This photo appears to be trimmed down. I can’t tell where the photo was taken.

Page 31C

This is the first tintype. These tintypes give an older look to the photos.

Page 31D

At first, I thought these two were my great grandfather James Archibald Frazer, but now I’m not so sure. I’ll say it is him with his hair part inversed by the tintype

Page 32A

This photo appeared to have been trimmed down from something else. Also a tintype.

Page 32B

Apparently these tintypes are a reverse image. Here is the flip side:

So apparently a Toronto relative. Could this be a Frazer relative?

Page 32C

Another trimmed-down tintype of 2 cute girls – assumed sisters.

Page 32D

Here is a non-tinype among the tintypes. A distinguished self-assured looking couple in Belfast. I’m not aware of any Belfast connection in my ancestry which makes me wonder who these two are.

Page 33

Here is what a typical tintype page looks like in the book:

 

Page 33A

I just need a program with facial recognition.

Page 33B

Page 33C

The guy bottom left looks like the same person that was on P 23. My guess is the best man at the wedding. I would need to find Parish records to find out that type of information.The other two appear to be Margaret Clarke and my great-grandfather, James Frazer.

Page 33D

This appears to be my great-grandmother on the left wearing a Wonder Woman belt. I had thought the woman on the right looked familiar, but now I’m not sure.

Page 34A

These look to me to be two sisters.

Page 34C

34B is missing.

Does she look like the woman on the left above?

Page 34D

Page 35A

Page 35B

Photos like this and the Belfast and Toronto photos raise quite a few questions. In a record I saw recently, my great-grandfather was a tea dealer. Could this photo have something to do with that? This was another non-tintype photo.

Page 35C

Looks to me like Margaret Clarke.

Page 35D

The same as 31C

Page 36A

Is this the same woman as 34A? Perhaps with her husband?

Page 36B

Somebody’s pride and joy.

Page 36C

Same as 33D

Page 36D

Summary and Conclusions

  • A major reason for me putting these photos out there is that I hope that some people will recognize who these are
  • These photos can spur research or direct research. For example, what are my Illinois, Belfast and Edinburgh connections?
  • Taking the photos out and looking at where they were taken was helpful
  • My guess is that most of the photos were from around the time when my great-grandmother Margaret Clarke was in the US. This would have been between about 1884 and 1902 when she died.
  • I have definitely increased the number of photos of people that I know and that I do not know.
  • The photos help to give a picture of the people that my great grandparents knew, even if I don’t know who they are.
  • A next step may be to sort the unknown people by those that look most like each other.
  • I also want to look into facial recognition software.
Posted on

Visual Phasing of My Canadian Frazer Relatives

One of the Canadian Line of Frazers descends from my 2nd great-grandfather’s brother. His name was Richard Frazer born 1830 in Roscommon County, Ireland:

My 2nd great-grandfather was George William Frazer, born about 1838. Here are the two lines as shown with their descendants that have taken a DNA test:

Visual Phasing

Visual Phasing is comparing the DNA results of three siblings (or more) and figuring out from which of their four grandparents they got their DNA from on each of their chromosomes. I did that with myself and my four tested siblings. Now on the yellow line we have Susan, Doreen and Ken who have all had their DNA tested. I am 4th cousins to Susan, Doreen and Ken. However, by figuring out where we got our DNA from, it will be almost like comparing our grandparents to each other. Richard Price “Pat” Frazer will be compared with my grandmother, Marion Margaret Hartley. These grandparents would have been second cousins to each other. Now we didn’t get all our grandparents’ DNA, but what we did get, we will be able to identify and compare.

Steven Fox’s Excel Spreadsheet for Visual Phasing.

If you do a Google search for Steven Fox and Visual Phasing, you will find a lot of information and blogs of other’s that have used his spreadsheet. It is possible to do Visual Phasing without his spreadsheet, but his spreadsheet makes it easier, more organized and more standardized.

Jumping in with Chromosome 22

Chromosome 22 is the shortest, so some people start with that one. There should be fewer crossovers on this Chromosome. The downside is that there are also usually fewer cousin matches on this short Chromosome.

This image is small but if you click on it, it should get larger. The top bar compares Ken (K) and Susan (S). The vertical lines represent crossovers where DNA received changes from one grandparent to another. The location of these changes or crossovers are important. It is also important to know to which sibling these crossovers get assigned to. The first crossover is found where the match between Ken and Susan goes from HIR or FIR. HIR is Half Identical Region. That means that Ken and Susan both got the DNA from one of their 4 grandparents at that segment. The problem is, we don’t know which grandparent. After the crossover, represented by the first vertical line, Ken and Susan have an FIR. This is a Fully Identical Region. That means that Ken and Susan both got their DNA in that segment from two of the same grandparents. One matching grandparent was on the maternal side and one was on the paternal side.

Finding the Location for the First Crossover

The second crossover is easy to find, because it is at the same place where Susan and Doreen go from no match to a match. This spot is recorded by Gedmatch at 23,564,890. I could call that 24M or 23.6 depending on how exact I want to be. In the case above, I called it 23.6. To get the first crossover, we have to look at the comparison between Ken and Susan at full resolution at Gedmatch.

Here is the first part of Ken and Susan’s comparison at Chromosome 22:

This says that the beginning of Chromosome 22 doesn’t even start until position 14.5M where M is million. Every little ^ is one million. So counting back from 20M, Ken and Susan go from HIR to FIR between 15 and 16M. I’ll call it 15.7M. The pink part is a centromere. Usually this would be at the center of the chromosome, but there must be information at the very start of Chromosome 22 that isn’t used.

One Crossover or Two on the Right Side of Chr22?

Here is a blowup of the last two crossovers. On the top bar, there is a spot where Ken and Susan go from HIR to FIR. However, this does not line up with position 45.4M where Ken and Doreen go from no match to an FIR. However, to be sure, I need to know where Ken and Susan go from an HIR to an FIR.

According to Gedmatch, the end of Ken and Susan’s match is at 49.5M. That means the last ^ is 49M. That means that Ken and Susan’s change from HIR to FIR is between 45 and 46. I’ll say 45.7. This is pretty close to 45.4, so a judgement call. I’ll just leave it as I had it.

Assigning the Crossovers

The crossover usually gets assigned to the person that is in two of the changes. This is easier to see in the second crossover. There is a change in the top and bottom comparisons. The first comparison is Ken and Susan. The last comparison is between Susan and Doreen. Susan is the common denominator, so she gets the crossover.

I gave the first crossover to Ken:

I had forgotten why. Now I remember. I think that there is actually a very small match that doesn’t show up between Ken and Doreen at the beginning of the Chromosome. It is very subtle, but I’d say that there is more green in the beginning of the K&D comparison compared to the S&D comparison. These crossover assignments can be a bit of an art. If I had lowered the match resolution it should have shown up as a blue match there.

The last two crossovers were not easy either:

These changes have to come in pairs. That means that I had to treat the little segment between D and S as an FIR on the bottom comparison. That means that there are two changes for Doreen first making that her crossover. Then there are two changes for Susan (top and bottom comparisons).

Working on the Segments

This image is the end result, but I will say how I got there. First I started with K&S. They have a FIR for the second segment. This shows as dark green. In the image above, that means that Ken and Susan have two of the same colors. They match with one maternal grandparent and one paternal grandparent. Because Ken has no crossover to the right of the second segment, I can extend that DNA all the way to the right end of the Chromosome on both Ken’s maternal and paternal sides. Also in the second segment, Doreen has no matches with Ken or Susan. That means she has the spouse of the other two grandparents in that slot. So instead of orange and purple, she gets blue and green there. She has no crossover to the left and none on the right until near the end of the Chromosome.

