Initial Frazier YDNA Results Show Connection to North Roscommon Frazers May Be Further Back in Time

I mentioned in a previous Blog that a Frazier has recently ordered a BigY 700 test. The first step in this test is going from his previous 37 STRs to 111 STRs. Richard’s BigY test is now at the stage where his 111 STRs have been completed.

Richard and Rick

Rick also ordered a BigY test and I am also awaiting the results of his tests. I was checking out Rick’s test and saw that he also matched Richard:

Rick matches Richard at 111 markers at a Genetic Distance of 8. That is out at the level that Rick matches two people with the Stuart surname. Initially, that seems to suggest that Richard’s match could be more distant to the Frazers of Ireland than originally thought. This has implications on Richard’s genealogy. If he matched Rick more closely, then we would be looking for Richard’s ancestors in Ireland. If they are matched more distantly, which seems to be the case, then it is likely that the common ancestor for Frazer and Frazier is in Scotland prior to the Frazer move to Ireland. At the the 37 STR level, it seemed like Richard would be more closely related to the Frazers. These 111 STRs give a more accurate level of information.

It would make more sense to show the connection from Richard’s perspective:

Richard is a GD of 7 to Jonathan and a GD of 10 to Paul. However, he is also a GD of 9 to a Stuart. What will be more important to know is Richard’s Haplogroup. That will be revealed when the results of his BigY are completed. However, based on this, my guess is that Richard’s connection should be further back than the time that my Frazer ancestors arrived in Ireland.

Here is a chart which I just saw today:

This chart was done for a different project (R-U106), so the numbers may not be the same for our R1a Frazers. However, based on the above, Richard’s most likely match with the Frazer family was a GD of 8. This translates to between 180 and 720 years. The midpoint of this range is 450 years, which is around the time-frame that I am guessing could be right for a common ancestor between Richard and our North Roscommon Frazers.

Here is the view from Jonathan’s results:

Based on my previous analysis, it appears that Jonathan’s YDNA results are more typical of our Irish Frazer ancestor. As such, Jonathan matches Richard between two Stuarts by STRs. However, as I mentioned above, what will be more important is Richard’s Haplogroup. Above, my Irish Frazer relatives are R-YP6489 and the Stuart Haplogroup is R-BY26344. That can be better seen on Jonathan’s Block Tree:

Further out, Jonathan matches a Hayes at R-YP6480. The question is, what will Richard’s Haplogroup be? My guess is that Richard could match Jonathan, Rodney and Paul with a Frazer (or variant spelling) somewhat further back than Jonathan’s, Rodney’s and Paul’s common ancestor who lived in Ireland. Further, Richard may break up the block of SNPs in the white box above starting with R-YP6489.

What Does It Mean to Break a Block?

Here is the block that needs breaking:

My Frazer relatives (Jonathan, Rodney and Paul) have five SNPs defining them all. R-YP6489 was chosen to represent this block of SNPs that defines the North Roscommon Frazers. That means that since before the time when surnames were popular, these SNPs have been collecting every 144 years or so in our North Roscommon Frazer line. We don’t know which SNPs happened first or last. Suppose that when Richard’s BigY results come in he is tested positive for three of the SNPs above, but not the other two. If one of Richard’s positive SNPs turns out to be YP6489, he will be called YP6489 and the other three Frazers will be named for one of the SNPs that Richard did not test positive for. Also, depending on the results, we should be able to figure out around what year our Frazers split off from Richard’s Fraziers/Frashers.

There is also a possiblilty that Richard’s YDNA will be more alignted with Grant and Stuart on the right. They are under BY26344. Right now, I am thinking that this possibility will be less likely.

Dating the Haplogroups from the Block Tree

In the image above, there are an average of two private variants between Jonathan, Paul and Rodney. One way to estimate the date of their common ancesor is to use 144 years per variant. That would put their common ancestor at about 244 years before their birth (say 1950) or about 1706. This is very close to when we believe that their common ancestor was born.

However, between Frazer, Grant and Stuart above, a lot more time has passed. Between YP6488 and our Frazer testers there are 7 SNPs. Between YP6488 and Stuart/Grant, there are 8 SNPs. I’ll average that out at 7.5 SNPs. Multiply that by 144 years and get 1,080 years.  My guess is that Richard’s results will fill in part of the gap between  the 11th century and 1706.

Our Frazers are documented to North Roscommon in the first half of the 1700’s. Clans associated with the Frazers by YDNA bordered each other to the SW of Inverness. By YDNA, the common ancestor of these associated clans could have been living around 1,000 AD. By family tradition, the Frazers were living in Ayrshire prior to their arrival in Ireland. It may be this time period (1600 or so) that Richard could tie into.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Richard’s 111 STR results have come in as the the first part of his BigY 700 test
  • These STR results suggest that he matches our North Roscommon Frazers more distantly than suggested by his 37 STR results
  • My guess is that Richard’s results will fill in the YDNA gap between the Stuart, Grant and others whose common ancestor could go back to about 1,000 AD and the North Roscommon Frazers whose common ancestor lived in the early 1700’s.
  • Frazer/Frazier/Frasher descendants should be expectantly awaiting Richard’s results.
  • In addition to Richard’s results, Frazers are awaiting the new BigY 700 results of Rick. Plus Rodney will be getting an upgrade from BigY 500 to BigY 700. That is a total of three Frazer/Frazier BigY 700 results we are waiting for.

The First BigY 700 Frazer Results Starting to Come In

I wrote about the ordering of Rick’s new BigY 700 test here. This is good news for at least a few reasons. One is that he is on my particular Archibald Branch of the Frazer family. The second is that his is the first BigY 700 test ordered. There have been three other of the older BigY 500 tests that have been taken – two on the James Line and one on the Archibald Line:

Paul on the left is my second cousin once removed. His grandfather Hubert was my great-grandfather James Archibald’s brother.  Rick on the bottom left is the subject of this Blog.

Rick’s YDNA Order History

This shows that Rick’s BigY-700 has been completed. However, that is only part of the story. The only results I can see so far are his 111 STR results. Three years ago Rick’s Y-DNA67 results came in which were for 67 STRs. Now we can see how Rick matches Paul, Rodney and Jonathan at 111 STRs:

Rick’s first match is with my cousin Paul as expected. Second is with Jonathan, and third with Rodney. The last two matches are with Stuart surnames which is interesting. It appears that there is not much difference between Rick’s match with Rodney and the Stuart matches. However, that is where the BigY test comes in. Rick’s next to last match took a BigY test and that Stuart is at BY26344. This Stuart branch is on a parallell branch to the Frazer branch. This is how it appears at YFull:

The common SNP for Frazer and Stuart is YP6488 which was formed 1150 years ago and our common ancestor was 800 years ago, so say 1200 AD. The takeaway is that the BigY test with its SNPs is superior to the STR test.

A 111 STR Frazer Tree

With Rick’s results it will be possible to buiild a 111 STR tree for the four Frazers who have now tested to that level. To do that I first go to the Fraser and Septs YDNA Project Page.

These are the four Frazers who have tested plus one person who fits in with Frasher ancestry. I will just look at the four Frazers. There are 111 STR results but I have not shown that many. Rick is the one who doesn’t show his ancestor. The fourth row down gives the Mode. I will assume that is the oldest value for the STR.

