Father’s Day DNA Sale – Discovering Information About Male Ancestors

The Father’s Day sale has started. Father’s Day is Sunday, June 17th and there’s still plenty of time to order a DNA test. Dad can swab on Father’s Day, but BEFORE he eats, please.

Father’s Day reminds me of barbeques on the grill and making the summer’s first homemade ice cream in the old crank ice cream maker.

Today, we have the option of making memories another way – by utilizing our DNA to honor the men in our direct paternal family line as well as men in other lines.

I’ve noticed lots of men who have taken autosomal tests haven’t utilized the power of Y DNA. That’s like leaving money on the table.

Males can learn extremely valuable information about their direct paternal line that can’t be discovered with autosomal testing. Want to know what you can discover with Y DNA testing? Take a quick look at the article Working with Y DNA – Your Dad’s Story.

Testing our father’s DNA, uncles or brothers (for females who wish to obtain information on their father’s lineage) is relatively easy, but often we want to discover information about other paternal lines in our tree. Women don’t have a Y chromosome, so can’t take a Y DNA test, but women can certainly find males who carry their ancestral surnames and sponsor tests!

Checking the Family Tree DNA projects is one way to see if your ancestral line has been tested. You can search for the surname that you’re interested in on the Family Tree DNA main page to see if your ancestral line has already been tested in a project.

Would you like to make contact? You may already match some of these people autosomally, or you can contact the project administrator to offer the person who tested an upgrade. I’ve sponsored several upgrades and Big Y tests this way.

You can also search your Family Finder results for that surname to see if there are any males in your match list who carry that surname from your line.

To see if a match has taken a Y DNA test, click on their profile and look for the Y haplogroup. If there’s a haplogroup showing, they’ve taken a Y DNA test. But if not, it’s their lucky day – and yours. You can honor your ancestor by offering a paternal Y-line test or upgrade.

Almost everything Y DNA is on sale for Father’s Day. You can purchase traditional tests at 37, 67 or 111 markers, or the Big Y which INCLUDES all 111 markers in addition to the revolutionary Big Y test itself which scans the entire Y chromosome for unique mutations. Upgrades are on sale too. You’ll learn who the tester matches as well as historical information from before the advent of surnames. All pieces of the “where did I come from” puzzle.

You can also order a Family Finder test for those males from your line that have taken the Y DNA test(s), but not autosomal. The Family Finder test is on sale for $59.

You’re not done yet! DNA is the gift that keeps on giving.

You can transfer Family Finder results to MyHeritage for additional matching and to use their great genealogy records. Great news – that transfer is FREE. Not everyone tests at the same companies, so it pays to fish in several ponds. I’ve found close matches at each vendor that haven’t tested elsewhere. You can also transfer in the other direction too, from MyHeritage to Family Tree DNA.

I’ve already purchased one kit and offered a second.

Which lines can you find to test for Father’s Day to honor your male ancestors? What do you hope to discover?


Standard Disclosure

This standard disclosure appears at the bottom of every article in compliance with the FTC Guidelines.

Hot links are provided to Family Tree DNA, where appropriate. If you wish to purchase one of their products, and you click through one of the links in an article to Family Tree DNA, or on the sidebar of this blog, I receive a small contribution if you make a purchase. Clicking through the link does not affect the price you pay. This affiliate relationship helps to keep this publication, with more than 900 articles about all aspects of genetic genealogy, free for everyone.

I do not accept sponsorship for this blog, nor do I write paid articles, nor do I accept contributions of any type from any vendor in order to review any product, etc. In fact, I pay a premium price to prevent ads from appearing on this blog.

When reviewing products, in most cases, I pay the same price and order in the same way as any other consumer. If not, I state very clearly in the article any special consideration received. In other words, you are reading my opinions as a long-time consumer and consultant in the genetic genealogy field.

I will never link to a product about which I have reservations or qualms, either about the product or about the company offering the product. I only recommend products that I use myself and bring value to the genetic genealogy community. If you wonder why there aren’t more links, that’s why and that’s my commitment to you.