At some point I have to deal with a HIR. I did that with Susan after the second segment. Susan has a HIR to Ken and Doreen. I made Susan match Ken’s purple but not his orange. We already knew that Ken and Doreen had no match in the third segment, so Doreen got the opposite colors there.

The last three bars in the image above represent Gladys’ match with Ken, Susan and Doreen. She shows a match with only Ken and not Doreen nor Susan. This has to be in Ken’s orange section as that is the only place along the match with Gladys that one of his segments is different than Doreen’s or Susan’s.

Gladys and Ken only match on the Frazer Line. Gladys has no Gray DNA. That means orange has to be Frazer. The only other paternal side is Gray so blue has to be Gray. I don’t have specific information on Ken, Susan and Doreen’s maternal side, so those are just labeled G3 and G4 for now. Actually, they should be M1 and M2 for maternal grandparents:

Ken and siblings’ father’s name is Stefansson and their mother’s surname is Gudmundsdottir.

How to Use Visual Phasing

Now that we know where Ken, Susan and Doreen got their DNA from on most of their Chromosome 22, what can we do with this information?

Part of the information is educational. Knowing how our DNA recombined by way of our grandparents is interesting. It is a kind of snapshot of what went into our makeup at conception.

Another part has to do with DNA matches. This focus us as to where our matches are. However, there is still one hitch. We still need to know if our matches are on our maternal or paternal side. If we don’t have a parent to compare our matches with, then it is possible to compare matches with known relatives.

Use of Crossovers

The exception to this is if Susan were to have a match that started before her crossover at 23.6 and continued beyond it. For a match that goes through a crossover, it has to be on the other side. So for such a match for Susan, this could not be a Frazer match but must be on her mother’s side.

These visual phasing maps work best when you have downloaded all your matches. Then you will know for every Chromosome which grandparent they will match depending where in the Chromosome your match is. If you have a lot of matches that end at a certain place and then other matches that start up again at that spot, that could be indicative of a crossover.

Separating Real Matches from Far Away or False Matches

Another way to use these results is to tell if a match is real or not. Here is part of mapped Chromosome 22 showing a small match between Doreen and Michael of the Frazer Project:

It shows that Michael only matches Doreen and not Susan nor Ken. Michael’s match is indicated by a blue bar at the bottome right of the image above. However, Doreen has no Frazer DNA in that segment. She only has Gray DNA on her paternal side. So, it may mean that Doreen matches Michael on the Gray line going way back or less likely on the Icelandic Line. But Michael could not be matching on the Frazer Line assuming I have mapped this correctly. As I mentioned, this is a small match of 5.6 cM. Matches under 7 cM have more than a 50% chance of not being real matches.

Comparison with My Visual Phasing

Here is my Chromosome 22. It is mapped along with three of my siblings. I didn’t get around to mapping Lori.

When I compare the two maps, I can see where my siblings have the potential to match with Ken, Doreen and Susan along the Frazer Line. It doesn’t mean we have to match there. For example, my Frazer grandparent DNA also has Clarke and McMaster DNA that Ken, Doreen and Susan don’t have. Likewise, Ken, Susan and Doreen have other DNA in their Frazer line that I would not share.

Extra Chromosome Mapped

While I was at it, I mapped Chromosome 12:

This was a little easier, because more cousins matched on this Chromosome. One interesting thing about this Chromosome is that between about 88 and 104M, there is no Frazer DNA. That means that if any of these siblings have a match in that area, it could not be a Frazer match.

This map had three spots that appeared to go from a no-match to a FIR or from a FIR to a no-match. This is impossible, so there needs to be a HIR transition. That is why there are three places where the crossovers are close.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Visual Mapping shows the process of our makeup based on how our grandparents’ DNA combined to form us
  • This mapping can be helpful in identifying DNA matches
  • Special attention should be made to crossovers. That is where DNA on one side of our Chromosome changed from one grandparent to the other.
  • If a match goes through a maternal crossover, for example, it means that match must be on the paternal side.
  • A lot of genetic genealogy is about separating out the DNA and visual phasing goes a long way in doing this.
  • Other sorting can be done by names or location of matches. As Ken, Doreen and Susan’s mom is Icelandic a clue as to the matches’ names, locations or genealogy can be a hint as far as placing them.
  • Visual Phasing works best when there are good cousin matches on all four grandparent sides.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

Toni’s DNA and Ancestry on the James Frazer Line

I had previously written a Blog about Toni’s sister Penny here.

Toni’s Genealogy

The genealogy I will be looking at will be for those that have tested their DNA. This simplifies the trees.

This is Toni’s Frazer branch going back to about 1821. William somehow made his way from Ireland to Sacramento, California by 1860:

William was a lumber dealer based on the 1860 Census and others. Here is up and coming Sacramento about 1857:

According to William’s will, he had a son Edward F Frazer who was to inherit his lumber business. The will mentions a deceased daughter Mary A Quinton. It mentions a daughter Angelina in Ireland:

Finally, the will mentions William’s deceased daughter, Margaret “Whiton”

Sadly, Margaret died in 1880 at age 33 of puerperal fever. This was a death related to child birth.

The Larger Picture

Here is one step up from William Fitzgerald:

At this point, the trees start getting less certain. Joanna is very keen on finding out about this branch as are other DNA tested descendants. Note the Mary Ann Quinton noted in the Will in the tree above Clyde and Carol.

Perhaps Mary A Frazer’s daughter Grace Angelina was named for William’s daughter Angelina G.

Here is the whole James Line of known DNA-tested descendants:

Penny and Toni are on the bottom left. They descend from an elder son William, son of Archibald who was an elder son of another Archibald, who was an elder son of James at the top of the Line. It would be nice if the DNA could give us some clues as to whether we are on the right track with this tree.

The  Plan

A simple plan is to see how Toni and Penny match the people on the chart:

 

I have taken some reported match figures for the different relationships from an ISOGG web page. I would think that the zero matches may be under reported, so the averages may be high. In the table above, I have Carol and Kathy in italics. That is because they are daughters of Clyde and Charlotte, so any DNA they got, they got from their mothers.

When I compare everyone, I see that there are 17 people tested for DNA in the James Line. I had missed Madeline, Charlotte’s sister in my chart above, so I added her.

James Line Autosomal Matrix

The first tool I use at Gedmatch is the Autosomal Matrix. This compares everyone to everyone else in the James Line.

Here I see something interesting. In this matrix, Penny and Toni are matching with the Thomas Line with larger numbers than within the William Line. That is true except for their matches with Jonathan. I should note that the autosomal matrix uses a smaller cutoff than the general matching number of 7 cM.

How do I explain this?

Here is how I filled in my earlier chart:

I can make a few observations:

  • In general, Toni had higher DNA matches with other Frazers than Penny
  • Penny and Toni’s matches within the William Fitzgerald Line are dependent on Clyde.
  • It seems clear from the genealogy that Penny, Toni, Clyde and Carol are all in the William Fitzgerald Frazer Line. That means that Penny and Toni’s closer matches to the Thomas Henry Line are due to the randomness of DNA inheritance.
  • Penny’s matches with the Thomas Line are a little below average. Toni’s matches with those in the Thomas Henry Line are above average.
  • Toni and Penny’s matches with all others in the James Frazer Line are below average, including within their own William Fitzgerald Line.
  • All matches are within reported matching ranges.

