Monthly Archives: December 2017

DNA.Land

Posted on by
19

DNA.Land first launched in October of 2015, a free upload site whose goal is to encourage sharing to enable scientists to make new discoveries including the initiative to understand what is needed for a cure for breast cancer by 2020.

Their purpose, as stated by DNA.Land in their FAQ:

DNA.Land is a place where you can learn more about your genome while enabling scientists to make new genetic discoveries for the benefit of humanity. Our goal is to help members to interpret their data and to enable their contribution to research.

DNA.Land has invested a lot of effort into providing tools for genetic genealogists in order to encourage them to upload their autosomal DNA testing results to DNA.Land and participate in research in exchange for having access to their tools.

Let’s step through the process and take a look at their offerings.

If you’re interested in participating, the first thing to do is to register and the next step is the consent process.

Consent

If you are considering participation, or uploading your DNA to utilize their ethnicity or matching services, you must sign their consent form. Needless to say, you need to fully read the consent form before clicking to authorize, at DNA.Land and anyplace else.

Please note that you can click on any image to enlarge.

Upload Your File

After you click to approve and continue, you’ll be asked to select a file to upload. I chose Family Tree DNA Build 37.

Research Questions

Given that the focus of DNA.Land is medical research, you’ll be asked questions about yourself and your ancestry, such as your birthdate, as well as that of your parents.

I joined the Breast Cancer research and authorized researchers to contact me.

You are then asked, “Is this file your file?” DNA.Land wants to be absolutely sure you are providing information for your own file, and not someone else’s.

DNA.Land then asks questions related to your family and breast cancer. I answered the questions, agreed to be contacted if there are questions and joined the study.

You’ll answer questions about whether your parent, full siblings or children have been diagnosed with breast cancer, as well as questions about yourself.

I was excited to see that I was the 7,456th person to join the breast cancer initiative, but then I realized that their goal is 25,000 by the end of 2017. They have a LONG way to go. Please consider joining.

Your Personal Page

Your personal page includes your file status, the research projects in which you are participating as well as reports available.

Your file status is shown at the bottom of the page, including links to learn more.

About Imputation

DNA.Land was the first vendor to attempt imputation. I wrote about imputation in the article, Concepts – Imputation. I also wrote about matching with a vendor who utilizes imputation in the article Imputation Matching Comparison.

Imputation affects your matches, segment sizes and the quality of those matches. If you’re not familiar with imputation, I would strongly suggest reading these articles now.

While I’m incredibly supportive of the breast cancer and research initiatives, I’m less excited about the accuracy of imputation relative to genetic genealogy. Let’s take a look.

My Reports

Now that I’m done with setup and questions, I’m ready to view information about my own DNA results according to DNA.Land. Remember that these results include imputed information, meaning data that was imputed to be mine in regions not tested based on my DNA in regions that have been tested. My Family Tree DNA file that I uploaded held over 700,000 tested locations, and DNA.Land imputes another 38 million locations based on the 700,000 that were actually tested.

You can select from various My Reports options:

  • Find Relatives
  • Find Relatives of Relatives
  • Ancestry Report
  • Trait Prediction Report

Let’s look at each one.

Find Relatives

As of today, just over 70,000 individuals have uploaded, an increase of 10,000 in just under two months, so the site is rapidly growing.

The first page is DNA Relationship Matches. The match below is my closest match to cousin, Karen. I wrote about dissecting this match in the article Imputation Matching Comparison.

You can show or hide the chromosome table at far right. Segments are divided into recent and ancient based on the segment size. I’m not sure I would have used the term “ancient,” but what DNA.Land is trying to convey is that more often, smaller segments are older than larger segments.

I have 11 High Certainty matches and 1 speculative.

The information page explains more. Click on the “Learn more about the report” link in the upper left hand corner, which displays the following example information.

All reported segments are 3.00 cM or larger.

Very beneficially, my closest match, Karen, showed her GedMatch kit number as her middle name. I utilized her file at GedMatch and her results at DNA.Land to compare raw data file matching and imputed file matching. You can read about the findings in the article, Imputation Matching Comparison.

Based on imputed matching, I’m not sure that today I would have much confidence in matches to the relatives of relatives, but let’s take a look anyway.

Find Relatives of Relatives

Relative of relatives is a big confusing.  Think if it as an alternate to a chromosome browser.  Here’s what their information page says about this feature.

