Another Daniel Miller – A Y DNA Tale – 52 Ancestors #135

Just when you think you have the family all straightened out, a left hook comes along, sneaks up and sucker-punches you.

Indeed, as if there wasn’t enough confusion about the various Daniel Millers, we now have yet another very interesting twist in the Daniel Miller saga, thanks to DNA.

And a conundrum it is too.

In the article, “Daniel Miller (1755-1822), Musical Graves, 52 Ancestors #130” I provided this summary of the various Daniel Miller’s that we know existed in Montgomery County, Ohio at or about the same time that my Daniel Miller (1755-1822) lived there, or subsequent generations. Below is the summary from that article.

Daniel (1) is my ancestor and was born to Philip Jacob Miller and his wife, Magdalena, whose last name is unknown, on April 8, 1755 in Frederick County, Maryland. Daniel was married to Elizabeth Ulrich and died in Montgomery County, Ohio on August 26, 1822. Those are the easy dates. The rest are difficult.

Daniel (2) arrived in Montgomery County from Huntington County, PA. Daniel (2)’s wife was Susanna Bowman and Daniel (2) lived in what would become the City of Dayton proper where he settled on Wolf Creek in November of 1802, according to the History of the City of Dayton and Montgomery County, Ohio, Volume 1.   For those specifically interested in this line, the Brethren Heritage Center has an article available written by Gale Honeyman.

Daniel (3) is the son of Daniel (1). According to the family Bible he was born on March 30, 1779 and he died on June 25, 1812. He would have been 33 years old, and unless he was disabled in some way, he was likely married and may well have had children. He would only have been about 20 when his father Daniel floated down the Ohio on a raft, probably in 1799. Daniel (3) could have remained in Clermont County when his father and uncle, David Miller, left for Montgomery County sometimes around 1802. There is no mention of an estate for Daniel (3) in Montgomery County.

Daniel (4) is the grandson of Daniel (1) through his son Stephen Miller. Daniel (4) was born in 1797 in Bedford County, PA and died in 1879 in Preble County, Ohio.

Daniel (5) is the son of Michael Miller and Salome Cramer of Montgomery County. Michael is the son of David Miller who died in 1845. David was the brother of Daniel (1). Michael obtained and farmed his father’s farm in Randolph Township. Daniel (5) was born in 1822, died in 1903 and was married to Isabella Cook.

Daniel (6) is the grandson of Daniel (1) through son Jacob A. Miller born in 1776 who married first to Elizabeth Metzger and second to Catherine Zimmerman. Jacob farmed his father’s land in Randolph Township past 1851 and likely until his death in 1858. Jacob’s son Daniel (6) by his first wife was born about 1800, married Susanna Hardman on November 1, 1819 and died about 1835 in Montgomery County.

Daniel (7) born in 1815 is the son of Isaac Miller, son of Daniel (1) and his wife Elizabeth Miller who is the daughter of David Miller, brother of Daniel (1). I know nothing more about Daniel (7).

Daniel Y. (8) born in 1808 is the son of John Miller, son of Daniel (1).  John’s wife Esther Miller, daughter of David Miller, brother of Daniel (1). Daniel Y. (8) married Margaret Bainter and died in 1833.

Daniel (9) is the son of Daniel (2) and his wife, Susan Bowman. Daniel (9) was born about 1808 and died about 1863 in Montgomery County, marrying Susan Oliver.

Daniel (10) is the son of the Elder Jacob Miller by either his first or second wife, who are unknown. This Daniel was born on September 6, 1780 and died on November 15, 1858 in Monroe County, Iowa. Daniel (10) married Elizabeth Shidler or Shideler on April, 13, 1808 in Montgomery County, Ohio, but by 1813, it appears that they had moved on to Union County, Indiana. When Daniel lived in Montgomery County, he owned land near the 4 Mile Church, east of Cottage Creek, about one and one half miles west of the Lower 4 Mile Church.

Today’s article specifically deals with Daniel (2), referred to in this article as Dayton Daniel to keep him separate from Daniel (1) who lived in Montgomery County at the same time as Dayton Daniel (2).

To this group, we need to add two more Daniels. It’s OK to groan now. I’ve been groaning all week!

Daniel (11) who is the son of Lodowich Miller, brother of Philip Jacob Miller. Daniel (11) was born about 1752, probably in Frederick County, Maryland and moved with Lodowich’s family to the Shenandoah Valley about the time of the Revolutionary War. Daniel (11) died in Rockingham County, Virginia in 1819.

Daniel (12), the son of John Miller, also a brother to Philip Jacob Miller. This Daniel was probably John’s eldest son and was one of the executors of his father’s estate in 1794 through 1799 when the estate paid the heirs.

Therefore, Daniel (1), Daniel (11) and Daniel (12) were all first cousins to each other – and Daniel (2), Dayton Daniel, we’ve discovered this week, was also somehow related as well.

The question is, who is Dayton Daniel and how is he related?  And how do we know he’s related?