Thank you for your readership, your ongoing support and for purchasing through the affiliate link if you are interested in making a purchase at Family Tree DNA, or one of the affiliate links below:

Affiliate links are limited to:

Johann Michael Muller the First was a Widower, 52 Ancestors #196

When I wrote about Johann Michael Muller (the first) as well as his wife, Irene Elisabetha Heitz, I thought his story was complete.

Just when you think there are no more records, nothing else to squeeeeeze out of that turnip – there’s one more thing. And as it turns out, it exposes a VERY important chapter in Michael’s life by deciphering just one word.

This church entry documents Johann Michael Muller’s wedding to Irene Liesabetha Heitz in Miesau, Germany in 1684. When we discovered this record, it was HUGE news, because proved the real identity of Michael’s wife.

But there’s more…

The Turnip Bleeds

As you can see, the script is very difficult. The original translation stated that Michael had married Irene, picking out the evident words, but there was additional information lurking there that would prove to be very important, obfuscated by centuries-old script.

Upon further investigation, and no small amount of sleuthery in terms of trying to decipher the script – it was determined that one of the words was incredibly important.


Above, an enlarged area from the marriage record.

What the heck is a wuntartzt? Nobody knew. Not Tom, not Chris our Native German speaker, and not another long-time German historical resource.

Tom, my trusty cousin who is also a retired German genealogist, suggested, after much gnashing of teeth because no one knew what a wuntartzt was, that maybe, just maybe, the word was really widower, which in German is “witwer.” German script is extremely contrary sometimes, and of course it’s always the MOST important word that stubbornly resists.

After three knowledgeable people concurred that this word really is witwer, the translated verbiage was evaluated again for context. That’s not always straightforward either!

Chris replied:

So, “son” and “widower” refers to the same person, Michael. The part before “Sohn”: “Heinsmanns Müllers Einwohners zu Schwartz Matt im Berner Gebieth” is put as a genitive, because it refers to Michael`s father Heinsmann.

Which, of course, raises an entirely new question: If Michael Müller was a widower at the time he married Irene Liesabetha Heitz in 1684, who was his first wife then? Did she die in Steinwenden or in the area or rather already back in Switzerland? Maybe it is worth to have another close look at those burials in the Miesau church book from 1681 to 1684 to maybe find her there?

Here’s the retranslated marriage entry as agreed upon by Tom and Chris.

“Johann Michael Muller, widower, son of Heinsmann Muller, resident in Schwartz Matt in the Bern area (Switzerland), married 17 April 1684 in Steinwenden to Irene Liesabetha Heitz, daughter of Conrad Heitz.”

Of course, the blessing or curse of genealogy is that one answer or even a hint always raises many more questions.

And…another gem is unearthed from that script – Michael’s father’s name. Except, of course, as this family always seems to do – that information conflicts with what we thought we knew.

So, let’s evaluate how this puzzle piece fits with the rest of what we actually do know.

For beginners, Michael’s death record in Steinwenden on January 31, 1695 states his age as being 40, which means he was 29 or 30 when he married Irene in 1684. Chances are good (92%) that he had not yet had his birthday in 1695 when he died, which means he was probably born in 1654, and if not, in 1655. He would have become of marriageable age in about 1675, but probably wouldn’t have married yet for a few years, until he could provide support for a family in some fashion. So we are looking for a marriage record for Michael sometime in or after 1675 and of course, before April of 1684. Probably significantly before 1684.

Someplace. But where?


Chris’s continuing thoughts:

What remains interesting to me though is the reported village of origin for the Michael Müller, who married Irene Liesabetha in 1684. As I pointed out he must be from Schwarzenmatt (church records are found in the Boltigen church books), which is in fact really close to Erlenbach in Simmental.

With the two villages being so close to each other, I would think it goes certainly well along with Michael Müller from Schwarzenmatt and Jacob Ringeisen from Erlenbach having been cousins.

Later records in Steinwenden state that Jacob Ringeisen is a cousin of Michael Miller’s and that Jacob is a Swiss from Erlenbach.

Chris goes on to say:

The Boltigen church books: As I read on an internet forum, the church books of the time period around 1650 that would be of most interest for us are lost in a church fire in 1840. You can also see this from the Familysearch compilation:


So I fear we are lost guessing here, with the remaining possibility that pedigrees have been made before 1840 and saved somewhere.