This is a bit confusing. The “via” relative is the person on your match report.

The first person listed, or the “endpoint” relative is the person related to them.

The intersection is the set of intersecting matching segments between you, your match and their match that (apparently) also matches you, or they would not be on this report.

Here’s a Relatives of Relatives match with my strongest match, Karen.

The problem is that the person shown as Karen’s match, Shelley, is not shown as my match.  The common matching segments between the three of us, shown above and below, are very small.  Even though Shelley is a match to Karen, Shelley apparently only matches me on smaller segments, not large enough to pass the DNA.Land threshold for a match.

The problem is that all of the above matching and triangulating segments above are imputed segments and don’t show up as legitimate matches at GedMatch between me and Karen, so they can’t be a valid three way match between me, Karen and Shelley.

In other words, these aren’t valid matches at all, even before the discussion about whether they are identical by descent, chance or population.  Therefore, these have to be matches on imputed regions, not through actual testing.

The certainty field is also confusing.  I initially though that the “high” certainty pertained to the three way match certainty, but it doesn’t.  Certainty means the certainty of the match between your match (the via relative) and the endpoint (their match) and has nothing to do with the certainty of the segments matching the three of you being relevant.

If you’d like to utilize this information, please read the information pages VERY CAREFULLY and be sure you understand what the information, is, and isn’t, telling you.

Ancestry Report (Ethnicity)

The Ancestry report is DNA.Land’s ethnicity report.

Looking at the map, it’s difficult to compare the DNA.Land results to other vendors, because they have Scandinavia divided into half, with the westernmost part of Scandinavia included in their Northwest Europe orange grouping, the light green designated as Finnish with the olive green as North Slavic. Other vendors include Norway and all of Sweden as part of Scandinavia.

One nice thing is that the population reference locations are shown on the map below, even for non-matching reference groups.

In my case, DNA.Land missed my Native American entirely.

The chart below represents my known and proven genealogy as compared to the DNA.land ethnicity results.

You can see how DNA.Land stacks up against the rest of the vendors, below.

Trait Prediction Report

The trait report requires an additional consent form. In essence, DNA.Land wants to make sure you really want to see your traits, that you understand what you are going to see and that you understand how traits are calculated and displayed.

DNA.land offers several traits you can select from.

But there’s a hitch.

Before you can see your traits, you get to answer a survey. In all fairness, DNA.Land’s purpose is medical research, and the reports participants receive are free.

My eye color is accurate, BUT, I also just told them that my eye color is dark brown during the questions. Not terribly confidence inspiring – but my confidence increased  after reviewing all of the information they provided about the science behind my actual trait prediction.

The eye color map, above, is something unique I haven’t seen elsewhere. I find this kind of information quite interesting.

Even though I did provide DNA.Land with the “brown eyes” answer, this chart makes me feel much better, because they shared the science behind my result with me. Therefore, I now feel much better, because, based on the science, it’s apparent that they didn’t just parrot my result back to me.

There is also a “what if my result is wrong” link. After all, science is all about continuing to learn and to think we know everything there is to know about genetics is foolhearty.

Yea, I like this a LOT!

If you’d like to read more about how genetic research takes place, read the interesting article titled Is there a Firefox Gene? Yes, that’s the Firefox browser, and yes, this is a real study. Take a look. It’s really quite interesting and written in plain English.

Summary

DNA.Land has a different purpose than other DNA matching and ethnicity sites. As a nonprofit, DNA.Land offers their matching and ethnicity services as an enticement to genetic genealogists who have paid to test elsewhere to upload their results to DNA.land and in doing so, to participate in medical research.

DNA.Land is absolutely up front about their mission. The features are “complimentary,” so to speak, meant to be enticements to consumers to participate and contribute their DNA results.

Given that, it’s difficult to be terribly upset with DNA.Land’s features and services.

DNA.Land has a nice user interface and some nice display features. Their eye color mapping isn’t found elsewhere, and other similar features would make great teaching tools. Their help pages are informative and educational.

Imputation concerns me. Imputation for medical research doesn’t directly affect me today, although it may someday, given that imputed data is used for research.

Imputed data does affect your results at Promethease if you choose to utilize your imputed results as input for any application that reports your academic and/or medical mutations. You can read about that in the article, Imputation Analysis Using Promethease.