Michael Miller’s Sons

As a short review, let’s take a look at the immigrant Michael Miller’s sons. He has three proven sons, and only three; Philip Jacob, Lodowick (Lodowich) and John, parents of Daniel (1), Daniel (11) and Daniel (12), respectively.

For many years, every stray Miller male in a several-hundred-mile radius around Frederick County, Maryland was pinned to Michael Miller like tails on the proverbial donkey. To date, we have disproved every line that has tested utilizing Y DNA. In fact, that’s the purpose of the Miller Brethren DNA Project – to sort out the various Brethren Miller lines.  I expected several lines to match Michael’s descendants, but surprisingly, they haven’t – until now.

Before this week, not one line that was not from Michael Miller’s proven sons has ever matched Michael’s line utilizing Y DNA. But then came today and all that changed.

And of course, the end of line oldest ancestor for the new Miller Y DNA participant was none other than Daniel Miller (2), Dayton Daniel, found originally in what would become the City of Dayton, in Montgomery County, Ohio, very early – his arrival date stated variously as either 1802 or 1804 and having come from Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania.

If you recall from the article about “my” Daniel Miller, the son of Philip Jacob Miller, the son of Michael Miller, the immigrant, Daniel lived in Bedford County from sometime in the 1780s until around 1800 when he floated down the Ohio River and joined his father and siblings in Clermont and Warren Counties in Ohio. My Daniel migrated on to Montgomery County by 1805, about the same time as Dayton Daniel. In fact, when I first began researching Daniel Miller in Montgomery County, I found the information about the Daniel in Dayton and thought for some time that he WAS my Daniel, until I found additional information and pieces of the puzzle began not fitting. I figured out that there were indeed two Daniel’s living in Montgomery County at the same time, thanks to tax lists and other information. Actually, there were three Daniels until 1813 when Daniel (10), who is not descended from the Michael Miller line, did us the huge favor of moving on.

Dayton Daniel was also Brethren, but that alone does not mean he is related to my Daniel. Another man was Brethren too – the Elder Jacob Miller, who everyone thought surely WAS related to Michael Miller, but who, it turns out, is not – at least not through the paternal line. So just being a Miller male, a Brethren and being found in Frederick County, Maryland, then Montgomery County, Ohio does not guarantee a kinship relationship – as unlikely as that seems. I can see why people reached those earlier conclusions, before Y DNA testing, but they were wrong.

Michael Miller, the immigrant, had three proven sons – and only 3, who were:

  • John Miller who died in 1794 in Washington County, Maryland, formerly Frederick County, with a will which listed his children. This John had a son Daniel (12).
  • Lodowich Miller who died about 1782 and whose children (if not Lodowich too) moved south to the Shenandoah Valley about this same time also had a son Daniel (11) who died in Rockingham County, Virginia in 1819.
  • Philip Jacob Miller also had a son Daniel (1) who married Elizabeth Ulrich, moved to Bedford County, Pennsylvania, then on to Ohio where he was the Daniel who wound up in Montgomery County but did NOT live in Dayton. This is my Daniel.

After I published my article about Daniel, sorting through the various Daniel Millers in Montgomery County, a cousin, Doug, contacted me and was confused. Doug descended from Dayton Daniel (2), born in 1765, and he wondered, if his Daniel was not descended from Johann Michael Miller, why did Doug’s autosomal DNA so strongly match my mother and cousins. Obviously, I couldn’t answer that question, so Doug set about finding a male Miller, his second cousin, who descended from Dayton Daniel, to test. That participant is referred to as TM in this article.

Obviously, if TM’s DNA representing Dayton Daniel’s Y DNA had not matched my Daniel’s Y DNA, you either would not be reading this article right now, or it would be a very different story. But Dayton Daniel’s Y DNA does match the Michael Miller line.

Um….so now what? Who is Dayton Daniel (2) and who are his parents?  They can’t be the only three proven sons of Michael Miller – because all 3 of them had sons named Daniel and all 3 are accounted for.  So, who were Dayton Daniel’s parents?  Let’s walk through the possibilities and look a the DNA results.

The Y DNA

Looking at the Miller Brethren project, we can see 5 men descend from Michael Miller. There are also two additional men, but they are not project members.   One is private, so I can’t even e-mail him.

robertas-view

The first thing I noticed was that marker 449 has two different values, shown at far right, in purple, above. I mapped them to the participants, with the hope that TM’s marker 449 would tell us which line he was from. In other words, I was hoping that 449 was a line marker mutation.

michael-miller-desc-pedigree

TM, shown at far left, has a value at marker 449 of 30. One of Philip Jacob’s descendants, RM as well as both of Lodowich’s descendants carry the same value. So no, marker 449 does not indicate a specific son’s line of Johann Michael Miller.

How can this same marker show up in two of Daniel’s sons’ lines, represented by HAM and RWM, but not in the third son’s line, represented by RM? Apparently this marker value has mutated in both Isaac and John’s lines, sons of Daniel, independently, someplace between Daniel and the testers, HAM and RWM today. We know that the original marker value is 30 because it is found independently in the lines of two different sons, Daniel and Lodowich, and probably a third son now with TM.