Triangulating in the James Frazer Line

Triangulation Groups are where three or more people’s DNA match each other on the same segment. This should result in a common ancestor. I need to do a major overhaul on the James Line Triangulation Groups (TGs), as I haven’t looked at them in a while.

Chromosome 1

Here *B is Betty on the chart below.

This TG appears to confirm that Achibald born about 1792 (or his unknown wife) is the common ancestor for Toni, Betty and Joanna.

Chromosome 2 and 4: Bonnie, Judy and Gary

This is like one TG that was broken up, so it is now two. Bonnie has an interruption in her match between about position 6 and 10M.

 

Here is a TG with the same people in Chromosome 4:

This TG is from 110 to 123M at a minimum. This brings up and interesting point as there is already a TG on the Archibald side from 11-115M.

How can this be? This could be for many reasons. There is a 50% chance that the Judith/Bonnie/Gary TG could be a Charlotte Davidson TG. That would be the most obvious explanation. The other would be that the Archibald Line TG is a Stinson TG. There are other possibilities.

A TG at Chr 5 and 7?

I questioned this because Madeline and Charlotte are sisters:

Normally sisters are not included in TGs, but here Kathy who is Charlotte’s daughter is included. I would normally include an aunt and a niece in a TG. Plus this shows that if Kathy inherited the segment from her mom, that it is likely to be a valid match.

We have the same situation at Chromosome 7:

I think it’s a valid TG. I’m not sure if everyone would agree with me.

Chr 12, 15, and 16 Frazer or Davidson?

 

Without further information (matches) it is not possible to know if these are Frazer or Davidson TGs as discussed above.

Chr 14 TG

This TG is clearer:

This is quite a long-range TG. It goes all the way back to James Frazer (or his wife). There are other possibilities, but the one I drew seems the most obvious. For example, what if the Archibald  born 1792 married a Knott. Then the most recent common ancestor could be a Knott in the generation after James Frazer. At any rate, the fact that Toni is in the TG means that Gary and Judith should not be matching each other on the Davidson side – assuming Toni has no Davidson ancestors.

TG 16

I think I’m getting near the end. This is a four person TG including siblings Joanna and Jonathan.

This is also a James Line TG. That explains why the matches with Beverly are smaller than the ones between Toni, Joanna and Jonathan. Beverly is a 5th cousin to Joanna and Jonathan and a 5th cousin once removed to Toni. However, Toni is a third cousin once removed to Joanna and Jonathan.

A TG Summary

We now have a good collection of TGs for the James Line:

 

 

The two dark lavender TGs at the bottom go over to the Archibald Line. TG15C includes Paul and TG 17B includes Doug.

The orange looking TGs could be Davidson or Frazer TGs as discussed above. Other than the orange TGs there are no TGs that appear to be specifically Frazer/Knott or Michael Frazer (b 1764) TGs. Beverly is in two TGs, but neither one is in the Frazer/Knott group.

Toni’s DNA testing resulted in five new TGs. The Frazer/Peyton group seems more well-behaved as far as the TGs. That group has TGs that are just within what we have as the Frazer/Peyton Line and wihtin the Achibald 1792 Line below that.  Toni is a good example of why siblings get their DNA tested. Her sister Penny was not in any of the five TGs that Toni was in.

Summary and Conclusions

  • William Fitzgerald Frazer made his way accross the world from Ireland to Sacramento, CA to start a Lumber business and raise children
  • Without understanding of the genealogy and the randomness of DNA inheritance, it might seem that Toni belonged in Joanna’s line (Thomas Henry Frazer) rather than the William Fitzgerald Frazer Line that she is in.
  • William’s second great-granddaughter Toni took a DNA test and matched many other Frazers that descended from the James Line of Frazers
  • Toni’s DNA testing resulted in five new Triangualation Groups
  • Those TGs have shored up the genealogy of the Line of Frazers that descend from William’s Irish father and grandfather.
  • In addition, Toni is in two TGs that appear to indicate a common ancestor with James Frazer going back all the way back to about 1720.
  • I identified a new group of 5 TGs that could be either Frazer or Davidson TGs.
Posted on

Frazer-Johnston DNA and Genealogy: Part Two

In my previous Blog on the Frazer-Johnston connection, I looked at John’s DNA results. Recently John told me he had uploaded his sister Jamie’s DNA results to Gedmatch.

The Frazer-Johnston Connection on the Frazer/Stinson Line

John and Jamie are in the light blue. This is a good Frazer line as there are some on the line that are in other Frazer lines such as Jane, Michael and the yellow group. John and Jamie as well as the purplish line, Cathy and the bright green line are represent people that are believed to be in the Archibald/Stinson Line only. That gives some surety in what the DNA matches might mean. However, it could result in smaller DNA matches. There is a tradeoff.

The Johnston-Frazer connection is quite old. At the top of the blue line is a Mary Frazer born at the end of the 1700’s. She married William Johnston born about 1790. Having any information from Irish records before 1800 is considered great. I have more detailed genealogical information in my previous Blog.

Let’s Jump Into Jamie’s DNA

Well, not literally. The results are a little surprising:

Jamie is on the row below the top of the solid box in the bottom right. That box represents those that are only in the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line. This shows that Jamie does not match anyone that is just in that line other than her brother John.  Jamie’s largest match is with Richard who I believe to be the only one that is only in the Philip Line.

We can look at the Jamie/Richard match when I look at the specific matches later. However, there are a few explanations for the match as I see it now:

  • Jamie and Richard would be 5th cousins, once removed through the Frazer side. That is pretty far out. The further out the relationship is, the more random the match is. That is likely why Richard and Jamie have a 31.6 cM match as 5th cousin once removed and why Jamie wouldn’t have a match with some of her 4th cousins that are in the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line.
  • A second reason would be that Jamie could be matching on a line we don’t know about. We don’t know who the wife of Philip was. Also Jamie doesn’t know the name of the mother of the William Johnston that married Jane Frazer in 1815. I noted in a previous blog that a later Philip Frazer, married a Jane Johnston also in 1815.

Moving across, we see that Jamie matches Emily and Paul who would not be in the Frazer/Stinson Line. However the same reasons apply for them as applied to Richard. Note also that Emily and Paul are of the same generation as Richard, so more likely to match. Here is the whole Archibald Line:

Paul is at the bottom of the third blue column. Emily is shown to the left of Paul in the above image.

Dancing with DNA

Here are Jamie’s specific matches with those in the Archibald Line of the Frazer DNA Project:

 

I tried to put the matches into the appropriate Frazer Lines. Jamie has more matches with those in the Stinson Line. However, Jamie has higher matches with those that are not in the Stinson Line. Anywhere Jamie matches more than one person on a segment, there is a possibility of triangulation. Ir looks like Jamie could triangulate on every chromosome above except for Chromosome 12 with Paul.

Frazer Triangulation

Triangulation should mean common ancestors. This trouble is figuring out who those common ancestors are. As this is a Frazer project, and we all have Frazer ancestry, the assumption is that the common ancestor is a Frazer. However, there are other possibilities.

TG03

This TG can be shown like this:

The theory is that this TG points to either Archibald Frazer or Ann Stinson. Not both. However, we don’t know which unless there is a match to a Frazer that is not related to a Stinson or a Stinson that is not related to a Frazer. I have a spreadsheet that has a compilation of TGs and the triangualtion above I have previously named TG03C. So I added Jamie to that group.