Imputation affects matching for genetic genealogy negatively. While I didn’t discuss matching quality in this article, I did in the article Imputation Matching Comparison, which I would encourage you to read if you are attempting to utilize the DNA.Land matching function seriously for genealogy. I would encourage genetic genealogists to simply match at the vendor where they tested, or at Family Tree DNA which accepts uploads (Ancestry V1, V2 and 23andMe V3, V4) from other vendors, or at GedMatch for serious match analysis.

My suggestion to DNA.Land for matching would be to eliminate the smaller segments entirely, especially if they are a result of imputation and not actual matching DNA segments. In my limited experiment, DNA.Land seemed to do relatively well on matching and utilizing larger segments.

Ethnicity results at DNA.Land, called Ancestry Results, are divided oddly, with Northwestern Europe including all of the British Isles, western Scandinavia along with the northwest quadrant of continental Europe. This division makes it extremely difficult to compare to other vendors’ results.

DNA.Land seems to report an unrealistic amount of Southern European, but again, it’s somewhat difficult to tell where the dividing line occurs. It would be easier if their ethnicity map were overlayed on a current map of Europe showing country boundaries. DNA.Land missed my Native entirely.

It would be interesting to know how much of the ethnicity results are calculated on actual DNA and how much through imputation. Ethnicity results tend to be dicey enough in the industry as a whole without adding the uncertainty of imputation on top. Having said that, given how popular ethnicity testing has become, offering another ethnicity opinion is probably a large draw for attracting people to upload and participate in research at DNA.Land.

Some of the trait information is quite interesting and new traits will probably be equally so, although I wonder how much of that information is imputed as well. In other words, I don’t know if the results are actually “mine” through testing or could be in error. The good news is that DNA.Land provides the genetic locations where the trait analysis is compiled, allowing you to utilize a service like Promethease which provides the ability in some cases to confirm imputed data if you upload your actual tested files from testing vendors.

For all results, I would very much like to see a toggle where you can toggle between actual match results and match results derived from imputation.

I would also like to see some research about the accuracy of imputation as compared to non-imputed results. Clearly this would be available through research efforts like my own at Promethease, exome and full genome sequencing.

In a nutshell, DNA.Land provides an interesting free service so long as you don’t want to take the results terribly seriously for genealogy research. If any of the results are important or you want to depend upon them for accuracy, verify elsewhere with actual tested data.

It’s important to remember at DNA.Land that their real goal isn’t to provide a product or to compete with the testing vendors. Their features are a “thank you” or enticement for consumers to contribute their autosomal data for medical research, some of which may be “for profit.”  Companies aren’t going to participate in research initiatives that don’t hold the potential for profit.

I really didn’t need an enticement, but I’m grateful nonetheless.

Additionally, DNA.Land has provided an important first foray into imputation and allowed us to compare imputed data with tested data. I know that wasn’t their goal, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to learn and work with real life examples. My own. I would encourage you to do the same.

Be Part of the Cure

The last thing I have to say is that I truly hope and pray that the Breast Cancer Deadline shown as 2020 is a real and achievable goal.

I welcome the opportunity for anything I can to do help eliminate that horrific scourge that has affected so many women. Breast cancer has taken the lives of my family members and friends, as I’m sure it has yours, and I would like nothing better than to participate in some small way in wiping it off the face of the earth. DNA.Land is one way you can help, and it costs you absolutely nothing.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Testing Strategy – Should I Test at Ancestry and Transfer to Family Tree DNA?

Posted on by
45

As most people know by now, Ancestry doesn’t accept DNA file transfers from other vendors, so many people recommend testing first at Ancestry and then transferring to Family Tree DNA.

Actually, that’s not always the best choice.

  • There is nothing inherently WRONG with that strategy, but it may not be right for you either. Transferring to Family Tree DNA from Ancestry certainly won’t hurt anything, but a transfer will only provide 20-25% of your matches if you tested at Ancestry after May of 2016 because the DNA chips used for processing are different at the two vendors.
  • If you tested at Ancestry before May of 2016, the Ancestry kit and the Family Tree DNA kits are identical, so transferring will give you the same matches at Family Tree DNA as if you had tested there. You are on the Ancestry V1 kit, so just transfer.  There is no need for a V1 kit to retest at Family Tree DNA. The transfer itself is free, as are your matches, but to unlock all features and tools costs $19. A bargain.
  • If you tested at Ancestry after May of 2016, you tested on the V2 kit. Ancestry changed the markers tested and now the Ancestry kit is only partially compatible with Family Tree DNA. As an Ancestry V2 transfer kit, you will only receive about 20-25% of the matches you would receive if you tested at Family Tree DNA.  The matches you receive will be your closest matches, but is that enough?