Next, I take the results from the Fraser and Septs Page and put them into an Excel spreadsheet. Then I take out all the results that are the same:

I have Richard in for reference. He tested to the 37 STR level. However, based on that testing, I see how he seems to fit in with the others. When I copied the DYS385 results, Excel interpreted 11-14 and 11-15 as 14 and 15 Nov.

This appears to be the ancestral STR signature for our branch of Frazers:

Archibald Branch STRs

The Archibald Branch which Rick and I are on is defined by these STRs:

Note that the CDY had a double change. The James Line appears to have kept the older STR values.

Further Frazer Branching

Here is the tree I came up with:

I tried to combine the genealogy with the STR values. The Archibald Branch is defined by the three STRs on the left. These mutations ocurred sometime between 1720 and 1804. Rick has DYS444=13. This happened sometime between Richard of 1830 and our current Rick. Paul has DYS575=19 which ocurred sometime between his great-grandfather George and Paul.

For some reason I don’t have a date for William Fitzgerald Scarsfield Frazer. I have that Edward Fitzgerald Frazer was born in 1867. So the William Frazer Line has the DYS552 value of 24 which ocurred sometime between before 1867 and the birth of Rodney.

One interesting thing about Jonathan is that he shows no STR mutation between himself and Archibald Frazer of about 1690. This could be the case due to the randomness of STR mutations or it is possible that there could have been a mutation and a back mutation in his line. If this was true, we wouldn’t know it. Scanning across Jonathan’s line we can see that all his values are the same as the mode for the Frazers which we take to be the ancestral STRs:

This is offset by Rick and Paul who both had changes in four STRs.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Rick’s first change in his BIgY test is that he now has his 111 STR results.
  • These results are consistant with what we have for the Frazer genealogical tree.
  • A was able to build a 111 STR tree as all four Frazer testers have now tested to that level.
  • The STRs are the preview. The most important part of the BigY 700 test with SNP results is still to come.


A New Frazier BigY 700 Ordered

Thanks to Joanna, she got Richard and me talking. That lead to a new BigY being ordered. That means that two new Frazer/Frazier BigY 700’s are in the pipeline right now. I wrote about the previous new BigY here. That previous test was for Rick and this one is for Richard.

Richard’s Previous YDNA Testing

Richard has tested test to the 37 STR level and matches my second cousin Paul at that level:

Rick is in the first orange box and Richard in the second orange box. They are both considered to be R-M198 by FTDNA. Rick has tested to 111 STRs. Rick is a fairly close relative to Paul in terms of YDNA. He is a third cousin once removed:

The exciting thing about Richard is that we don’t know how he is related. We are hoping that the BigY 700 will shed some light on that. So far, on the above chart, Paul, Rodney and Jonathan have taken the BigY 500 test. Rick and Richard will be the first to take the BigY 700 test. The good thing about the BigY 700 test is that it is more accurate and tests for more SNPs. SNPs are what we are looking for to define the Frazer lines on the YDNA Tree.

I also wrote a Blog on Richard’s results back in 2018 when he first had his YDNA tested. At that time, I concluded that Frasher and Frizelle were related to the North Roscommon Frazers.

On this chart:

I notice that some are classified as R-M198 and some are R-M512. As far as I can tell, there is no distinction between these two Haplogroups:

My guess is that R-M512 was the older names because those that have that designation tested in 2015. The date for these two haplogroups is about 6,500 B.C. From an older Blog I wrote, our branch of Frazers are on the Germanic side:

However, this is a tree from about 4 years ago. A lot has happened since then. S2880 is the last Haplogroup on our Frazer Line showing on this tree. According to YFull:

S2880 formed about 3700 years ago. That gave our Germanic Frazer ancestors plenty of time to make their way to what is now Scotland. These are the dates that YFull has for our present-day Frazer BigY testers:

Richard in the Fraser and Septs Project

Richard has joined the Fraser and Septs Project. In that Project, the R1a Frasers/Frazers, etc are in the minority. Most Frasers are R1b. That is because our Frazers as being Germanic were relative late comers to Scotland, having arrived perhaps around the time of Christ. Here are the results from that Project:

Here I have only gone to the 37 STR level as that is what Richard tested to. The administrators of Fraser and Septs placed Richard in with our North Roscommon Frazers:

First is Rodney from my tree above, then Jonathan, then Richard, Rick and Paul.

Richard’s Family Tree

I think that I found Richard’s tree:

This tree starts with Richard’s grandfather. I am mostly interested in the Frazier/Frasher line as that is what YDNA looks at. I think that other Frazers that descend from the Frazers of North Roscommon, Ireland may be interested also. At this point, I usually try and do my own tree to see if it comes out the same way. At best, this will be a second opinion. I don’t have the time to go into it in great detail, but may find out if the tree is obvious or if there are problem points.

Richard’s grandfather is found in the 1920 Census:

His father, Frank was the enumerator:

Frank and his father were both born in Tennessee according to the 1920 Census. Here is Dickson to the West of Nashville:

Frank Frazier

I think that this is Frank in the 1900 Census:

Interestingly, this family is listed as Frasher. This is consistent with Frank’s death record which has his mother as Mary Graham born in Pennsylvania:

Interestingly, the marriage record spells the name Frasher also:

Morgan and Anderson Frazier/Frasher

Here is Anderson Frasher with his large family on the farm in Dickson:

Here Morgan is William M. It helps that the family lived in Dickson for so long. here is the family in 1870. Now Anderson just has initials none of which are ‘A’:

Findagrave has Anderson’s name as William Pellen Frasher:

This appears to reconcile the names:

However, the name is Frasher on the stone:

Here is a photo of W.P.A. that I found from an Ancestry Tree:

This was a Southern family and W.P.A. served for the Confederate army during the Civil War as a blacksmith. He was also a prisoner of war.

David Frazier/Frasher (1803-1890)

Here is W.P.A. in 1850:

William A was a farmer in Dickson. His father was a blacksmith:

They were both born in Tennessee. From this point, without a detailed Census before 1850, tracking this family should be more difficult. The 1880 Census gives a hint.

David’s father was born in Virginia and his mother in North Carolina. His wife, Elizabeth’s parents were both born in Georgia.

William Frazier/Frasher

All the Ancestry trees have William as the father of David. When I put in William Frazier as the father of David at Ancestry I get 7 hints Here is one from 1828:

It appears to me that the Frazier/Frasher name was phonetically spelled. Here we have a combination that came out as Frashier. This was in Hickman County. Hickson is quite close to Dickson:

In the record above, George Harvell is listed as an assignee of William Frashier. I am not sure what this meant. It seems like land was granted to William, but he gave it George? This seems to be our William Frasher due to the proximity to Dickson County. Here is the 8th District mentioned in the land record above:

However, there was a William Frasher listed in the 1790 Census for Randolph, North Carolina:

Here is Randolph, NC:

Here is the 1830 Census:

The simple interpretation is that William was between 60 and 69 and that his wife was between 50 and 59. It is likely that he was living with his four sons and one daughter. It appears that his son David was not included here as he is listed elsewhere on the Dickson 1830 Census:

Here is a good land deal in Hickman. One cent per acre for 100 acres:

Here is a portion of some tax records for Hickman:

The left part is cut off, but it looks like there is a David, William and Robert Frasher listed there.  My thinking is that Frasher was a fairly rare name. Meanwhile, in Dickson the tax record has a William Frasher and a David Frazier:

Of course, none of this shows that William was the father of David. I suppose it must be from family tradition.