Ok, we know that marker 449 doesn’t help us, so where do we look next?  Let’s take a look at the genealogy.

Candidates for Dayton Daniel’s Father

Obviously, the first place to look for this Daniel is among the grandchildren of Michael Miller.

Dayton Daniel’s wife is Susanna Bowman who was born in Bedford County, Pennsylvania. They are both buried with tombstones that give their age at death, so we can extrapolate that information to obtain a birth date and year.  Thanks to the tombstone, we know that Daniel was born in 1765 and because he married Susanna who was born in the next county, we know that they were living there about 1785, marriage age.

Knowing Daniel’s birth year helps us rule out various grandchildren of Michael Miller.

We have already ruled out Philip Jacob Miller as Dayton Daniel’s parent, because his son was my Daniel (1), according to the family Bible.

Two of our other Y DNA testers descend from Lodowick’s son, Daniel (11), who was born in 1752 and died in 1819 in Rockingham County, Virginia. Clearly, this is not the Daniel living in Montgomery County, Ohio who died in 1849.

That leaves Michael Miller’s son, John, who also had a son Daniel (12).  Could Daniel (12) actually be Dayton Daniel?  Let’s see.

John Miller, Michael’s third son did us the favor of executing a will just days before his death listing his children.

john-miller-will

Children named:

  • Daniel
  • John
  • Jacob
  • Abraham
  • Ludwick
  • David
  • Michael
  • Catherine
  • Susanna
  • Mary
  • Elizabeth

Underage sons were Ludwick, David and Michael.

Son Daniel Miller and son-in-law John Fisher were executors.

The will was made Dec 13, 1794 and recorded Dec. 20, 1794. Clearly John was literally on his death bed when he made his will.

On April 9, 1799, Daniel Miller and John Fisher, executors of John Miller’s estate made a distribution of 2010 pounds, 5 shillings and 9 pence, in equal parts to the 10 remaining children, all apparently now 21 years of age. The order of the named heirs is: Daniel Miller, John Fisher, Susanna Wissinger, Mary Studanbaker, Elizabeth Cameron, Jacob Miller, Abraham Miller, Lodwick Miller and David Miller. Michael is missing in the distribution list so he apparently died sometime between 1794 and 1799. Washington County Distribution Liber I, folio 80.

In 1799, when the estate was paid, all children would have reached the age of 21. The youngest child, Michael, apparently did not survive, so if we can presume he wouldn’t have become 21 until 1801, that means that he was born in about 1780. There were a total of 11 children, so a child was born every two years, with no deaths, then the oldest child, presumably Daniel, would have been born about 22 years before the youngest, or about 1758.

There is some confusion about John Miller’s name, because while most deeds and documents, such as his will, refer to him clearly as John, which would mean his German name was Johannes, with no middle name, one deed refers to him as Peter, not Johann Peter, just Peter. Was the deed in error, or was John really Johann Peter? We don’t know.

Did Michael Miller Have Other Sons?

The answer to this question is yes, he did, according to German church records. What we don’t know is if they lived, how many he might have had that are unrecorded, and if he had children after he arrived in Pennsylvania. Yes, there are a lot of unknowns.

In Frederick County, Maryland in the 1760s, there is a Michael Miller Jr. and a Hans Michael Miller, both of whom are involved with Michael Miller, the immigrant. It would be very unlikely for Michael to have two sons named so closely, but then again, stranger things have happened. One or both could also be grandsons. Or the two men could be one and the same.

In the Michael Miller article, I introduce both of these men. I did not follow either one forward in time, but it might well behoove the descendants of Dayton Daniel to pick up the trail where I left off.

Birth Records in Germany

My retired German genealogist friend, Tom, has found records of the births of several of Michael Miller’s children, in Germany. Unfortunately, the church records are missing for a time period, so we don’t know if all of the children lived, or how many more children might have been born. Tom is reading every single entry on every single page, just to be sure we don’t miss something.

Yes. Every. Single. Entry. On. Every. Single. Page.

Tom is my super-hero!

Michael Miller married Susanna Berchtol in 1714, who was born in 1688, in Konken, Germany. Their first child was born the following year, also in Konken.

  • Hans Peter Miller born January 19, 1715 (This might be John.)

The next children were born in Kallstadt.

  • Johann Jacob Miller baptized May 26, 1716
  • Regina Maria Elisabetha born August 30, 1717
  • Johannes Michael Miller born April 24, 1719 (This could be Hans Michael or Michael Jr.)
  • Johann Ludwig born April 10, 1721. (This would be Lodowich.)

Very unfortunately, by 1722, Johann Michael Miller and Susanna Berchtol had moved to Lambscheim where they live until 1726 where the records indicate they immigrated. I will be documenting these movements in a special update article about Michael Miller and Jacob Stutzman soon, but for today, we just needed the names of Michael’s sons.