For some people, especially adoptees, your closest matches may be all that you are interested in.  If so, you’re golden with any Ancestry transfer.

For genealogists, you’re missing 75-80% of your matches, and your brick-wall breaker may well be in that group. Not good at all!

Let’s look at my kits for example.  I have tested directly at Family Tree DNA, and I have also transferred an Ancestry V2 kit to Family Tree DNA.

As you can see, my Family Finder kit received 3115 matches.  My Ancestry V2 transfer kit only received 26.65% of those matches.

Plus, if you attach the DNA of known family members to your tree, Family Tree DNA provides phased matching, which tells you which side of your tree a match connects to.  In the example above, that means that I know immediately which side 1236 of my matches connect to.  That’s a whopping 40% and that’s before I even look at their trees or common surnames! This is an incredible tool.

People who recommend that you test at Ancestry, today, and transfer to Family Tree DNA may not understand the unintended consequences, or they may be people who work primarily with adoptees. They may also not understand the value of phased matches for genealogists.

For people who tested at Ancestry after May of 2016, my recommendation is to take the Family Finder test directly at Family Tree DNA as well as test at Ancestry separately.

If you tested at MyHeritage, that test is fully compatible at Family Tree DNA as well, so do transfer, no retest needed!

To Order or Transfer

To order your Family Finder test, click here and then on the Family Finder test, shown below.

To transfer to Family Tree DNA for free from any company, click here and then in the upper left hand corner of the screen, click Autosomal Transfer, last option under the dropdown under the blue DNA Tests to get started.

Related Articles:

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Elinor McDowell (c1690->1730), Murtough’s Wife, Many Questions and No Answers, 52 Ancestors #173

Posted on by
8

We don’t know a lot about Murtough McDowell, and we know even less about his wife, Elinor.

In fact, the only way we know her name is through a deed where on September 26, 1730, Murtough and Elinor McDowell of Baltimore County, Maryland sold to Richard Gist 100 acres on the north side of the Patapsco River.  Murtough signed with an X and Elinor didn’t sign at all. It would be highly unusual for a literate female to be married to a male who could not write. So we will suppose here that Elinor could neither read or write.

If Elinor was Murtough’s only wife, she was probably born before 1700 since he was in Baltimore County before May of 1722.

Thirty years later, in 1752, Murtough’s son, Michael, sold his share in Murtough’s land.  At that time, Michael would have been at least 21 years of age.

Michael also had a son, Michael Jr. that was born about 1747.  We could safely say that Michael Sr. was at least 25 before Michael Jr. was born, so Michael Sr. was probably born no later than 1722.  Michael Sr. could have been born shortly after arriving in the colonies, on the ship in route, or in Ireland. Marriage records in Baltimore County don’t exist prior to 1777.

Therefore, it’s likely that Elinor who was married to Murtough in 1730 was the mother of Michael – but it’s not certain by any means.

Because Michael was living in Virginia in 1752, a state where Catholics were not tolerated, we can be fairly certain that Michael was Protestant and attended the Anglican church, as mandated by Virginia law.  This suggests that Michael’s parents were not likely to be Catholic either, and indeed, Murtough’s Y DNA match in Ireland lived in a solidly Protestant area – then as now.

Given that, it’s very likely that Elinor was Protestant as well, and if she was married to Murtough before he left Ireland, her family was probably from Kingsmoss, or nearby.  You have to be able to court to marry – and courting probably occurred with neighbors or fellow churchgoers. Who else would he see regularly?

Let’s presume, for purposes of discussion, that Michael’s birth year was 1722.  We don’t know if Michael was his mother’s first child, or her last child – or someplace in-between.  Therefore, Elinor could have been anyplace from about 21 to about 43 in 1722, so a birth range for her of 1679 to 1701.  I would be surprised if Elinor was born in 1701, because that would not have given Murtough much time to earn enough to pay passage to Maryland for both he and a wife.

Not only is there nothing to suggest that Michael and Elinor were indentured servants – they couldn’t have been, because indentured servants could not be married, nor could they patent land, a process which Murtough began in May of 1722.