Back in 1827, there was a William Frashier buying land in White County at 12 and a half cents per acre:

White County is to the East of Nashville:

Here is an 1825 tax record for White County:

Perhaps Thomas, William, Alexander Senior and Junior and Munford were related.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Richard has ordered a new BigY 700 test. These results will first show his 111 STRs, then extended STRs, then the SNPs which give the most accurate reading of his male line.
  • Richard’s past testing of 37 STRs has put him in a grouping with my Frazer family with roots in North Roscommon, Ireland. That means that it is possible that Richard’s ancestors came from that same place.
  • Richard’s ancestors had the last name of Frazier, Frasher or Frashier, but I haven’t seen their name spelled Frazer.
  • I took a look at Richard’s genealogy. His ancestors lived for quite some time in Tennessee. Before that they were proably in North Carolina and possibly Virginia. There is a lot of speculation on where William Frasher was born including one document claiming he could have been a German mercenary during the Revolutionary War. As it is claimed that William was born in 1765, that would have made him a very young mercenary during that War.
  • Next, I will review Richard’s 111 STR results when they come in.



My Daughter-In-Law’s Genealogy: Part 2

In my last post, I looked at my daughter-in-law Sarah’s Vezina heritage back to France. I also started looking at her Portuguese side. In this Blog, I’d like to look more into the Portuguese side. This is as far as I got in her tree for Sarah’s paternal side:

All the green leaves are hints. However, some are just directory listings. I have that all of Sarah’s paternal great-grandparents were born in Portugal. It would be nice to pin a specific place to these people.

Manuel Pimental Born 1890

I have that Manuel was a barber. Here in the 1930 Census. In that Census, I am interested in the Immigration year and Naturalization status for Manuel and his wife Mary or Maria:

Actually I need the family members also:

That is so I can make sure I have the right family in the 1920 Census:

The daughter Mary was born in Portugal. Now the immigration year is the same for Manuel and the two Marys wich makes more sense. Now the oldest three show as aliens. It may be that Manuel got his naturalization between 1920 and 1930.

In 1920, the family was living at 74 Hope Street in New Bedford:

From the Census, it appeared that many families were living at this address.

Manuel Pimental’s Naturalization

This should be the key to linking Manuel back tot he old country:


As a bonus, there is a photo of Sarah’s great-grandfather.

The Azores

I believe this is it. Perhaps JJ and Sarah will visit:

The population in 2011 was 436.

It appears that Sarah’s Pimental’s roots were in a remote village on a remote Island.

The naturalization record leads to a shipping record dated 15 April 1910 which can tell us a lot:

First, Maria appears to have been born when her mom was 15. Also the spelling here is Pimentel. I’m guessing that this was the original spelling. Manual’s signature seems to spell his name the same way on his Declaration of Intention above.

These columns can be helpful:

Manuel gave as a reference, his neighbor:

Here we also have the proper spelling of Achada that agrees with the Google Map above. The intended destination after arriving in New York was New Bedford.

Manuel arrived with $15. He noted that he had visited New Bedford twice before the current trip:

Once Manuel got to New Bedford, he planned on staying with his brother-in-law on Coggeshall Street:

Mother and daughter Maria were born in Achada:

On Manuel’s Declaration above he was said to be born in ‘Achado’. Here he appears to be born in Rehada. I’m not sure about the ‘R’. Perhaps they all say Achada but were written differently for some reason.

Records from the Azores

There are records from the Azores but they are difficult to read. I go to this website and find this form:

To get to Achada Baptisms, I made the following choices:

I have that Manuel was born on October 12, 1887:

According to the above, he was also married on his birthday October 12, 1893. According to the website, Manuel was born in 1886:

This cemetery is on Allen Street:

According to this web site on Azores Genealogy, I should be able to find out a lot of information from these records:


I tried looking at some of these records and was having trouble figuring them out. Perhaps marriage records would be easier as suggested above. However, the dates are a bit confusing. Maria is listed as 19 years old when she arrived in New York in 1910. If she married in 1903, she would have been about 12 or 13! Further, Maria’s birthdate is listed as August 30, 1893. Does that seem right? That means that I have a lot of information and dates, but are the dates accurate?

Some 1903 Marriage Discoveries

Here is marriage #4 for Achado:

I’m reading something like Maneul Rego Pimental and Dona Rosada ? Franco. Marriage #6 from November of the same year had a Maria Franco married to someone else, but was Franco her middle name?


Let’s concentrate on Marriage #4. Here is the Achado Church:

The first four lines of the marriage record appear to include the date and information about the Church:

Outubro is October in Portuguese, so the month is right. I don’t know how to read the day.

I would like to find out the names of the parents of Manuel and Dona (aka Maria). Here is my best guess for Manuel’s parents:

Legitimo means legitimate – or we may that Manuel was the natural son of Manuel Rego and Dona Maria de Lur. At least it looks like Lur.

That leaves this for Manuel’s wife’s parents:

Julio de Medeiros Franco and Dona Maria Rosa de Men? Unfortunately, the surname went on to another line. Here is the end of the record:

That would be Manuel’s signature I assume. The others are perhaps witnesses or even the priest? There is a lot of information on the record. I imagine that some information had to do with occupations. If Sarah has some Portuguese-speaking connections, we may get a better read on this record.

Azorean Baptismal Records

Now that I have broken the Portuguese record barrier by getting some basic information from a marriage record, I would like to find birth records for Maria aka Dona Rosa Franco and Manuel Rego Pimentel. I am guessing that the Rego could be an important hint due to the number of Portuguese Manuels.

A Possible Baptismal Record for Manuel Pimental

Here is Record #68 from October 1886:

In the margin, there is a note about America. However, the parents look different than for the marriage record above:

That means that either I had the wrong marriage above or more likely, I have the wrong baptismal record here.

Jose Mendes Born 1892

I’ll take a break from Sarah’s Pimental side and look at the Mendes side. Jose was Sarah’s great-grandfather:

In 1940, Jose was a weaver at the Sowle Mill living at 55 Collette Street.

There were more children on the next page.

Sowle was the Ancestry transcription. It was actually the Soule Mill on Sawyer Street:

Here are Collette Street and Sawyer Street on a map:

Jose’s WWII Draft Registration Card is helpful:

I am looking for Jose’s European roots. Here, he reports he is from Melo Portugal. Here is what Google Maps shows me for Melo:

The Draft Card also gives a different name for Jose’s wife. The Census had her as Elvira. Here she is Elrida. The 1930 Census shows much the same information. However, the immigration columns are important:

Jose, his wife and eldest daughter are listed as aliens. This also shows that Jose came to the US first and his wife and daughter came the next year which would not be unusual.