TG17

This is a TG I had found when I looked at Richard’s results. Unless there is some other connection, this TG appears to go all the way back to Archibald born about 1743 or his wife Mary Lilley.

Note that my sister Lori and I are in the Philip Line as well as the Richard LIne. I didn’t put us in the Richard Line to save space. The same with Michael. Only his first ancestor in the Stinson Line is showing in peach color. It is tempting to think that I am matching Richard on the Philip Line and Michael is matching Jamie on the Stinson Line, but that is only one possibility.

More About Chromosome 17

Here is my TG Spreadsheet for Chromosome 17.

I’ve squished it together a bit so it would show better. Note that Doug is in a purple TG with Bonnie and Beverly. Bonnie and Beverly are on the more distant James Line. I also note that Richard matches Doug from 70-74M on Chromosome 17. So something is going on here between the Frazer Lines.

Let’s look at this from Richard’s viewpoint. Here are his matches on Chromosome 17:

This shows that Richard has a large match with Michael. Interesting, but confusing.

A New TG Chromosome 18

This is a little like the previous TG. Is the DNA trying to tell us something? It seems to be saying that there may be a connection the Philip and Archibald/Stinson Lines that we don’t know about. Or, it is just a good match up to the Archibald born in the 1740’s and his wife Mary Lilley.

TG20

Here Jamie is added to an existing TG.

Triangulation Group Summary for Jamie

 

This spreadsheet accentuates what I have been trying to explain in this Blog. It seems like John and Emily have an affinity for the left side of the spreadsheet and not so much for the Stinson side. This could be by chance. However, there could be other explanations. What if Philip who we think may have been born in 1776 married a Johnston? That would tie these families together – I think.

 

Here I tried out my theory. I had a feeling that Michael would not fit in to this cinfiguration. However, his match with Jamie was small at 7.6 cM and could be the one that goes up to the Archibald born in the 1740’s. The tree above seems to fit the DNA. However, I’m sure there could be another explanation.

Here is another, simpler explanation. Under this scenario, Philip did not have to marry a Johnston. This would have Mary as Philip’s daughter instead of Archibald’s. This would require some rejiggering of the genealogy.

The above seems to fit the DNA better, but remember that DNA can be fickle.

My Two Laws of Genetic Genealogy

After looking at genetic genealogy for several years, I have come up with two laws:

  1. The DNA is trying to outsmart you. The matches you have are generally not on the ancestors that you were expecting.
  2. Your ancestors are messing with you. They married relatives and did other things to intentionally confuse us to keep us from figuring out their genealogy.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Jamie’s results gave some different results from her brother John. This is normal and is one reason why we test siblings.
  • Jamie’s DNA results showed no clear affinity for the Archibald/Stinson Line. This could be due to chance DNA inheritance or other reasons
  • I gave two guesses as to the other reasons. One was that Philip born about 1776 may have married a Johnston. The other reason is that the Mary Frazer that married William Johnston could have been a daughter of Philip Frazer rather than Archibald Frazer. I like this option as it seems to explain the DNA matches.
  • There may be other explanations. As always, more DNA testing could bring in more answers.

 

Posted on

More on Emily and Melanie’s Frazer DNA

In my last Frazer DNA Blog, I wrote about Melanie and Emily’s DNA match at MyHeritage. I was really hoping that Melanie would upload their DNA to gedmatch for a proper comparison and she did. I hope that I wasn’t too annoying in my asking.

A Frazer Photo Identified

How often is it that you have a photo that is over 100 years old and someone is able to identify it? That is what Emily was able to do with this photo:

I had always assumed that these were all Frazers in front of their house in Ballindoon. Here is Emily’s comment:

 The photograph of the group outside Ballindoon is obviously my grandmothers wedding. I have never seen it before and love it. I never saw a photo of my grandfather James Fairbanks. He died when my mother Susan was three years old.

That’s great collaboration. Emily’s grandmother was Violet Frances Frazer in the white. Her husband is between my 2nd great grandmother Margaret McMaster Frazer and Violet. This is a good example of collaboration. Even though it is sad that James Faribanks died young, I am glad to know who he is in the photo. And Emily is very glad. I can only guess that this photo was mailed to my great-grandfather James Archibald Frazer who was Violet’s older brother in the US. Now, over 100 years later, the photo has gone back from the US to Ireland over the internet to be identified by Violet’s granddaughter.

Frazer Trees and DNA

In my last Blog on Emily and Melanie, I showed this tree of DNA-tested descendants of the older couple in the photo above. The addition of this branch is a big help in the Frazer DNA Project.

That group in turn are part of a James Frazer/Violet Frazer tree which is part of a Philip Frazer tree:

Philip is part of the Archibald Branch of the Frazer Tree. He is one of two brothers (the other being James) that we first have a record of in Aghrafinigan, North County Roscommon in 1749.

The above represents the Archibald line on the left in color and the James Line on the right uncolored. The Archibald side is a bit out of date and is difficult to portray as some DNA testers descend from more than one line due to Frazer cousin marriages. For example, the single blue line on the left above is meant to represent the Philip Line. This also has other branches. However, the yellow group in the Philip Line are also in two other Frazer Lines. This makes for interesting genealogy and more interesting DNA results.

Emily and Melanie’s DNA at Gedmatch

Emily, as Melanie’s mom, gave half of her DNA in general to Melanie. That means that Emily has about twice as much Frazer DNA compared to her daughter. For that reason, I will be looking at Emily’s results rather than Melanie’s.

Before, I start with the DNA, I need to mention that Emily and Melanie are part of the Richard Frazer Line also:

That is because Violet, the daughter of Richard Frazer at the top of the chart married James Frazer who I believe to be a son of Philip Frazer. That would mean that they would be first cousins. David on the left of the chart was added due to DNA matches. Jane was also. Assuming that David is placed correctly, he is important to this line being the only one that is not also known to be in another Frazer Line. In the Philip Line above, Richard is the one not in another line.

Emily and the All Archibald Line Comparison

I like to compare people to all others in a project and then see how the DNA sorts out. I’ll do that first with the Archibald Line of Frazers as there are too many in the whole project.

The Archibald Frazer Autosomal Matrix

I like this matrix, because it is fairly easy to interpret. The higher the number, the closer the relationship.

I have highlighted Emily in blue. Looking across from Emily, her highest match is with Paul. Paul and Emily are 2nd cousins. That means that they share the same great-grandparents: George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. Here are some autosomal statistics from the ISOGG Web Page:

An average amount of DNA that two 2nd cousins might share would be 233 cM. Paul and Emily share 289 cM which is well within reported ranges. My siblings and I match Emily as 2nd cousins once removed. All of our matches are below the average of 123. They range from a low of 47 to a high of 107. By the way, the autosomal matrix uses a smaller cutoff for DNA matches so these matches will be a bit higher than if you do a one to one match at Gedmatch.

Emily matches Gladys at 127 cM. This is quite high considering the two are third cousins. After that, Emily matches Doreen, 3rd cousin once removed at 73 cM. The average, above is 48. (When I run a ‘one to one’ match between the two, the result is a bit smaller at 68 cM.) Overall, Emily’s autosomal matrix results are not surprising. She matches Richard who I believe is a litmus test for the Philip Line. They would be 4th cousins once removed. Emily does not match David, believed to be a litmus test for the Richard Line.

In the Stinson Line, Emily matched her 5th cousin Cathy at 24 cM and her 5th cousin, once removed Ros from Australia at 17 cM.