Therefore, it’s most likely that they were over 30 when they arrived, allowing them time to amass enough pay for their passage and any of their children, so Elinor was probably born sometime before 1690.

Maryland in 1720

What was Maryland like in 1720? What did Elinor find awaiting her as she stepped off the ship that would have sailed nearly to the end of the murky Chesapeake Bay?  If she arrived in late summer, the Chesapeake was body of water full of stinging jellyfish? However, the bay was also an important food source.

Did the family subsist on the plentiful seafood such as oysters and crab until they could find land and plant crops for the following year’s harvest? Where did they stay their first few days and weeks?  Did they know someone who had already sailed earlier?

In 1720, according to the map above, no plantations were shown on the Patapsco River and only 4 or 5 on the north side of the inlet.  Most plantations were along the water’s edge in order to build private docks for ships to moor and load tobacco for transport back to England.  Tobacco was the mainstay of Maryland, and Marylanders welcomed the merchant ships that were always filled with cloth and other goods not available in the colonies.

Imported goods from the UK are listed below in the order of monetary value:

  • Wool
  • Silk
  • Linen and sailcloth
  • Cordage
  • Gunpowder
  • Leather wrought and for saddles
  • Brass and copper wrought
  • Iron wrought and nails
  • Leads and shot
  • Pewter

Goods from other foreign ports:

  • Linens
  • Calicoes
  • East India Goods
  • Wrought silks
  • Iron and Hemp

In a letter to “the King’s Most Excellent Majesty” dated September 8, 1721, we find the following discussion of population:

From whence it appears, that the Inhabitants of this province have increased to above double the number in 15 years, and altho’ some part of this increase may have been occasioned by the transportation of the rebels from Preston, by the purchase of slaves, as well as by the arrival of several convict persons, and of many poor families, who have transported themselves from Ireland; yet it must be allowed, that Maryland is one of the most flourishing provinces upon the Continent of America.

Elinor and Murtough were most likely part of those poor families who transported themselves from Ireland.  The colonies lured immigrants with the possibility of achieving a dream that could never be realized in Ireland – land ownership – and with that, financial independence.

Maryland was a tobacco economy, with few towns and large plantations.  Small farmers did their own backbreaking work without the aid of slaves, widely used on the larger plantations as shown in this 1670 painting from neighboring Virginia.

Raising tobacco was an unforgiving mistress to which a man or a couple was in essence enslaved night and day, year-round.  The tobacco crop was vulnerable to all sorts of pests and calamities – including weather and the economy.

Tobacco, shown above, depleted the soil of nutrients within just three years, so crop rotation had to be employed and a farmer had to have nine times as much land as was planted at any one time with tobacco.  A single worker could tend to between 4 and 6 acres, so a farmer would have to have 54 acres of tillable farmland (plus land for a house and outbuildings) to keep 6 acres planted in tobacco.  The rest was sewn in wheat or other grains to feed both humans and livestock. Of course, the goal of any “planter” was to have help, be it a son, daughter, wife, indentured servant or slave.

Women cooked, cleaned, bore and raised children, carded flax for linen and spun wool from which they wove fabrics that were then dyed and made into clothing by hand. The woman in the photo below is using a traditional Irish spinning wheel.

Cloth that was manufactured overseas and imported was beyond the reach of most farmers.

Many women also worked alongside men in the field.

Small farmers were poor by colony standards – even if they were rich by Irish standards where land was never owned by the people who farmed the land – only by rich English gentry.

In 1720, Native Americans still lived in Maryland.  In fact, it wasn’t until 1744 that the chiefs of the Six Nations relinquished by treaty all claims to land in the colony, with the assembly purchasing the last Indian land in June of 1744. Murtough and Elinor probably knew and may have lived alongside Native families. Perhaps Native women shared their knowledge of herbal medicines with Elinor.

The Robert Long House located in present day Baltimore and believed to be the oldest home, shown below, dates from 1765.

Elinor may well have seen this building as she came and went, if she lived long enough – but this home would have looked nothing like where Elinor eventually lived.  Most homes of small farmers were one room and had only a dirt floor.  Some had a fireplace indoors which provided heat as well as a cooking area.  Cooking probably occurred outside, especially in summer.  The family may have had one bed, with children sleeping on straw or pallets. If they were very poor, everyone would have slept on straw, along with insects and possibly some livestock.