Next is the 1920 Census:

In 1920, Sarah’s grandmother Isabel was a baby. This shows that Jose had immigrated in 1916 and that he was an alien. They lived at 381 Coggeshall Street:

Here is 397 Coggeshall, so I guess the building is no longer there:

Here is Jose’s burial marker:

It looks like the Elvira name stuck for his wife. They were buried in St. John’s Cemetery where Manual Pimental was buried.

More on Jose Mendes

There area 10 trees at Ancestry that mention Jose Mendes. Two have parents for Jose:

Passenger Lists for Jose Mendes

This looks like Jose’s record:

This was from May 12, 1913 on the Caledonia. Note that Jose’s middle name was Augusto which is what the tree above had for Jose’s father.

Jose gave his last address as Mello Portugal. He lists wife Maria as his closest relative. I think it says her address is d’Annuciae? Sousa, Mello. His destination is New Bedford. The ship left from Scotland and landed in New York City. Jose’s plan was to stay with a friend on Coggeshall Street:

Jose was five foot three and gave his birthplace as Mello:

That is good news, because that menas that this WWI Draft Registration is also Sarah’s Jose:

However, Jose gives a different birthday here than he does on his WWII Draft Registration. Also here he gives Cambezes, Portugal as his birthplace. He also says he is single, so possibly there were two Jose Mendes? [Note: This was the wrong guy – see below.]

Three Joseph Mendes on Coggeshall Street

I was a little surprised to find three Joseph Mendes on Coggeshall Street in the 1919 New Bedford Directory:

Isn’t that confusing? Clearly Sarah’s Joseph was living at 381 Coggeshall Street. Soon after he moved to Collette Street because that is where we find the family in the 1925 Directory:

In the previous column there were a Jose and Joseph living on Coggeshall:

That means that the WWI Registration Card for Jose Ahes Mendes is not for Sarah’s great-grandfather. Also the shipping record for the Jose Augusto Mendes from Villa Cortez, Portugal was also the wrong person. I can weed out that record.

Here is the correct record again in context:

The second M in the column menas that Jose was married. The no and no meant he could not read or write. Antonio Viegias may have been a relative as Jose’s wife name was believed to be Elvira Conccica Viegas. However, his Portugal contact from this record appears to be his wife listed as

Maria d’Annuciaedo Souza. Confusing. He was from what looks to be Nabaes:

However, it is actually Nabais:

By the way, one of the other Joseph Mendes’ was from Vila Cortez Da Serra. Also note Melo not far from Nabais. Probably less than a mile and a half away. Here is a photo of Melo now that I’m sure I have the right place:

I’m sure the area is rich with history:

Melo is part of the municipality of Gouveia in the district of Guarda.

Melo was known for farming and historically for sheep and weaving. When Jose Mendes came to the New Bedford, he was listed as a weaver in a cotton mill there.

Melo Vital Records

FamilySearch has records here:

It looks like my only choice for Melo is the Parish of Santo Isidoro. I have that Jose was born on 5 March 1891, so let’s give that a shot:

When I choose Batismos, Matrimonios 1787-1910, I get this message:

It appears that I am out of luck as far as at-home research for Melo, Portugal.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I was successful in getting Sarah’s Pimental line back to the Azores and her Mendes line back to Portugal.
  • Parish records exist online for the Azores but the specific records that I was looking for were difficult to find
  • I couldn’t find Parish records online for Melo, Portugal
  • Sarah had heard about her background from mainland Portugal but was unaware of here Azorean roots.
  • Both of these places look like they would be interesting to visit.


My Daughter-In-Law’s Genealogy

I have never looked into my daughter-in-law’s genealogy, but would like to do that now. Sarah is Portuguese and French Canadian. It would be nice to get back to Portugal and Canada with her heritage and find out some more about it. Sarah’s recent ancestry is in New Bedford. My ancestors were also immigrants to New Bedford but from England.

Starting Sarah’s Genealogy

I didn’t have to add a new tree for Sarah. I just added her onto my existing tree at Ancestry:

This is how far I got yesterday working through Ancestry on my phone. I blurred out some of Sarah’s mom’s information. I’ll have to ask Sarah more about her maternal grandparents. Sarah has roots in New Bedford as both her parents were born there.

Joseph Pimental

I lifted Ken’s parents from another Ancestry tree that focused in on the Mendes side. I checked with Sarah and it was right. Ken was born when his parents were older. Here is Ken’s father’s Joseph’s World War II Draft Registration:

He lived on Coffin Ave in New Bedford and named his mother as a contact.

The house on the right has a 194 on it.

Joseph worked at the Nonquitt Mills:

There was also a Census in 1940:

This Census tells us that Joseph’s parents were born in Portugal and that they owned their own house. There were two more children on the next page, so a total of 7 kids in 1940.

It looks like Manuel was a barber and Joseph was a cleaner at the factory in 1940.

Here is Joseph’s service record:

Sarah’s Mother’s Side

Sarah’s mother’s side is French Canadian. Sarah’s mother’s father was Joseph Roland Vezina. Here is young Roland in the 1940 Census:

He was living at 1012 Victoria Street in New Bedford. His father Roland was listed as a salesman for a baking company. The Census also says that Roland and Beatrice lived in Fall River in 1935.

This is the photo that Google maps has for that address:

Roland Vezina Sr

I’ll quickly jump back to Roland Vezina Sr. As per above, he was born in Fall River in 1910:

Both of Roland’s parents were born in Canada. Roland was from a large family:

They lived at 698 South Main Stree in Fall River in 1910:

Roland’s father George was listed as a tea merchant.

A Tale of Two George E Vezinas

George was born in Canada. Here is one page of his Naturalization records:

The good news about this record is that it gives his birth place. I think that he was from L’Ange Gardien. My first search for this place came up with this:

I may be way off on this based on the 1871 Census:

This shows George in St Michel, North Bellechasse.

That means that it would be a good idea to figure out where the place is listed on George’s Naturalization papers. Here is the 1881 Census:

I assume I have the right George here. It would help to have a marriage record or birth record for George. Fortunately, I found George’s baptismal record in L’Ange Gardien in 1862:

That means that the Census that I had for 1871 and 1881 showed the wrong George Vezina. Here is the right one in Salem in 1880:

Here is 144 Congress Street:

Further, we learn from George’s baptismal record that his mother’s full name was Marie Zoe Lefrancois.

Where Did the Vezinas Live in Canada? Looking for L’Ange Gardien

All indications point to L’Ange Gardien, but where exactly was this place? Here is a death record for an Albert Vezina. I assume that he was a priest:

He gives his birth place as Danville, Canada. Google Maps show Danville next to Asbestos Quebec:

Another trick is to look at the beginning of George’s baptismal book. This is a short book of about 12 pages:

This tells me that George was baptized in Montmorency. I had trouble finding a map of L’Ange Gardien.

This place is close to a tourist area which is the Montmorency Falls at Boischatel. I believe that Sarah’s husband, my son, has been there. L’Ange Gardien looks like a large place but it is not really. It is just highlighted on the map. Here is the view of L’Ange Gardien from the St. Lawrence River:

My French teacher wife tells me L’Ange Gardien means Guardian Angel.

Here are the Montmorency Falls:

In real life, they are more dramatic.