We next find Michael’s immigration record, along with Jacob Stutzman, in 1727.

We know that Philip Jacob Miller was born about 1726, so he was probably a babe in arms on the boat.

If Michael Miller and Susanna Berchtol continued having children in the same pattern, they would have had another child in 1723.

Susanna would have probably had children until she was in her early 40s, so until about 1730. Therefore, in addition to Philip Jacob in about 1726, they could have had another child in 1727, 1729 and perhaps even 1731.

This gives us the opportunity for 4 additional sons (besides Philip Jacob) not recorded in existant church records. Of course, additional children may not have been male, and may not have survived.

Is John the Same Person as Hans Peter?

If John who died in 1794 is the same child as Hans Peter born in 1715, then he would have been age 43 in 1758 when his first child was born. That’s actually quite unusual for a man in that timeframe, so one of a number of situations have to be the case.

  1. The John Miller who died in 1794, brother to Philip Jacob is not the same Hans Peter who was born in 1715.
  2. The John Miller, brother to Philip Jacob who died in 1794 had more than one wife, and had children before 1758 who are all omitted from the will.
  3. The Hans Peter born in 1715 died and Johann Michael Miller had another son by the same or a similar name either in 1723, 1727, 1729 or 1731. This would make John between the ages of 27-35 in 1758, which is still on the older side for a Brethren man to be marrying, but more believable than age 43 for a first marriage.

However, even allowing for these possibilities, it still doesn’t seem reasonable that Dayton Daniel Miller who died in 1849 in Montgomery County, Ohio and was born in 1765 is the oldest child of John Miller. That would mean that the next 10 children were born beginning in 1767 and continue being born until 1787. However, we know that all of John’s surviving children were of age by 1799. Therefore, Dayton Daniel simply cannot be the son of John.

It’s also possible that John’s son Daniel was not the eldest, but the children seem to be listed in order, twice – once in the will and once in the distribution.  Daniel is listed first in both documents. It’s typical for the eldest son to be the executor.

Therefore, for all these reasons, I don’t think it’s feasible that Daniel Miller of Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania who was born in 1765 is the son of John Miller who died in 1794.

However, Dayton Daniel’s descendant matches the Y DNA of Johann Michael Miller. Furthermore, Dayton Daniel’s descendants match several of Johann Michael Miller’s proven descendants utilizing autosomal DNA, so he has to be related in a reasonable timeframe. Autosomal DNA becomes less and less likely to match with each passing generation beyond third cousins.

Other Candidates?

Our next best candidate as the father of Dayton Daniel is Michael Miller Jr. and/or Hans Michael Miller.

I did not track them forward in time, but other researchers have spent some time on this endeavor. It is reported that Hans Michael Miller lived in Franklin County, PA and what is now Mineral County, West Virginia, and had a will. He reportedly paid taxes in Antrim Township in Franklin County and New Creek, now in Mineral County, WV, according to the 1772 Frederick County Tax list. He was given money by Michael Miller to purchase land called Pleasant Gardens, which could be Garden’s Delight and Add Garden’s Delight on the 1772 tax list as well.  This information is detailed in the Michael Miller article.

Michael Miller could have had other sons that did not accompany him to Frederick County in about 1750 from York County, Pennsylvania, or who do not appear recognizably as his sons in the Frederick County records. Those sons would have been 20 or slightly older by the time that Michael left Pennsylvania and moved to Maryland. It’s certainly possible that one of Michael’s sons survived infancy, the voyage overseas and the frontier, married, and did not elect to move to yet another frontier – instead, remaining in York County or striking out on his own.  Possible, but not terribly likely.  There was safety and help in groups, especially for a small religious denomination who were known as “dissenters” and not terribly well liked because they would not defend themselves, or the neighborhood where they lived.  Brethren tended to stick together, moving in groups.  Young families would not be inclined to stay behind, especially not if the rest of the family moved on.

If Michael Miller’s son, Johann Michael Mueller, born in 1719 is the father of Dayton Daniel, he would have married sometime around 1740 and could still have been having children in 1765. It’s also possible that Dayton Daniel was the grandson of Johann Michael born in 1719, but to do so, both Johann Michael and his firstborn son would have bad to have married young.

DNA Findings

When Doug and I first realized we were cousins, and I mean via DNA, we didn’t know exactly how. Doug had always assumed that Dayton Daniel was indeed a descendant of Michael Miller, the immigrant. However, as the documentation surrounding Michael Miller’s life unfolded, we realized that we needed more information and documentation. Doug and I discovered additionally that we are also both descended through the Stephen Ulrich line, so Doug and I could have been matching through that line and not the Miller line. That’s when Doug reached out to Dayton Daniel’s Miller descendant, TM.