Estate records exist in both Baltimore and Prince George’s County during this timeframe, yet we know nothing more of Murtough and Elinor. I thoroughly searched Baltimore County records, although an extensive search has yet to be completed in Prince George’s County where Murthough’s final land grant suggests that he lived in 1732. It would be unusual for Murtough to own three parcels of land, two at his death, yet leave no estate at all to be administered.

We know that Elinor was alive in 1730, but we don’t know any more.  We don’t know when or where she died, although it was likely at Pleasant Green, located on the North Run of Jones Falls – the land owned by Murtough and Elinor from 1722 when it was surveyed until Michael sold his share in 1752.

If this is the case, then both Elinor and Murtough are likely buried someplace on the 100 acres named Pleasant Green on the North Branch of Jones Falls, in the area shown below.

DNA

Unfortunately, because we don’t know of any female children born to Elinor, her mitochondrial DNA is not available to us today. Mitochondrial DNA is given by mothers to both genders of their children, but only females pass it on. Our only prayer would be if additional children are discovered, one of which is a female with descendants to the current generation through all females. In the current generation, of course, males would also carry their mother’s mitochondrial DNA.

However, there seems to be a genetic hint buried in the confusion.

I joined my kits at Family Tree DNA to the NIFHS Ballymena DNA project that represents Northern Ireland. The project administrator contacted me indicating that I match two people, both of whom are Irish, living in Northern Ireland, from the Ballymena area, about 17 miles from Kingsmoss.

Are these two matches simply chance?  We don’t know.

Are these matches through Murtough, Elinor or another ancestor?  We don’t know that either. It’s only a hint, not an answer.

We do know that the DNA inherited from this couple has to have originated from either Murtough or his wife.  Without identifying people from either side prior to Murtough and Elinor, we have no way to sort the McDowell DNA into “sides,” meaning Murtough’s and Elinor’s DNA.

However, the final chapter of what DNA will one day reveal is not yet written.

In Summary

We know that Elinor was either brave, reluctant or fool-hearty, or maybe some of each.  There were no guarantees, only opportunities, but opportunities fraught with danger – beginning with a 6 week or longer ocean voyage in a small ship on a very large and sometimes angry sea.  The devil you know versus the devil you don’t.

Women during that time had little say in decisions like whether to uproot the family, leave everything familiar and embark on a new life in a new land, from whence there was no return. Did Elinor have a brood of a dozen stairstep children as she boarded the ship, or was she expecting her first?

We’ll never know whether Elinor was excited about this new adventure and the future that awaited – whether she was lukewarm and set forth begrudgingly, or whether she was dragged kicking and screaming all the way to the boat.  None of that mattered after they arrived in America, because there truly was no going back. She simply made the best of her life in the colony of Maryland. Was she happy? Was she homesick for the green fields and bogs of Ireland? Did she leave aging parents behind, along with siblings?

Perchance Elinor felt better about their immigration to the colonies when she and Murtough sold their land in1730.  Perhaps making something of a profit made the journey worthwhile. Did she purchase a treat, perhaps an ell or two of calico to make herself a nice dress?

We are left with so many questions.

  • Who was Elinor?
  • Was she married to Murtough in Ireland?
  • How many children did she have in her lifetime?
  • How many did she bury?
  • How many lived to adulthood?
  • Who were they?
  • Did she lose children on the ship during their journey, wrapping them lovingly as she said prayers and buried them as sea?
  • Was the family confined to steerage for weeks on end?
  • Did she give birth on the ship? Before birth control, women spent their entire reproductive lives either pregnant or nursing.
  • Did Elinor leave small graves behind in the Presbyterian churchyard near Kingsmoss in Ireland?
  • Did she bury children and perhaps Murtough in Baltimore County at Pleasant Green?
  • Did she and Murtough pull up stakes a second time, moving on to Prince George’s county, as the 1732 land survey and grant suggests?
  • Did Elinor wave goodbye to son Michael as he set forth on the journey of the next generation to Halifax County, Virginia – just as she had bid her relatives goodbye years earlier? The goodbye to Michael was probably final, because 260 miles to Halifax County would have taken about 26 days by wagon or about two weeks by horse.
  • Did Elinor ever see her grandchild, Michael Jr.? Was he born before Michael Sr. left Maryland?
  • Did Elinor have other grandchildren?

So very many questions, and no answers.  Perhaps one day, the DNA of Elinor’s descendants along with currently unknown records will somehow answer at least a few of these questions.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research