Here are some of Sarah’s ancestors so far:

I tried to pixelate some of the information for Sarah’s mother and grandmother as they are still alive. This shows out to two of Sarah’s third great-grandparents: Regis and Zoe.

More on the Vezina Family

Things are going pretty well, so I might as well see how far back I can get on the Vezina Line. Here is an 1860 marriage record for Regis, transcribed by Ancestry as Pregis – probably due to the handwriting.

This seems like a longer than usual marriage record.  Right now, I’m just following up on the Vezina line to see where it takes me. This marriage record gives the parents of Regis as Pierre and Elizabeth Côté. Here is Regis’ intention to become a citizen of the US:

Regis was a carpenter. Sometime between 1880 and 1887, the family moved from Salem to Fall River.

Pierre Vezina

On the marriage record above, Pierre is listed as Regis’ father. Here is Pierre’s marriage record from 1823:

This marriage took place at Chateau Richer:

According to Google Maps, Chateau is a small town not far from L’Ange Gardien:

At the time of Pierre’s marriage, he was a farmer.

Vezina in the 1700’s

From the marriage record above, Pierre’s father was also a Pierre. Pierre Vezina and Marie LaBerge married in 1795 in good old L’Ange Gardien:

This Pierre was the son of another Pierre Vesina. If the Pierre from the marriage record was 25 when he married, he would have been born around 1770. His mother’s name appears to be Marie-Anne Morray.

Next Pierre Vesina

Here is another marriage made in L’Ange Gardien:

This is the transcription. Here they have Marois for Marie Anne instead of the Morray I had guessed at from their son’s marriage record, but I think that is pretty close. I’m not coming up with a good guess for this Pierre’s mother:

However, I am getting Jean for the father. I have been waiting for the point where some of this information is written into books. This may be the point:

This shows Pierre as Pierre-Francois. The mother’s name that I couldn’t figure out was Marie Bernadine Roy. Notice that Vezina has gone to Vesina and now to Vesinat. It is not clear to me how the Tanguay Collection works, but my guess is that Francois was the father of Jean and another Pierre was the father of Francois. [Note: After further review, it appears that Pierre would be the father of Bernadine.]

Tracing Vesinats Back to the 1600’s

Now I am spoiled by the Tanguay Collection:

It looks like Francois who was born in 1681 had several children. This couple married in 1703:

That must be Francois’ signature above.

Here is the next Francois going back:

Here is another listing:

Now I see that the 1679 in bold must be the marriage date. I am not sure why there are two entries here. Here is some information from a website called Geni:

I assume that the reference to Cadet means the younger Francois as there appear to be two brothers named Francois.

La Rochelle

LaRochelle is an interesting place:

My understanding is that La Rochelle was a holdout of Protestant rebels. These rebels were besieged by the French government and starved. There was a TLC TV show called Who Do You Think You are? that highlighted this historical event. The show was about the ancestry of Tom Bergeron in Season 6, Episode 6. Here is one link that discusses the episode. Basically, Bergeron was surprised to find that he had a Protestant ancestor from La Rochelle. This ancestor converted to Catholicism amidst pressure and became a fille du roi. These were daughters of the king but not literally. They were women recruited to go to New France (Quebec) to help with the shortage of women there. It would be interesting to delve into Sarah’s La Rochelle connection sometime.

My Wife’s Vesina Connection

It turns out that my wife is connected on the Vesina side also. Her dad’s mother was French Canadian. Here is my wife’s paternal grandmother’s mother’s tree:

On the right is Marie Anne Vesina. Marie-Anne’s father Pierre was different than Sarah’s ancestor Pierre:

However, Pierre’s father was Francois Vesinat. Pierre Vesinat and Jeanne LeTartre married in 1701:

Two Francois Vesinats?

My interpretation of this Tanguay book is that there were two Francois Vesinats. My wife, Marie must be descended from the first (although I don’t see Pierre listed as a child) and my daughter-in-law descends from the second. The other thing is that both of these Francoises had Jacques as a father. That means that either there were two Jacques Vesinats or one Jacques who had two sons named Francois.

Here is one interpretation at Geneanet:

Putting It Together

My best guess is that Marie and Sarah are 10th cousins once removed going back to La Rochelle France.

That’s a lot of history.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I started with some basic genealogy on Sarah’s Portuguese side.
  • I quickly switched over to Sarah’s French Vezina/Vesina/Vesinat history. By the way, my wife tells me that an ‘s’ between two vowels is pronounced as a ‘z’. Perhaps that is why the Vesina name changed to Vezina.
  • Sarah’s Vezina family has deep roots in L’Ange Gardien, not far from the Montmorency Falls NE of Quebec City.
  • The first Vesinat to come to Quebec from France to Quebec was Jacques Vesinat. He was a master barrel maker which I am sure was an important trade in Quebec.
  • By using someone else’s work, I was able to get the Vezina Family back to La Rochelle, France. This was a hotbed of Protestantism. The French King squelched this movement for religious and political reasons in a brutal way.
  • I tried to connect Sarah’s genealogy to my wife’s as she has a Vesina in her ancestry. I ran into problems due to two apparent brothers both named Francois Vesinat. I came up with a likely connection for Sarah and Marie.
  • It would be a lot to fill out all of Sarah’s French Canadian ancestry. Sarah has two Frenh Canadian grandparents. At the level of Jacques Vesinat she would have over 2,000 French ancestors.
  • I’d like to look more at Sarah’s Portuguese ancestry to try to find out where in Portugal her ancestors lived.


A New Frazer BigY Test Ordered

A new BigY 700 YDNA Test has been ordered for Rick. This is big news for my Irish branch of the Frazer family. This branch can be traced to the Northern part of County Roscommon in the early 1700’s. Rick had taken the 67 STR test previously, but not the BigY test until now.

The Two Roscommon Frazer Branches

The two Frazer branches are divided into the Archibald branch and the James Branch. These two were likely brothers living near the Northern border of County Roscommon in the early 1700’s. Here are the four Frazer YDNA testers:

Rick is on the lower left. His second great-grandfather Richard Patterson or Paterson Frazer left Ireland for upstate New York. From there the family moved to Canada where many of his Frazer descendants live today. Paul is my second cousin once removed. That means that Paul’s great grandfather George Frazer was my 2nd great-grandfather. Paul’s grandfather Hubert moved from Ireland to the Boston area after my his brother, my great-grandfather moved to Boston. This branch moved to America a generation after the Richard Patterson Frazer family.

History of Frazer YDNA Testing Back to 2015

YDNA testing for our branch of Frazers began in 2015. At that time, STRs were tested. A STR is a Short Tandem Repeat. These repeating markers have values that may go up or down. The combination of differences of these STRs can define a group of people. However, the STRs are not a accurate or precise as a SNP. A SNP only mutates once. The STRs were used to predict SNPs. I believe that Joanna’s brother Jonathan was the first of our Frazer group to test for 37 STRs. This put him into the very general R1a SNP group.

The R1a group is a bit of an oddball SNP for Frasers or Frazers. Most Frasers going back to Scotland are in general R1b. That means that before there was a Frazer surname our Frazer ancestors arrived from Scandinavia to the Inverness area to join a group of people that were to become Frasers/Frazers. This probably happened about 2,000 years ago. So there are the old Scot Frazers who were already in present day Scotland before 2,000 years ago. These would be the R1b Frazers/Frasers. Our ‘newcomer’ branch is R1a.