Unlike Doug, TM does not descend through the Ulrich line, so any of the known Michael Miller descendants that TM matches should be matching through the Miller line only.

michael-miller-autosomal-pedigree

TM’s matches are shown above, in red. Of course, he matches his second cousin, Doug, as expected. But aside from that, he matches four of Philip Jacob’s descendants, and none of Lodowich’s, as shown above and below on the chromosome browser.

tm-mtches

It’s exciting to think that the segment on chromosome 14 is shared by four of Michael Miller’s descendants. A piece of Michael or his wife that still exists today and is identifiable. That’s just amazing for a man and his wife who were born before 1700.

Is this Michael Miller or Susanna Berchtol’s DNA?

I have access to the kits that TM matches, and the DNA segments that match the other Miller descendants do triangulate, so we know for sure that these segments do indeed belong to the Miller line, descended from Michael Miller or his wife, Susannah Berchtol.  We can’t tell which, of course, without matching someone from another Miller, like Michael’s brother, or a Berchtol.  So now, we can simply say this matching DNA comes from this couple.

I know what you’re going to ask next? Did Michael have a brother that could have also immigrated and father’s children who, in turn, had Dayton Daniel in 1765?  Great question.

There is absolutely no evidence that Michael had a Miller brother who immigrated. In fact, according to the church records in Steinwinden, Germany, no other children born to Michael’s parents survived. Michael was the last child born before his father’s death.

Autosomal Messages

Let’s look at what the autosomal DNA suggests in terms of how closely related TM and these 4 matching individuals might be. The table below shows TM’s matches to the 4 Miller descendants, except for Doug.  We already know how TM and Doug are related.

Shared cM Longest block Segments >5cM *Estimated Relationship **Shared DNA Range ***Predicted Relationship Average DNA****
Barbara 98 27 5 6C 0-21 2-4C 2C1r-2C2r
Donald 87 29 4 6C 0-21 2-4C 2C2r
HAM 77 35 2 5C1r 0-41 2-4C 3C
Cheryl 57 29 3 6C 0-21 2-4C 3C1r

*Estimated relationship presumes (I know, bad word) that Dayton Daniel is Michael Miller, the immigrant’s grandson. Dayton Daniel cannot be Michael’s son, because Michael married a widow woman about his same age by 1754, after his wife died. In 1765, Michael would have been 73.

** Shared DNA Range is the range of the lowest and highest amounts of DNA found for the estimated relationship in the Shared cM Project.  In other words, this is how much DNA someone of that Estimated Relationship is found to share.  6th cousins share a range of 0-21 cM DNA, not 98cM like TM and Barbara share.

***Predicted Relationship is the relationship level predicted by Family Tree DNA based on the amount of shared DNA.

****Average DNA is the best fit from the chart I compiled in the article, “Concepts – Relationship Predictions” that combines information from several sources on the expected, actual average and ranges of DNA for each relationship type. The average DNA is taken from the column titled “Blaine’s Shared cM Average” which are results from a crowd sourced project indicating the actual amount of shared centiMorgans from various relationships.  In this case, the best fit for Barbara and TM would be between second cousins once removed (2C1r) and second cousins twice removed (2C2r).

Even though the average DNA suggests that these people are some flavor of second or third cousins, we know from the proven genealogy that these relationships cannot be in the second or third cousin range, because we know beyond a doubt that Dayton Daniel born in 1765 cannot be more closely related to Barbara, Donald, HAM and Cheryl than the nephew of Philip Jacob Miller, their common ancestor.  In fact, they cannot be related more closely than the 5th or 6th cousin level, as shown in the Estimated Relationship column.

Clearly, the amount of shared DNA exceeds the expected average for 6th cousins or 5th cousins once removed, significantly, for all 4 matches – comparing the value in the Shared cM column with the Shared DNA Range column. The amount of shared DNA also exceeds the maximum amount of shared cMs in the range, by at least double. In the case of Barbara and Donald, they exceed the maximum DNA for 6th cousins by 400%.  That’s not a slight deviation.   What could cause this?

There can be three possible causes for the amount of shared DNA to so dramatically exceed the maximum amount found for the estimated relationships.  I’ve listed these in the order of probability.

  • TM is related to Barbara, Donald, HAM and Cheryl through a secondary line. However, TMs mother is English and his paternal line is well researched back through Dayton Daniel. If TM and Barbara, Donald, HAM and Cheryl share more than one line, that occurred in or before Dayton Daniel’s father’s generation and Philip Jacob Miller’s generation. We do not know the surname of Philip Jacob Miller’s wife, Magdalena, nor have we identified the parents of Dayton Daniel. This shared secondary line is the most likely scenario for why TM shares so much DNA with Barbara, Donald, HAM and Cheryl.
  • For some reason, a very large amount of common DNA has been passed to TM and Philip Jacob Miller’s descendants. This is not one “sticky segment” but multiple segments, which makes this scenario less likely.
  • All 4 matches, meaning TM to Barbara, TM to Cheryl, TM to Donald and TM to HAM are extreme outliers in the relationship range shared centiMorgans. This is the least likely scenario and it would have had to have happened independently four different times.