Triangulating Emily’s DNA

Triangulating means finding three people that match each other on the same segment of DNA. When this happens there is almost always a common ancestor involved. I already have a list of Frazer Triangulation Groups or TGs. Emily will be in some that have already been found and may form a new TG or TGs.

The first TG that Emily is in, is in Chromosome 1. This is a popular TG:

Note that Michael and Jane are in this TG (TG01C). Michael and Jane do not descend from Philip, so this must be a Richard TG. This further means that the DNA that Heidi, Jon, Lori, Emily, Paul, Gladys, and Bill share came down to them through Violet Frazer and not her cousin James as Violet was Richard’s son.

That is one huge TG. Another possibility for this TG would be through the Frazer/Stinson Line. However, Heidi, Jon, Lori, Emily and Paul do not descend from that line, so that possibility is unlikely.

A New TG On Chromosome 2

I’m still modifying my TG Summary Chart:

This TG02B includes Emily, Paul and Gladys. They all descend from James and Violet Frazer.

Note that these three are third cousins to each other. This means that because Gladys is in this TG, the DNA that Emily and Paul Share in this TG is not McMaster DNA (from Margaret McMaster) but Frazer DNA. Also, the TGs that are just in yellow descend from James and Violet Frazer as shown. However, as there are no matches with those in the Richard line where Violet comes from, there is more of a chance that these would be James Frazer TGs.

New TG – Chromosome 6

This TG06A is squeezed in at the beginning of Chromosome 6 before the existing TG. These TGs can be difficult to interpret. Note that Doreen is in both TGs. If Jane is in a TG, that represents the Richard Line or Violet Frazer. If she is not in the TG it implies that the TG could represent the Philip Line or James Frazer.

TG Chromosome 8

Emily seems to be joining an existing TG.

This looks to be a sliding TG. That means, that it could be a longer TG, but not all the people in the TG are in all parts of it. Emily’s TG is actually a little further along on this Chromosome and only with Emily, Paul and Vivien. Either that or Gladys and Bill are still in it, but matching at lower cMs. I know, confusing.

Unless there is a connection on other than a Frazer Line, then this TG goes back to about 1743 when we believe Archibald was born. Gladys should be on this tree also in the yellow section, but I haven’t built it out all the way yet.

Chromosome 9 – An Old and a New TG

I had TG09B in green and changed it to yellow. I added a TG09C which has the same people except for Doreen and Bill. These yellow TGs seem to come from James or Violet Frazer based on the genealogy of the people in the TGs.

Chromosome 18

Emily joins an existing TG:

A lot of people seem to have made room on this Chromosome for James or Violet Frazer. Here is a map of Chromosome 18 with 4 of my 5 mapped siblings:

Heidi (H), Joel (J) and Sharon (S) are in the TG from 35-52. Those are the positions on the map above where Sharon, Heidi and I got Frazer DNA. My brother Jonathan (F) got Hartley DNA on his paternal side in that segment. That is why he isn’t in the TG. The same is true for Lori.

A similar positioning of DNA would explain why others from the group are in or not in this TG and other TGs.

The Mystery of My Chromosome 20 Further Revealed

In my previous Blog on Emily and Melanie, I noted that they helped reveal a mystery I have had with my Chromosome 20 ever since I have been looking at my DNA. Emily and Melanie matched on Chromosome 20 where I have hundreds of other unidentified matches. Emily and Melanie were the first good matches I was able to link to a related Frazer. Now, it appears I also have a TG there.

Here is the spreadsheet I use to find TGs:

In this TG, I see Emily in blue, then Jonathan, Lori, Heidi and Joel are me and my siblings. Then there is John. John recently contacted me and I wrote a Blog about him here. I had lost John in my TG spreadsheet when Excel crashed. Now he is back in.

Here is John over in the Frazer/Stinson Line.

Mystery solved. Apparently. These results are a bit controversial. Some believe in areas where you have too many matches, it is not possible to determine a common ancestor. Others believe that it is possible. I have found at least three out of the hundreds that have a common ancestor.

Here is some more mapping of my Chromosome 20:

The green segments show large areas available for Frazer matches.

Emily and the James Line DNA

I know the Blog is a bit long, but one last topic. How does Emily match the more distantly related James Line?

Emily matches CJ (Charlotte) and Jonathan from the James Line on Chromosome 5:

This is interesting, because it looks like a TG, but it isn’t. CJ would have to match Jonathan for this to be a TG and they don’t match each other. This could mean one of two things:

  • One or both of the matches is a false match or
  • Emily may match one person on her maternal side and one on her paternal side. It happens. This is a big reason why TGs are used.

Emily matches Beverly on Chromosome 19:

Summary and Conclusions

  • There was one thing that I did not find. I hoped to find some triangulation with Richard, my family, Emily and Paul. That would have indicated a common Philip line ancestor. The matches between Richard, Paul, my family and Emily seemed pretty well spread out which made triangulation not possible.
  • One of my favorite photos from Ballindoon has been identified making it much more meaningful.
  • Emily added a third DNA branch to the George Frazer/Margaret McMaster Line. This branch has been pretty lonely for the last 4-1/2 years.
  • Emily’s matches with others in the Archibald Line of the Frazer Project did add evidence to past work on the Frazer DNA Project. For example, her matches with the Philip and Richard Frazer branches confirm the people that are in those branches.
  • Emily’s triangulation with my family and John, who recently joined the Frazer DNA group,  verified a common ancestor on Chromosome 20. That is an area in my family where we have hundreds of matches.
Posted on

Emily and Melanie’s Frazer DNA from Ballindoon

Emily and Melanie are important matches for me at MyHeritage. From their family tree there, they show that they descend from George William Frazer and Margaret McMaster – the same as I do. Several years ago, I tested the DNA of my 2nd cousin once removed Paul who also descends from the same couple. I have also tested my siblings. Now we have another branch from George and Margaret. From what I can tell, Emily and Melanie are here:

They descend from Violet Frances Frazer born 1872 in Ballindoon. Violet Frances is an interesting name. This name could be from her two grandparents. Her dad’s mom was Violet Frazer (yes, a cousin to her dad’s dad from what I can tell). Violet’s mother’s mom was Fanny or Frances McMaster – also a cousin to her mom’s dad. Yikes.

It looks like Melanie has this photo which I got from a visit to Ballindoon:

Here is what I have from my web page.