Here is my wild guess on the movements of our branch of Frazers:

Because YDNA reaches so far back, it is possible to know the general areas that Frazer ancestors lived thousands of years ago. Based on YDNA matches with other clans, it appears that the Frazers lived in the Inverness area since before the time that surnames were adopted. After that, family tradition says that our Frazers probably lived in Southwest Scotland before moving to Ireland.

I had my 2nd cousin Paul tested and he was a match with Jonathan. This showed that we were on the right track and that the Archibald and James Lines were connected. Paul’s testing seemed to indicate that his YDNA had changed more than Jonathan’s over the past 300 years or so. That means that Jonathan’s YDNA should be more representative of their common ancestor who was Archibald Frazer born perhaps in 1690.

Frazer YDNA 2017

In May 2017 Paul’s BigY results came in. This moved his Haplogroup down the R1a Tree to R-YP432. This SNP was still very old. The common ancestor for this SNP was 2800 years old, but this was an improvement on Paul’s previous STR testing. Based on that testing his common ancestor was over 14,000 years old!

In June 2017, Jonathan’s BigY results came in. These seemed to indicate that Paul and Jonathan should move down at least one step to R-YP5515. However, the company YFull was ahead of FTDNA in that analysis. Around July 2017, The R1a Administrator for FTDNA with expertise in the Frazer area of R1a came up with this tree in 2017:

This put the Frazers down the tree three levels below R-YP5515 and gave a common ancestor date for the two Frazer lines of about 1600 AD. This is certainly in the area of when we think Archibald, the father of the Archibald and James Lines was born (around 1690).

Rick tested for 67 STRs and his results came in also in July 2017. Rick’s closest match was with Paul. This makes sense as both Paul and Rick are on the Archibald Line and both descend from James Frazer born about 1804.

Here is a possible tree I made based on the STR testing:

The State of Roscommon Frazer YDNA to This Point

Basically, we have four YDNA testers. Three of these testers have taken the BigY test and one, Rick is in the process of having his BigY taken. When Rodney and Jonathan had their BigY, I was hoping that they would have a matching SNP that Paul did not have that would define the James Branch of the Roscommon Frazers. However, that did not happen. There could be a few reasons for this. The most likely reason is that no new SNPs formed between about 1690 when we think Archibald Frazer was born and Jonathan and Rodney’s common ancestor who was Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836:

That means that between Paul and Rick, I will be hoping to catch a new SNP between Archibald Frazer born about 1720 and James Frazer born about 1804.

Paul’s Private Variants

One of the reasons that I think that there may be a new SNP on the Archibald Branch is that Paul has four Private Variants:

FTDNA lists the private variants as position location numbers until they get a match.  So far, Paul’s Private Variants do not match any that Rodney or Jonathan have on the James Line of Frazers. That means that Rick, if he has any of these Private Variants, will match with Paul. Then that matching variant will be named and will be the new name for the Archibald Branch of the Frazers of Roscommon. So getting one more SNP will put a cap on the process. The BigY describes a person’s SNPs from genetic Adam up to present day. This last SNP will be the closest to present day for the Frazer Line. Also Rick will be the first Frazer to take the newer BigY 700 test which is more accurate and complete. The previous three testers took the BigY 500 test. I don’t feel any need to upgrade Paul at this point as he already has four private or unknown variants.

If Paul and Rick match on one of their Private Variants, that will be good news for those on the Archibald Line of Frazers. That will mean that, assuming we got the genealogy right, the new SNP will be from either Archibald Frazer born about 1720, Philip Frazer, or James Frazer born 1804.

Next Step: Waiting

Next up is waiting for Rick’s BigY 700 results to come in. Once they are in, we need to wait again for FTDNA to do a manual review on Rick’s results. There is also a chance that someone else will decide to have the BigY test done.

Summary and Conclusions

  • The history of YDNA testing for our branch of Frazers is about 5 years.
  • This 5 years of testing has resulted in several thousands of years of Frazer history going back way before surnames were being used. Tracing those results show where Frazer ancestors likely lived in pre-historic times.
  • Additional testing is needed to bring the Frazers into more modern times. It appears that we have a SNP that is so far, at least specific to the Frazer or North Roscommon surname. That SNP is R-YP6489.
  • It is hoped that Rick’s BigY 700 test, in conjunction with Paul’s BigY results, will give a name to the Archibald Line of Frazers. This is one of the main Frazer Branches that formed in the early 1700’s. The other is the James Line.

My Pilgrim Connection to Kim

I have known Kim for quite a while. We both lived in Lexington, Massachusetts at the same time for a while and we both attended the same Church in Acushnet years ago. I recently posted a photo of the Mayflower leaving New Bedford Harbor and she told me that she descended from two of the Pilgrims, so I thought that I would look at that connection in this Blog.

My Cooke Connection with Kim

Kim says she has a connection to Pilgrim Francis Cooke through two of his daughters. Kim also gave me access to her Ancestry tree:

If I count correctly, Francis Cooke is Kim’s 10th great-grandparent. When I check my tree, Francis is also my 10th great-grandparent. I think that means that Kim and I are 11th cousins on this line. Here is my top-down look:

I can tell already that things may get complicated. I descend from John Cooke who married Sarah Warren. Kim tells me she descends from the Warren Pilgrim line also. Kim descends from Mary Cooke who was born about 20 years after John. John was probably born in Leyden and Mary saw her first light in Plymouth. I see in my Mayflower Families Book on the Cooke family that John had a falling out with the Pilgrims on theological issues and ended up in Dartmouth, Massachusetts. This seemed to be an area of Massachusetts where dissenters ended up. Mary appears to have lived in Barnstable for a while where her husband John Thompson served in public office and she died in Middleborough.

The Next Cooke Generation

I’m going about this backwards as genealogy should properly go from the present to the past:


My ancestor Sarah Cooke married Arthur Hathaway and probably died in Dartmouth. Kim’s ancestor married Thomas Swift in Weymouth.

Speeding Up the Process

I had some problems getting all the ancestors onto an Excel Spreadsheet, but here is Kim’s side:

Kim’s line went west from New York to Ohio to Oregon. Here is my side:

My ancestors all stayed in the same general area. Plus I’m off a generation from Kim. That means we must be 11th cousins once removed.

Kim’s Richard Warren Connection

Kim’s connection to Richard Warren is through the wife of Thomas Swift above. Her name was Rachel Stockbridge:

On my side, I descend from Joseph Warren in my most direct path, but I also descend from Mary Warren his sister more than once. Then I already mentioned Sarah Warren above:

Here I color coded Kim’s line in orange. Here is the next generation:

My ancestors were all born in Plymouth. Kim’s ancestor Hannah was born in nearby Marshfield. Here is the next generation:

This is taking more work than our Cooke Tree. In the next generation, I add another branch:


Actually, I added two branches because I missed Joseph Bartlett back in 1639. Now I can say I’m related 6 ways to Richard Warren. I’ve got to get all of these ancestors down to Hannah Bradford. She is my second great grandmother who has all the Pilgrim ancestors. Next I’ll add what we had from the Cooke analysis above:

On the Warren side, Kim and I are 12th cousins. So we are 1/2 generation further out than on the Cooke line.