If Philip Jacob Miller and the father of Dayton Daniel married women who were related, that would cause a higher amount of matching DNA in the descendants of both lines – but not to people the Lodowich line, which is exactly what we are seeing.

It’s also possible that in addition to being related to each other, both of their wives were also related to or descended from the Berchtol line, which would also drive up the shared amount of DNA in the descendants. We know during that timeframe it was not unusual for people to marry their first cousins and there were not a lot of Brethren brides to choose from on the frontier.

What Have We Learned?

This exercise has been very interesting and we have learned a number of things.

  • Via DNA and genealogy combined, we have probably confirmed that the immigrant Michael Miller did in fact have another son that survived and had offspring. Based on records alone, that son may be Michael Jr., or Hans Michael Miller. Additional genealogy work needs to be done to follow the records for these men from Frederick County, Maryland forward in time.
  • Via Y DNA, we know that Dayton Daniel does positively share a common ancestor with the descendants of Philip Jacob Miller and Lodowich Miller, both sons of Johann Michael Miller, the immigrant.
  • Via genealogy records, we have proven that Dayton Daniel cannot be the son of Philip Jacob Miller, Lodowich Miller or John Miller, the three proven sons of  Michael Miller, the immigrant.  All three of Michael Miller’s sons had sons named Daniel, but all three Daniels are accounted for and eliminated as being Dayton Daniel born in 1765 by other records.
  • Via autosomal DNA, we confirm that the relationship between TM and the Miller descendants he matches is in a genealogical timeframe, not back in Germany several generations. Due to the fact that Michael had no Miller siblings that survived, if the relationship was further back in time, it would have to be at least two generations before Michael Miller, the immigrant, making DNA matching between TM and Michael’s descendants unlikely at all, and certainly not at the level they match, as they would be at least 8th cousins.
  • Via autosomal DNA, we suspect that there may be a secondary matching line, and the best candidates for secondary lines would be Magdalena, the wife of Philip Jacob Miller along with the mother of Dayton Daniel.
  • Given the very high amount of shared DNA, more than double the expected maximum amount, it’s also suggestive that in addition to being related to each other, than the wives of Dayton Daniel’s mother and Philip Jacob’s wife, Magdalena Miller, may also have been related to Michael Miller and Susanna Berchtol. We know that Susanna Berchtol had relatives in York County. Michael Miller did not, except for his step or half-brother, Jacob Stutzman, whose will we have and who did not have a daughter Magdalena who married a Miller, nor another unknown daughter who also married a Miller.
  • Because of the Brethren Miller DNA Project, we have gathered together the descendants of several Brethren Miller lines which allows us to compare the Y and autosomal DNA and work together to solve this ongoing mystery.
  • Doug and I have now confirmed that we are related on both the Miller and Ulrich lines – and now perhaps a third mystery line as well.

As with all genealogy, every question answered produces several new ones. What a wonderful puzzle to unravel and how lucky we are to have DNA tools in our genealogy toolbox today!!!

13 thoughts on “Another Daniel Miller – A Y DNA Tale – 52 Ancestors #135

  1. Daniel Miller (8) born about 1815 in Ohio is our great-grandfather. Here is more information on him: He was in the 1850 Census US/IL/Putnam (R.125) p. 352B, 972/1008 Daniel Miller 35 farmer b. OH, Susannah 42 b. VA, George F. 10 b. IA Territory, James J. 9 b IA Terr., Daniel Y. 3 Illinois.
    In the 1860 Census IL Bureau Berlin twp 14 Jul 1860 p 377 Post Office: Malden
    Daniel Miller 46 farm laborer OH with Susan F Miller 45 VA,George F Miller 21 IA , James J Miller 20 IA, Daniel Y Miller 12 IL (indexed as Daniel Z), Angeline Miller 10 IL. They were between Jonathan Olds and Mathew Barnhart in 1860, one of who might have been his employer. Moving backward: 1840 census of IA Terr. 29 Sept 1840: Linn Co, Daniel Miller p. 332, 1 m. child under 5, 1 m. 20 to 30, 1 f. 20-30. After his father Isaac died, his mother married Valentine Fackler and they moved to Linn County briefly before settling just over the border in the county to the South, Jackson Co, IA. He appears to have been a farm laborer who moved often and did not own land. I suspect he broke with his family and faith.
    Daniel Miller (8) was mentioned in the will of his mother Elizabeth Miller Fackler, and collected his portion in 1865, after which nothing more is found of this family except for son Daniel Y. Miller (8a). [Will 1865: Johnson County Will Record, Volume 1: 196-197, Johnson County, Iowa] The family was not found in 1870. This information was submitted to Troy Goss’s Miller Family History website: http://genealogue.net/millbk5.html#DanielMiller

    Reportedly all but son Daniel Y. Miller (8a, born Mar 1847 IL) were killed in explosion of a riverboat on the Mississippi River “after the Civil War”. Afterward only son Daniel was found in Kansas[Cen 1880] where he married Amy May Casner in Lincoln KA in 1878; then Blackfoot, Bingham County, Idaho; 25 miles south to Pocatello, Bannock County, Idaho [Cen 1900]; and lastly in Goldendale, Klickitat County, Washington.[Cen 1910] He left his family about 1907 and his death place and date is unknown.