    •     25.  i.   JAMES ARCHIBALD6 was born on 8 Jan 1867 at Ballindoon, Parish Killadoon, Co. Sligo. He married Margaret Clark, daughter of Thomas Clarke and Jane Spratt, on 5 Oct 1892 at Boston, MA. He married Maud Alice Rayne, daughter of George Rayne and Margaret Ross, on 28 Jun 1905 at Medford, MA. He died on 2 Apr 1940 at 26 Montrose Street, Boston, at age 73. He was buried on 4 Apr 1940 at Forest Hills Cemetery.
    •     26.  ii.   WILLIAM was born on 14 Mar 1868 at Sligo, Ireland. He married Amanda Skoog, daughter of John O. Skoog and Elsa Benson, on 29 Nov 1910 at Boston, Suffolk, Massachusetts. He was buried on 13 Apr 1950 at Kilmactranny Parish, Sligo, Ireland.
    •       x.   GEORGE RUSSELL was born on 15 Apr 1870 at Sligo, Ireland. He was baptized on 26 Jun 1870 at Kilmactranny Church, Sligo, Ireland.
    •     29.  v.   VIOLET FRANCES was born on 14 Jul 1872 at Sligo, Ireland. She married James Fairbanks.
    •     28.  iv.   RICHARD was born circa 1875 at Ireland. He married Elizabeth Lenore Rice, daughter of Ivory Fogg Rice and Mary McCartee, on 12 May 1902 at Portsmouth, New Hampshire.
    •     30.  vi.   HUBERT ALEXANDER was born on 6 Jan 1878 at Ireland. He married Annie McKinnon, daughter of Daniel McKinnon and Christine McRury, on 5 Jun 1917 at Medford, Massachusetts. He died on 12 Dec 1954 at Quincy at age 76. He was buried on 14 Dec 1954 at Mount Wollaston Cemetery.
    •     27.  iii.   GEORGE was baptized on 12 Oct 1879 at Kilmactranny Church, Sligo, Ireland. He married Annie Craig. He died at Derrycashel. He was buried on 29 Jul 1960 at Kilbryan church yard, Roscommon, Ireland.
    •     32.  ix.   JOHN EDWARD was born in Mar 1882 at Ireland. He married Waitie Covell. He married Margaret Lillie McMaster, daughter of Hubert McMaster and Eliza Neary, on 13 Dec 1917 at Kilmactranny Church of Ireland, Sligo, Ireland. He died on 27 Mar 1970 at Marlboro, Massachusetts. He was buried on 30 Mar 1970 at Maplewood Cemetery, Marlboro.
    •     31.  viii.   DAVID was born on 8 May 1884 at Ireland. He married Annie E. Gray. He died on 27 May 1953 at 8 Howe St., Milton, at age 69. He was buried on 29 May 1953 at Forest Hills.
    •       vii.   SUSAN JANE was born in 1887 at Ballindoon, Sligo, Ireland. She married Edward Crawford on 4 Apr 1918 at Kilimactranny Church, Sligo, Ireland; Moved to Northern Ireland.

For some reason, my web page list of siblings was all out-of-order. George Russel must have died young. That leaves nine children. My great-grandfather James was in Boston in 1887. That leaves eight. Other than the father and the mother I am having trouble figuring out who is who.

Here is a photo from Boston:

  • My grandfather is seated on the left – James Archibald
  • That must be William seat on the right. He married in Boston and moved back to Ireland.
  • The man standing in the middle appears to be the oldest of the three in the back row. That could make him Richard b. 1875
  • The man of the right could be Hubert Alexander b 1878. He would be Paul’s grandfather.
  • I don’t think George ever came to the US

That still leaves a bit of confusion. One problem is that my web page has John Edward born March 1882. However, the Ireland Census shows him born about 1889:

 

Assuming the top photo had the youngest boys and the two girls that would make this a possibility:

I believe I have George and Hubert reversed. If I am right, that would put this photo at about 1896 or 1897. Violet married about 4 years later at Kilmactranny Parish Church:

Just to confuse things, here is another photo that I rescanned today. This was apparently taken at a later date.

Emily’s DNA

By the chart at the top of the Blog, Emily and I should be 2nd cousins once removed. MyHeritage predicts that we would be 3rd or 4th cousins, so we must share less DNA than average. Here is how my match looks with Emily.

All my matches are on Chromosomes 17-20. This represents DNA that came down to both Emily and me from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. Here is what it looks like when I add these segments to my Chromosome map:

My Frazer matches are on my paternal side which is at the top of each chromosome. The matches representing George Frazer and Margaret McMaster are in a teal color.

The Mystery of Chromosome 20

When I first looked at my DNA matches, I was frustrated at the number of matches on my Chromolsome 20. There was a utility at the time that would give a graphic representation of your matches.

The light blue represented my Chromsome 20 matches. Even though Chromosome 20 is one of the smallest chromosome, I had most of my matches there. In January 2016, I wrote a Blog about this. At the time, I was learning how to do Visual Phasing. That is figuring out which grandparent you got your DNA from on each chromosome. I was surprised to find out that these matches were through my Frazer grandparent line. That didn’t mean that all the matches were Frazers, but they did in my case go through my Frazer grandmother. For example, they may be McMaster, Clarke, Spratt or other unknown matches to some of my grandmother’s ancestors.

Emily and Melanie Seem to Be the Key

One of my largest matches with Emily was on Chromosome 20. My only match with Melanie was on Chromosome 20. Finally,  after over two years, I have an actual match that I connect genealogically to my family.

Emily’s Match with Paul

I have had four of my siblings tested for DNA, but I have not uploaded their results to MyHeritage. They are all at Gedmatch where I have done a lot of work on analyzing Frazer DNA. I have, however, uploaded my cousin Paul’s DNA to MyHeritage.

Here is how MyHeritage shows the predicted relationship between Emily and Paul based on DNA:

Paul and Emily are actually 2nd cousins, so that would be right in the middle of what MyHeritage predicted. Here is how Emily and Paul match on a chromosome browser:

This is DNA that Emily and Paul share originating from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. So about half of this DNA on average would be from each great grandparent.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was glad to find two Frazer relatives that had their DNA tested.
  • These relatives descend from the younger sister of my great-grandfather. Her name was Susan Frances Frazer. I believe I have identified her in a photo.
  • Although my DNA match levels were less than average for Emily and Melanie, I was able to place them in a huge group of matches that has previously had no identified matches.
  • If Emily and Melanie upload their DNA results to Gedmatch, I will be able to add them to the Frazer DNA Project Group for further comparison with that group
  • I have uploaded more of my kits to MyHeritage in the meantime to see how they match with Emily and Melanie
Posted on

Richard and a Frazer DNA Breakthrough: Part Two

In my previous Blog, I introduced Richard and his connection to the Frazer DNA Project by genealogy and DNA. In this Blog, I would like to take a look at Richard’s DNA at gedmatch.com. There, I can see where the matches are specifically on which chromosome and on which part of the chromosome.

Richard and the Philip Line

I had surmised that I and some others were part of the Philip Frazer Line. Philip Frazer was probably born about 1776 in North Roscommon, Ireland in an area called Aghrafinigan – or more specifically Derrycastle.

Derrycastle (or Derrycashel) is at the top center of the map and is in the Parish of Ardcarn whcih is at the lower right of the map. County Sligo is just above the map. Kilmactranny Church, where Philip’s children were baptized is in County Sligo. Here is an early marriage of Philip Frazer from the Kilmactranny Parish Church:

Nov 22, 1818    Philip Frazer  of Ardcarne parish

Jane Johnston  of Kilmactranny

Witnesses:  Edw. Johnston,   Edw. Johnston

I am not sure if this Philip is the elder Philip or his son. However, it clearly shows that Philip was of Ardcarn Parish and his wife Jane Johnston was of Kilmactranny Parish.

I had been wondering where some of the other descendants of Philip Frazer were. Richard has come forward as one of those descendants. Here is my proposed DNA tree of Philip descendants:

 

Richard is in the green line. I am on the bluish line on the right. The yellow line, like Richard’s Line ended up in Ontario. That would make Richard a 4th cousin once removed to Gladys and Paul. That is, assuming that we have the tree right. If I call Philip born 1776 generation one, the green and yellow lines moved from Ireland to North America in generation three. My line moved to Boston in generation four.

Richard’s DNA Compared to the Frazer DNA Project

The Project is getting large, so first I’ll compare Richard to the Archibald Line of the Project. Archibald Frazer was born around 1743.