Here is the Warren Tree filled out:

This shows I have these relationships to Kim on the Warren line:

  • Once a 10th cousin twice removed
  • Three times an 11th cousin once removed
  • Two times a 12th cousin

Looking for Kim’s Other Cooke Ancestor

Kim told me she descended from two daughters of Francis Cooke. Kim’s other Cooke ancestor was Jane Cooke:

These two were born 22 years apart. I take it that her mom, Hester Mahieu was a robust woman and made it through many difficulties.

A Question of Genealogy

So far, I haven’t looked into any of the genealogy. The Mayflower Families Book on Francis Cooke brings Kim’s Jane Cooke line into question. Kim’s tree has Jacob Mitchell as the daughter of Jane Cooke. The Mayflower Book shows that Jane had Elizabeth, Thomas and Mary with Experience Mitchell. However, at some point, Jane dies and Experience Mitchell marries Mary. Mary’s last name is unknown as is her marriage date and Jane’s death date. So things are quite uncertain. The reason for assigning the last five children to Experience and Mary Mitchell is that there is a gap between Experience’s first three children and the last five.

Here is where Francis Cooke lived:

This is in the center of current day Plymouth. Here is what it looks like today:

The Cooke property was probably near the present-day Court House Museum which is the white building in the photo above.

Here is a map of where Richard Warren lived closer to the Harbor:


  • I’m related to Kim 6 ways on the Richard Warren Line
  • I’m related to Kim 1 way on the Francis Cooke Pilgrim Line. Kim had another potential Cooke ancestor, but that ancestor has not been verified.
  • I showed where Francis Cooke and Richard Warren lived on Leydon Street
  • Francis Cooke and Richard Warren must have known each other. Also their children who Kim and I descended from must have known each other and probably down to the next generation. At some point I’m sure they lost touch.
  • I’m sure I have these Pilgrim connections going back 400 years with other people that I know who live in the area. Kim was more of a surprise as she did not grow up in Plymouth County.





DNA Support for My Children’s Warren Ancestry

In some of my previous Blogs on my children’s ancestry, I have noted a discrepancy. It appears that one of their grandparents who was a Cavanaugh should actually be a Warren. I mention how I came to that conclusion in this Blog and elsewhere. In that Blog, I gave strong evidence that Heather and JJ’s grandmother’s father John Edward Cavanaugh was actually a Warren. Although I had strong evidence for that, I was missing some evidence, including DNA correlation. That is, until recently.

Heather’s DNA and Genealogy Match with Eileen

Here is Heather’s match with Eileen:

In addition, Ancestry suggests this Warren connection:

These are ThruLines. Ancestry suggests evaluating the ThruLines. Here is Eileen’s tree on her maternal side:

Eileen has back to Blanche Sullivan. I have Bridget Warren who married John Sullivan in 1855 in Lowell:

That means that I just have to make the connection. Here is Bridget in 1880 with her family including Francis:

Ancestry transcribed Bridget as Pridy for some reason.

Francis or Frank J Sullivan

Here is Frank in 1900 in Lowell with Daughter Blanche:

This appears to be the birth record for Blanche from 1889 in Lowell:

And, to tie it all together, here is the marriage record for Francis Sullivan:

Any Other DNA Matches for Heather?

I checked to see if Heather had any shared matches with Eileen and I didn’t see any. I did see this more distant DNA match that Heather had with Robin:

I’ll need to star that as Ancestry plans to take away the smaller matches under 8 cM. Here is how Ancestry shows the connection:

That means that Robin and Eileen must be 2nd cousins. Ancestry wants me to evaluate, but I think that Robin likely knows who his mother is. Here is a bonus with Heather and Robin’s shared DNA matches:

This shows that Heather’s brother JJ matches Robin at a higher level. JJ may also match Eileen at a level under 20 cM.

JJ’s Warren DNA Matches at Ancestry

Here is JJ’s DNA match with Robin:

When I look at Robin’s tree it only shows his mother and father. However, I think that Anestry has it right:

This shows that Mary H Dwyer and Mariam Hazel Sullivan were born on the same day.

Here is the family in Lowell in 1930:

Mary Hazel’s daughter Mary Jaqueline apparently went by Jaqueline. That seems to make the connection in Robin’s tree.

JJ and Eileen

Here is JJ’s smaller match with Eileen:

This match is over 8 cM so is not in danger of being stripped away by Ancestry.

JJ’s Shared Match with Eileen and Robin

I’ll just call him N. Here is N’s maternal tree:

N is on the Dwyer Line, so he is more closely related to Robin. I’m not sure why Ancestry didn’t pick up N as having a shared ancestor with JJ. Perhaps one will come up eventually.

Putting It Together

Here is how all the DNA matches fit together:

N is 2nd cousin once removed to Eileen and Robin and 4th cousin once removed to Heather and JJ. The confusing part from what I can tell, is that Louisa Gatley was actually Louisa Cavanaugh at the time she had John Edward Cavanaugh. She was a widow and John J Warren was a widower at the time. John J died not too long after John Edward was born in an accidental drowning.

Summary and Conclusion

  • The match between Heather and Eileen was a good find as it provided additional evidence that John J Warren was the father of John Edward Cavanaugh.
  • That means that even though Heather and and JJ’s maternal grandmother was Agnes Cavanaugh, they don’t really carry any Cavanaugh DNA. That is because John Edward’s mother was only a Cavanaugh by marriage and his father was John J Warren.
  • Heather, JJ, Eileen, Robin and N form a genetic cluster which gives further evidence that the tree is correct.

Post Script

In my previous Blog, I noted that perhaps a baptismal record would show up for John Edward Warren/Cavanaugh. Here is the record from St. Peter, Lowell in August 1880:

Here is the Ancestry transcription:

My New Hartley YDNA Branch of R-FT225247

It has been a while since my YDNA subclade has changed. I have been A11132 since 2017. My subclade changed recently because I had my brother tested for the BigY 700. Here are the results:

In 2017, I went from A11138 to A11132. Just recently FTDNA has put my brother and me in the same new subclade of R-FT225247. My brother and I have no private variants. That would be the usual case. David Vance, who is a YDNA expert points out the difference between the private variants shared between the A11132 Hartleys and the number of SNPs in my branch. He takes that to mean that my branch mutated much faster. My guess is that it did but that the A11132 testers mutated more slowly than average also. That means that if that these Hartleys had a common ancestor born in 1600, that would be 350 years from 1950 which would be around the time when some of these BigY testers were likely born. That would mean that on my branches the mutation rate was 50 years per SNP and 175 years per SNP on the A11132 branch. As the actual mutation rate as been estimated at between 83 and 144 years, the average between my two estimated Hartley SNP rates is about 113 years. So it all averages out.

This also explains why when the last Hartley tested, no new Hartley branch was formed. We must have all branched off the same Hartley tree around 1600 or so.


FT225237 is the name given to my group but the name is actually representative of 7 SNPs.