    Autosomal DNA test results of descendants of Daniel Y. Miller (GEDMatch kits A006292, A105083, T897231, T438357, and A213402) show matches to descendants of Isaac and Elizabeth Miller (2nd Fackler), Daniel and Elizabeth Ulrich Miller, David and Magdalena Abigail Maugans Miller, Philip Jacob Miller and others you have written about.

    I would be very interested in knowing if matches can show who Daniel (8)’s wife Susannah may have been.

    Ann

  2. For the one about whom you have little information: Daniel Miller (7) born about 1815 in Ohio is our great-grandfather. Here is more information on him: He was in the 1850 Census US/IL/Putnam (R.125) p. 352B, 972/1008 Daniel Miller 35 farmer b. OH, Susannah 42 b. VA, George F. 10 b. IA Territory, James J. 9 b IA Terr., Daniel Y. 3 Illinois.
    In the 1860 Census IL Bureau Berlin twp 14 Jul 1860 p 377 Post Office: Malden
    Daniel Miller 46 farm laborer OH with Susan F Miller 45 VA,George F Miller 21 IA , James J Miller 20 IA, Daniel Y Miller 12 IL (indexed as Daniel Z), Angeline Miller 10 IL. They were between Jonathan Olds and Mathew Barnhart in 1860, one of who might have been his employer. Moving backward: 1840 census of IA Terr. 29 Sept 1840: Linn Co, Daniel Miller p. 332, 1 m. child under 5, 1 m. 20 to 30, 1 f. 20-30. After his father Isaac died, his mother married Valentine Fackler and they moved to Linn County briefly before settling just over the border in the county to the South, Jackson Co, IA. He appears to have been a farm laborer who moved often and did not own land. I suspect he broke with his family and faith.

    Daniel Miller (7) was mentioned in the will of his mother Elizabeth Miller Fackler, and collected his portion in 1865, after which nothing more is found of this family except for son Daniel Y. Miller (8a). [Will 1865: Johnson County Will Record, Volume 1: 196-197, Johnson County, Iowa] The family was not found in 1870. This information was submitted to Troy Goss’s Miller Family History website: http://genealogue.net/millbk5.html#DanielMiller

    Reportedly all but son Daniel Y. Miller (7a, born Mar 1847 IL) were killed in explosion of a riverboat on the Mississippi River “after the Civil War”. Afterward only son Daniel was found in Kansas[Cen 1880] where he married Amy May Casner in Lincoln KA in 1878; then Blackfoot, Bingham County, Idaho; 25 miles south to Pocatello, Bannock County, Idaho [Cen 1900]; and lastly in Goldendale, Klickitat County, Washington.[Cen 1910] He left his family about 1907 and his death place and date is unknown.

    Autosomal DNA test results of descendants of Daniel Y. Miller (GEDMatch kits A006292, A105083, T897231, T438357, and A213402) show matches to descendants of Isaac and Elizabeth Miller (2nd Fackler), Daniel and Elizabeth Ulrich Miller, David and Magdalena Abigail Maugans Miller, Philip Jacob Miller and others you have written about.

    I would be very interested in knowing if matches can show who Daniel (7)’s wife Susannah may have been.

    Ann

    • I you can connect genealogically, that would be helpful. If you match the same segment of DNA with two other confirmed descendants of Daniel Miller who are not closely related to each other, and you don’t share any other lines, that would serve as confirmation at as well.

  3. Roberta, I enjoy reading your blog posts at DNAeXplained. That’s especially true since I have ancestors from some of the same places you do such as the western tip of Virginia (Witt, Roberts, Smith), and I am have Brethren ancestors who started in Bedford and Somerset Co. PA and went to Montgomery Co., PA. I have been *especcially* interested in your series about the many Daniel Millers. I am descended from Daniel #2, whom you call Dayton Daniel. I even went there when I lived in Ohio and took a photo of his house (from a distance), which is now a multi-family apartment building in west Dayton. I glanced through this latest post, but I haven’t had time yet to study it as closely as I will need to do to follow all the families and relatives. If you are interested, my Family Tree DNA kit is 371224 (should be listed as Rick Davis, though it might be Ricky instead). I’ve also downloaded my raw data at GEDMatch, where my kit number is T274956. Surely I ought to match TM and his cousin Doug. Please feel free so share my contact information with them. I’d love to meet some new cousins.

    By the way, an article in the April 1986 issue of the “Genealogical Aides Bulletin” of the now-defunct Miami Valley Chapter of the Ohio Genealogical Society features Daniel Bowman and Susannah Bowman. This may be the article you mentioned in your blog post. The article states, “Daniel Miller is said to have been the son of David Miller of Bedford County, Pennsylvania.” I haven’t looked for this David Miller and the statement comes with no proof, of course.