And What a Matrix It Is

Here is a matrix of the Archibald Line Descendants:

Part of the trick with these matrices is getting the headings right. Descendants of single line Frazer Branches are in short supply. We think that Richard descends from the Philip Line only. That is one reason his results are so important. My branch descends from Philip and Richard. The group in the middle descend from Philip, Richard, and Archibald. That gets confusing. Michael and Jane descend from Richard and Archibald. David is not sure how he fits in, but by DNA, he seems to be in the Richard Line only. The group on the right only descend from Archibald Frazer and Ann Stinson. I could have drawn another box for the Archibald Line going to Patricia, but it would have been too confusing and David, who I think is just in the Richard Line should not be in that box.

As Philip is the eldest brother and Richard is the only one that descends from only Philip, he is listed first. Looking across Richard’s DNA match results, they look reasonable. Richard’s matches with those in the Philip Line are higher and the matches with those that are not in the Philip line are smaller. This is true except for Richard’s match with Michael. There they have a larger than average match. Michael and Richard would be 5th cousins, once removed through the father of Philip.

Here are some matching numbers from the ISOGG web page:

This shows that Richard and Michael could be within reported levels of cMs for 5C1R. I see that Richard’s 4C1R matches are a bit above average and his 5C matches are a bit below average.

Here is how Richard and Michael match each other:

Richard and Michael may want to share notes to see if there could be connections in their family trees other than through the Archibald Frazer Line.

I checked Richard and Gary against the DNA of the James line but only found some matches just below the 7 cM threshold.

Richard’s Detailed DNA Analysis and Triangulation Groups (TGs)

Triangulation Groups are a bit of a holy grail for some genetic genealogists. These are important in trying to establish common ancestors. These TGs form when three or more people match on the same segment of the same chromosome. These three should be more distantly related than siblings.

I find the TGs by looking at the detailed matches between all the DNA tested people in the Archibald Line of the Frazer DNA Project. These segments are a bit different than the ones in the Matrix above. There is a lower threshold for the Matrix, so the detailed match criteria of 7 cM is a bit more stringent.

Here are Richard’s matches:

In order for Richard to be in a TG, he has to match someone more than once along the same segment. I can see that happens at Chromosome 10 with Doreen, Susan and Ken. However, these three are siblings. Then in Chromosome 17, Richard matches Michael, Joel and Lori. That is an interesting twist, as I was hoping for an all-Philip Line descendant TG.

A Chromosome 17 TG

The TG looks like this in table form:

 

  • Richard matches Michael from 53-72M
  • Richard matches Joel and Lori from 57-79M
  • Michael matches Joel and Lori from 57-70M

Here is how the TG may look on a tree:

This is a simplified tree as it doesn’t show the yellow line under Philip Frazer. In addition, the yellow line is missing a lot of DNA testers. Richard is on the bottom left in green. My family is in blue. Michael is in the salmon color under the Richard Line. Michael is also shown partially in the Archibald Frazer/Ann Stinson Line. That is why I drew a circle in the area of the Archibald/Stinson line. This depiction shows the common ancestors of Archibald Frazer and Mary Lillie. However, we don’t know the wives of Philip or Richard. What if these two wives were sisters? Then the parents of these two sisters could also be the common ancestors of Michael, Richard, Joel and Lori.

Don’t Worry, Things Will Get Worse Before They Get Better

I had a junior high school science teacher that liked to say, ‘Don’t worry, things will get worse before they get better’. Perhaps it is that way with the DNA. This TG17 did point out one mistake that I had on my Kitty Munson Chromosome map.

Before I knew better, I had mapped position 57-70M to Richard Frazer. That was based on my match with Michael and our common ancestry of Richard Frazer. From what I know now, that is probably not correct. The Richard of this Blog probably does not descend from Richard Frazer born about 1777. A better guess at this time would be Archibald Frazer born about 1743. Now that is going back quite a way.

This is more accurate – for now:

A Surprise TG with Gary at Chromosome 7

In my last Blog, I had mentioned Gary. Gary had a pretty good Acheson tree. Some of his family were from the same area that my Frazer family was from around Lough Arrow in Southern County Sligo. Gary also showed up as a shared Match between me and Richard. Here is what the TG looks in table form:

This is perhaps easier to see from the viewpoint of Gary’s matches:

These are Gary’s matches with:

  1. Richard
  2. Paul
  3. Susan
  4. Joel
  5. Ken
  6. Lori

Remember that a TG shows common ancestry. Who do Richard, Paul, Susan, Joel, Ken and Lori have in common? That would be Philip born aboiut 1776 and his unknown wife. Here is the situation we have:

This means that it is likely that Gary has a connection with the Philip Line (or a Philip Line ancestor). As we have not come across Gary before in the Frazer project, that could mean that the common ancestor would more likely be

on Philip’s wife’s side. This is one of those cases where the DNA gets ahead of the genealogy.

We don’t want to leave Michael out of this. Michael matches Gary on a different Chromosome – Chromosome 22:

All these DNA matches are food for thought. They can be used to direct research energies.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Comparing Richard’s DNA to others in the Archibald Line shows an affinity to those who descend from Archibald’s son Philip born about 1776. I believe that Richard’s paper trail to Philip Frazer is a little better than mine. The DNA connection gives me more confidence that placing myself and the other Frazer shown in yellow on the DNA tree was the right thing to do.
  • One exception in Richard’s DNA matches was Michael. As far as we know, Michael does not descend from the Philip Line.  That would mean Richard and Michael’s DNA connection may go back to Archibald Frazer born 1743. Another possibility is that there is a connection between the family of Richard Frazer’s unknown wife and Philip Frazer’s unknown wife.
  • I was hoping to see some triangulation within the Philip Line. That did not happen, but further testing of other’s in Richard’s line may result in triangulation.
  • I find it interesting that Richard and I have been on parallel genealogical research paths. Both those paths have led back to a common ancestor – Philip Frazer – who was born in Aghrafinigan, North Roscommon around 1776.
Posted on

Richard and a Frazer DNA Breakthrough: Part One

Richard contacted me recently as he had seen my web page on my Frazer ancestors. He had seen some similarities between my Frazers and the names and places of Ontario Frazer ancestors he was researching and wondered if his Frazer ancestors matched with mine.

Here are some of the people that Richard has been researching. I have quoted Richard below in part:

Eliza Frazer, b. in Ireland on December 11, 1827 per 1901 Canada Census, having immigrated to Canada in 1842.

Ann Frazer, b. in Ireland about October 1832.  No record to date of Ann’s birthplace or parents.  She married Robert Johnston (b. Roscommon or Sligo, Ireland) in 1853, probably in Brant or Oxford counties, Ontario.

Rebecca Frazer, b. 1837 in Ireland, d. 1877 in Huron County Ontario.  Rebecca lived with Ann Frazer Johnston and Robert Johnston in 1861, as did Robert’s employee William Geddes.   Rebecca married William Geddes in 1865.  Their marriage record lists Rebecca’s parents as Philip Frazer and Mary Taylor.

George James Frazer/Fraser, b. July 6 1841 in County Sligo, Ireland.  No record yet of date of immigration.  George is listed in the 1861 Canada Census in Woodstock, Oxford County, Ontario, occupation school teacher.  George married Jane Burgess (daughter of William Burgess and Elizabeth Ann Watt) of Woodstock in 1863 in Paris, Brant County, Ontario.  The marriage record lists George’s parents as Philip Fraser and Mary Gray.