My Previous Prediction

In my last Blog on Hartley YDNA, I looked at my private variants and my brother’s private variants. We both had 6 private variants which I thought would make up the new subclade. That means that I was mostly right. These were my private variants previously:

A quick comparison between that and the new FT225237 block shows that I was missing A11130. For some reason, this was not shown as a private variant previously. I guess it should have been a private variant.

A11130 and FGC6800

In my previous Blog, I noted that when I looked at my A11132 matches, there were SNPs in common including A11130 and FGC6800. As can be seen above, A11130 is now incorporated in my FT225237 Block. But what about FGC6800? Here are my brother’s non matching variants with the two A11132 Hartleys:

Notice that FGC6800 appears in both A11132 Hartleys. As both my brother and I have tested for FGC6800, I am not sure why it is not in the FT225237 Block. The answer appears to be here:

According to my brother’s results, FGC6800 is already on the Y Tree. According to YBrowse:

This SNP is part of the I2a-L801 haplogroup. As I am R1b, that explains why this wasn’t added to my results. This appears to be an anomalous SNP.


Next, as I check my brother’s matches, I notice that we have this non-matching variant:

My brother didn’t test positive for this, so that must mean that I have this SNP. Here is what YBrowse shows:

Here are my brother’s results for this SNP:

It looks like the results were inconclusive. There were some poor reads here. Some showed a mutation. The high quality reads showed no mutation. I actually addressed this in my previous Blog and thought that my brother would be considered positive for BY26739. But apparently, that didn’t happen. If Jim really is positive for BY26739, then that SNP should be added to our FT225247 Block.

Next Steps

So far, we know that there are three different Hartley families who have had the BigY test. We all branch out quite early – probably around the year 1600 or before. It wold be nice to find a branch of our Hartleys that was somewhat newer. I have reached out to someone on my 67 STR match to see if he would take the BigY 700 test.

Summary and Conclusions

I was surprised at finding out so soon that I have a new subclade. This is a large old subclade, but thanks to testing with my brother it is now on the books. This goes back to really old Hartleys who were probably born before 1600 so it would be nice to split out the branching to a later date. This would require more Hartley testers.


My Brother Jim’s BigY Results Are Starting to Come In

When I checked on my brother’s BigY results today, I saw this message from Family Tree DNA (FTDNA):

That was good news. I noticed yesterday that the Haplogroup for Jim had changed from a basic haplogroup to a specific Hartley haplogroup. However, I believe that a manual review will put us in an even more specific haplogroup.

Jim’s BigY Matches

Jim matches with me first, then two other Hartleys, then a Smith and a Pillsbury. My guess is that the Hartley matches go back to after the use of surnames and Smith and Pillsbury represent common ancestors who were before the advent of surnames. Here are the Hartley matches:

Jim and Me and BY26739

Theoretically, I would think that Jim and I would have no differences in variants. There is a few reason we would have a non-matching variant. One is that Jim or I formed a new SNP. In that case there would be a new branch of Hartley’s. Another reason may be that one of our tests did not cover that SNP or didn’t test conclusively positive for that SNP.

I’ll check for this SNP at YBrowse:

This SNP appears to be at the right end of the Y Chromosome.

This SNP was named in 2018. Here are Jim’s results:

It looks to me that Jim had six good reads, but that wasn’t enough to make him positive for this SNP. I think that when a manual review is done, that Jim will be positive for this SNP. My guess is that I will have more reads for this SNP than Jim:

Well, it looks like I guessed wrong. Do I get another guess? The genotype is C and the reference is A. I have two good reads of A to C. Then there are a lot of (11) what appear to be low quality reads of A to C. In Jim’s good quality reads, it showed that he had A at that position. However, his 9 low quality reads showed A to C. As  BY26739 is not a non-matching variant with my other BigY matches, I can assume that they also have this SNP. That means that there is no new Hartley YDNA branch between Jim and myself.

STR Differences Between Jim and Me

In my previous Blog on STRs, I discussed a STR difference Jim and I had in the 111 STR test. Now Jim and I have an additional difference. Here is my match with Jim:

This shows that out of 586 STRs Jim and I have a difference of two. From my previous Blog, I found that Jim had a 15 at DYS534 and I have a 16. That means that at this marker I had one additional repeat compared to Jim.


Jim and I have different values for DYS548. In order to find this, downloaded my STRs and Jim’s STRs. I transposed the results in a spreadsheet. Then I subtracted one value from the other. When the value was 1, that meant there was a difference.

Jim and I don’t match on two STRs out of 586, but we were tested for about 830 STRs. In these 15 least STRs, I didn’t have results for two STRs and Jim was missing results for 6 STRs. That means that 7 out of these 15 STRs could not be compared. Also, I do not know whether Jim had the mutation at this location or I did. To figure this out, I would need access the results of at least one of our other close matches. I may ask my other close BigY match at some point for his STR results out of curiosity.

Any Predictions?

I like to make predictions as to what might happen one there is a FTDNA manual review. Here is the situation now:

Under R-A11138 there is one branch. A11132 only has Hartleys. A11138 is quite old. The common ancestor between Hartley and Smith is probably 1,000 years old or more. If Jim and I match on a SNP or SNPs that the other two Hartleys don’t have, we should form a new Hartley Branch.

Here are my matches:

I have already discussed BY26739. I think that will go away. As I compare, my matches I see that match 2 and 3 have some variants in common. They are:

  • FGC6800
  • 11535449
  • 12707325
  • 15438401
  • A11130
  • 7048756

However, the fact that these variants are listed could mean one of two things. It could mean that Steve and Michael have these and Jim and I don’t. Or it could mean that Jim and I have these variants and Steve and Michael don’t. Or, more likely, it could be a combination of the two.  

Based on previous work, I had listed these as my private variants:

Here are the ones that are listed above:

That seems to indicate that Jim and I should have the highlighted variants. But what about the two FT variants? I’ll think about those later. The ones left from my original list are:

  • FGC6800
  • A11130

It appears that these should be the two SNPs that Steve and Michael Share that Jim and I don’t have. That is, unless FTDNA renamed these two SNPs. First, I’ll look at FGC6800. From FTDNA’s Chromosome Browser, it seems like I do have that:

That is at position 9,309,609, so it wasn’t on my previous list. I better check my private variants:

They seem to match what I had. Next I’ll check my brother Jim’s Private Variants:

Well, that’s good. We have the same private variants. It seems like these should make up our new branch.

Next, I wonder about A11130. I am checking JIm’s results:

Jim shows he has this as well. I am sure I do also. As I recall a ways back, it was thought that A11130 would be my Haplogroup until others in my group were found not having it. So the group became named for A11132 instead. I guess here is where I get confused between FTDNA calling some SNPs private variants and some named variants.

I guess Private Variants are what they say they are. They are private for a person until they have a match. In this case my brother and I do match, but we are awaiting a manual review to tell what to do with the private variants.

FT225247 and FT135932

These were my two other private variants that I said I’d get back to. FTDNA would refer to these as their position numbers while they are private, but they all really have names. These were the two variants that did not show up as non-shared variants with my other BigY matches.

Summary and Conclusions

In this Blog, while I was waiting for FTDNA’s results, I made some guesses as how those results might come out. The results appear to out now, so I’ll take a look at those in my next Blog.