    I also have an Ullery [Ulrich] line, another common Brethren surname. Stephen Ullery (born ca. 1750 in PA, died March 1836 in Montgomery Co., Ohio) married Susanna Rench. Their son Samuel Ullery married Mary Miller, a daughter of Daniel and Susannah (Bowman) Miller.

    If I can contribute in some way to the Daniel Miller research, please let me know.

    On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 3:12 PM, DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy wrote:

    > robertajestes posted: “Just when you think you have the family all > straightened out, a left hook comes along, sneaks up and sucker-punches > you. Indeed, as if there wasn’t enough confusion about the various Daniel > Millers, we now have yet another very interesting twist in the” >

    • Well, that at least explains the source of Daniel’s father being listed as a David Miller. And it explains why so many of the trees incorrectly connect Dayton Daniel to David Miller, the brother to my Daniel (1) who did live in Bedford County. The problem, of course, is that David Miller, brother to Daniel, was the son of Philip Jacob Miller and David was born in 1757, per Philip Jacob’s family Bible, so he very clearly could not have had a son in 1765. Thank you for this additional information.

  4. This is an interesting development. It’s nice that you have enough research done already so you can clearly eliminate a lot of possibilities.

    The chromobrowser screen shot look neat, so it’s not likely that the matching DNA is background noise from a few endogamous Switzerland villages brought in by Hiram Feverda. The connection is probably real. Or maybe it get messier when you lower the threshold to 1cm?

    So, the only line Barbara and TM share would be this one:

    ┌── Johann Michael Miller

    Philip Jacob Miller and his brother

    └── Susanna Agnes Berchtol

    And Baraba’s only true American Brethren line, minus the Stephen Ulrich one, would be:

    ┌── Johann Michael Miller

    ┌── Philip Jacob Miller
    │ │
    │ └── Susanna Agnes Berchtol

    Daniel Miller (1)

    │ ┌── ?
    │ │
    └── Magdalena ???

    └── ?

    Meanwhile, TM would have:

    ┌── Johann Michael Miller

    ┌── their unreported fourth son
    │ │
    │ └── Susanna Agnes Berchtol

    Daniel Miller (2)

    │ ┌── ?
    │ │
    └── ?

    └── ?

    You say up to three lines in common…. Were Brethren into “sibship”? Meaning multiple siblings from one family marrying siblings from a second family? Like Susanna’s brother marrying Michael’s sister, giving birth to Magdalena? Would that be enough to account for the missing DNA? Because there so little room left to add lines, I’m trying to maximize the possibilities. Or is marrying between double first cousin a step too far even for Brethren desperately in need of suitable spouse?

    If Magdalena and Jacob were double first cousins, wouldn’t it remove the need for Daniel Miller (2)’s mother to be related with the Miller and the Berchtol? Or maybe it was her who was double first cousin with her husband?

    • Hiram Ferverda was from the Netherlands, not Switzerland or Germany, so his DNA is not likely to be an issue, nor is he related to RM.

      Here’s my thoughts on this. If Dayton Daniel’s father married a woman who was a sister to Magdalena who married Philip Jacob Miller, then that would explain double the expected DNA, but not 4 times. However, if the sisters that those men married were Berchtol sisters, meaning maybe the daughters of Susanna Berchtol’s brother or uncle, that would explain even more common DNA. That is, of course, speculation, but I’m trying to find any reason for the 4 times expected maximum amount of DNA. My mother doesn’t have any missing ancestors either that could explain this, other than the ones I’ve mentioned. This is her only Brethren line except Lentz but we know that line hadn’t arrived from Germany yet.

      • I was under the impression Hiram’s ancestor were from Switzerland like Mueller & co., but his bunch just moved to Netherlands instead of the United States. I should have double checked it out before typing…

        As for Magdalena, I understand better what you mean. How many brother did Susanna have? Is there any probable candidate?

      • No, Hiram and family were from Leeuwarden in the north of the Netherlands for at least as long as we have records. They were Mennonite there. I am still working on the records in Germany for Miller, Berchtel and Stutzman, or better put, Tom is. Finding them in Germany and finding them here are two different things though. We know for sure there are Berchtols in York County because Michael Miller owned land jointly with them. They too were Mennonite, so I’m betting they all converted from Lutheran after immigrating. In any case, we don’t know exactly the relationship, but there assuredly was one. This is more like a soap opera than genealogy:)

      • You found some more work for Tom, are you guys about done with the Lentz and Ruhler lines then?

        So the Berchtol were first generation converted too. These Mueller had a thing for the fresh into the Anabaptist faiths families’ daughters (or not even into Anabaptist in Catharina’s case).

        As for the soap opera, it’s your writing skill which turn these dry facts into one. ^__^

      • Right now I’m stuck on the Ruhler line. I need a document that I can’t obtain without going to the Allen County Public Library. I’ve tried other sources with no luck. So that line has to wait until I can get there. Looks like maybe in December. If I’m going, I’m going to make a trip out of it with other research as well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s