One interesting thing is that all these Frazers had children except Rebecca. Eliza, Ann and George all named their first child Philip. Richard guessed that Eliza was the one I had on my Frazer Web Page and that Ann and Rebecca were sisters. Richard descends from Ann who “…married Robert Johnston (b. Roscommon or Sligo, Ireland)…”

My initial guess was that all these four were siblings.

A Reassessment of the Philip Frazer Line

The earliest research on the Frazer line that we know of was done in the 1950’s:

This research shows Philip Frazer born 1758 with sons Philip and George. Subsequent research by Frazer descendents have moved these brothers’ birth dates up to the 1770’s. I reasoned that the James Frazer that married Violet Frazer above was actually another son of Philip above. This was based mostly on the James’ naming of his first son Philip and where these families lived in proximity to each other.

Here is my web page version:

 

Note that I have that the younger Philip married a Jane Johnston in 1818. However, it could be that the father Philip married this Jane as a second wife. Philip would have been about 42 in 1818.

Further, this George is of interest. My 2nd great grandfather was George Frazer born around 1836. He could have been named after the late George born say around 1800. Looking above, the George that the Richard of this Blog has could also have been named for the same George. This gives circumstantial evidence that he could also have been of this same Philip Line.

Finally, note the tithe applotment. My assumption is that George, Philip and James were three brothers. My second assumption is that they are listed in order of age. That would make George the eldest and James the youngest. I have James born around 1804 based on his age at death. That would put the two brothers as born sometimes before then – Perhaps 1800 and 1802.

More Thoughts on the Philip Frazer, Jr. Line

Here is my web page which is in need of revising:

First, I am leaning toward putting Jane Johnston with the elder Philip. Second, I now have a wife for the junior Philip from Michael’s compilation of Frazer records:

MLB                 Marriage Licence Bonds (Diocese of Elphin 1709-1845)

This information is interesting in light of Richard’s research showing that Rebecca’s parents were Philip Frazer and Mary Taylor. Richard’s Rebecca was born later than the one I have on my web page above. This could mean one of two things:

  • The first Rebecca died and the family had a later Rebecca
  • Rebecca wanted to be younger than she really was

This brings up the subject of the Maxwell Discontinuity.

The Maxwell Discontinuity.

I had told Richard that this was the Minion discontinuity, but apparently I was wrong. These are Minions:

Maxwell was the Parish Priest in Klmactranny. He was supposed to be taking down records but didn’t between sometime in 1830 and sometime before early 1842. For this reason, a lot of important records are missing. My 2nd great grandfather was born about 1836. So that could explain his missing birth record. Apparently the birth of Richard’s George James Frazer is missing due to the Maxwell discontinuity. Hmm… perhaps George James Frazer was named for the deceased George mentioned above and also for my ancestor James born about 1804. Well, James is a common name. Another issue for Richard’s George James Frazer is that his mother is listed as Mary Gray rather than Mary Taylor. There could be at least two reasons for that:

  • The wrong name could have been written down for George’s mother on his marriage record
  • George’s father could have remarried a Mary Gray. I suppose if this was the case, then DNA testing of descendants would show the difference. For example, matches between Richard and George’s descendants would be half cousins, so the DNA matches would be half as much as they would be with the full cousins.

What About Ann Frazer born 1832

If Ann Frazer was a sibling of Philip, Eliza, Rebecca and George she would have been born during the Maxwell Discontinuity. It would have been likely that she would have been baptized at the same Church as her siblings.

That sums up some of the genealogical connections between the families.

Next, on to the DNA

Richard’s Ancestry DNA Matches

Richard gave me access to his DNA results. I typed in Frazer on Richard’s match list and came up with these results:

 

These were just the projected 4th cousin by DNA matches. The first match was with Michael who compiled the Frazer records I mentioned above. The second match was with Gladys who I have as descending from Philip Frazer. Both of these people are the Frazer DNA project that I run. I don’t know who Debbie is.

Under more distant cousins, my sister Lori and I are listed. Then there is Moira who I don’t know. Finally there is someone who wished to remain anonymous, but is clearly related on what I have as the Philip Frazer (Sr.) Line. Once I saw the Ancestry results, I was quite sure that Richard was on the right track and was related by DNA and genealogy to the rest of the Frazers in the Frazer DNA Group.

But Wait, There’s More: Shared Matches

AncestryDNA doesn’t have a chromosome browser, but they do have a useful utility called Shared Matches. When I check the Shared Matches between myself and Richard, I come up with Gary. Here is Gary’s paternal tree from Ancestry:

Gary has his great grandfather William Acheson as being from Rockview, Lough Arrow, County Sligo. My Frazer ancestors lived on Lough Arrow and some of my relatives are still there. The ones I have been most in touch with live on the NE shore of Lough Arrow Here is a map of the Rock View Hotel, which I assume could be the same place:

Another tie-in is that Arthur, someone that helped with my genealogy years ago, was researching Achesons. Arthur was the one that coined the phrase Maxwell Discontinuity and discovered the gap of missing records.

It turns out that Gary’s father’s best man at his wedding was one of my Frazer relatives from near Lough Arrow. I had asked Gary to upload his results to Gedmatch. I didn’t see his message that he did that until I looked again at his results at AncestryDNA just recently. Right now Gary’s results don’t give me any easy answers, but there seem to be some interesting connections there – somewhere that we haven’t figured out yet. Ah, the mystery of genetic genealogy.

By the way, a Shared Match means just that. It means I match Richard by DNA. Richard matches Gary and I match both of them. It is not the same as triangulation by DNA but it could be the same. In a way it means, where there is smoke, there may be fire.

A Summary of Part One

  • Some Ontario Frazers that Richard has been researching (including his own ancestor Ann Frazer) appear to be siblings. They also all descend from Philip Frazer. This appears to be the same Philip who I have as the son of another Philip from North Roscommon, Ireland and the brother of my ancestor James Frazer. I have not proven that my ancestor James is the brother of Philip, but the research from Richard adds circumstantial evidence to the work that I have done.
  • In addition to matching by genealogy to my Frazer relatives, Richard matches me, my sister and two other Frazers in the Frazer DNA Project: Gladys and Michael. The match to Gladys can be explained if we are all descended from Philip Frazer born around 1776.
  • Richard also matches Michael at AncestryDNA. I have that Michael does not descend from Philip born around 1776, but from two of his brothers: Richard and Archibald. That means that the common ancestor between Michael, myself, Gladys and Richard could be the father of Philip or another collateral line. Actually Gladys does match Michael on another Frazer Line. Both Gladys and Michael descend from Archibald Frazer born about 1778 who is a brother of the Philip born about 1776.
  • Richard and I have another shared match Gary. The connection between this Gary, Richard and me may be even more difficult to figure out than the one between Michael, Richard and myself. This is because Gary is not aware of any Frazers in his ancestry.
  • So far, my research on the Frazer family has been a great collaboration with other Frazer researchers around the world. I am glad to have Richard contributing his research to the work that others have done.

Next Blog

In the next Blog, I’ll take a look at Richard’s results at Gedmatch. AncestryDNA gives some general matching information, but does not give specific matches. With specific matches, on specific parts of specific chromosomes, it is possible to infer or give pretty good indication of common ancestors. This DNA may give further evidence for or against having my James Frazer in the Philip Line.

Also, I know how I am related to Michael. My ancestor Violet Frazer was the daughter of Richard Frazer born about 1777. Violet was the sister of Isabella Frazer who was the ancestor of Michael. However, I am not sure how Richard matches Michael. He would have a common ancestor in the father of Philip Sr who was Archicbald Frazer born about 1743, but that is going quite a way back.

 

 

.