Would we be that lucky? But wait…

There is a coat of arms of a Müller family in Boltigen.

Now that’s quite interesting. I can’t help but wonder if this pertains to my Miller line. I wish I knew more about those Boltigen Millers and I surely, surely, wish that one of the male Boltigen Millers, assuming some of them survived to current, would take a Y DNA test. I’d love to confirm that this is the same line. In fact, if you’re a male Boltigen Miller descendant and carry the surname today, I have a DNA testing scholarship for you!

The Original Zollikofen Narrative

It’s disconcerting when new information conflicts with information that has been believed within a family for a long time, even if the family doesn’t exactly know WHY they believe that.

For as long as I’ve researched this family, it’s been repeated that Johann Michael Muller was believed to have been born in Zollikofen, Switzerland in 1655. The age fits and the location fits given that many Swiss were immigrating from that area to Germany. However, there has never been any documentation or record to prove that the Johann Michael Muller born in 1655 in Zollikofen to Johann Jacob Muller and Salome Huber is the same Johann Michael Muller who lived and died in Steinwenden. In fact, I’ve never actually seen that Muller/Huber record either, simply heard repeatedly that it existed.

Researchers, me included, were frustrated for years trying to find this documentation. Had we been able to discover what happened to the child of Jacob and Salome Huber Miller, we could possibly have disproven (or proven) that he was our Michael, but that information too proved elusive.

I did find it worth noting that none of Michael’s children were named either Jacob or Salome. Jacob might not have been remarkable because it’s so common, but Salome is rather unusual. On the other hand, none were named Irene or Regina after his wife, either, nor Heinsmann after his father.

Neither was I able to document Jacob and Salome Huber Miller, the Zollikofen couple that was supposed to be Michael’s parents. Now, that doesn’t matter anymore.

The marriage record for our Johann Michael Muller to Irene gives Michael’s father’s name and location. And it’s not Johann Jacob Muller nor is the location Zollikofen, or even near Zollikofen.

It appears that Zollikofen was a “best fit” by someone using the information they had at the time. Sadly, as a family, we’ve been emotionally married to Zollikofen for decades now, and mistakenly so. One family member, a minister, even preached from the pulpit in Zollikofen, thinking he was in the church where Michael stood. Truth be known, he was about 40 miles away.

So close but so far away.

A Marriage Record

Tom found something quite interesting.

An April 1681 marriage in Boltigen between Michael Muller and Anna Andrist.

Is this our Michael?  It could be. The time is right. But who knows!

This quaint alpine church in Boltigen replaced the church lost in fire in 1840. Is this the location where Michael was first married, in the original church?

By Roland Zumbuehl – Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20634682

Boltigen marriages started being recorded in 1662 but unfortunately, no parents are recorded in marriages. How FRUSTRATING!

Deaths began in 1683, so if Michael’s wife died there before the records began, that too has slipped away from us.

Tom looked in the Miesau church records for any sign of Michael’s first wife and of course, didn’t find hide nor hair of her or Michael before his 1684 marriage to Irene.

Switzerland to Germany

What brought Michael to Germany from Switzerland?

From the Boltigen/Erlenbach area to the Miesau/Steinwenden area is a nontrivial trip. Note that on the map below you can see parts of seven different countries; France, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Lichtenstein and Austria . Europe is much more compressed than the US, and while we think of country boundaries as borders, in Europe, they function mostly seamlessly and did then as well. Some boundaries are geographical, like the Alps separating Switzerland and Italy, but in other cases, country lines are politically drawn and have moved and been renamed over time.

Viewed from Boltigen, the Juan Pass.

Beginning at the northern base of the Alps, Michael’s path would have ambled along the Rhine River after crossing more mountains near Basel.

1493 woodcut of Basel from the Nuremburg Chronicle

Did Michael move to Steinwenden because his cousin, Jacob Ringeisen had moved or was moving to the Steinwenden area? Did they make the journey together? Had other family members moved there too, attracted by the Palatinate promise of land and tax exemption?

We know there was lots of vacant land available. The area was entirely depopulated by the 30 years war. A 1656 tax list states that no one lived in Steinwenden. By 1671, inhabitants were once again listed. The 1683/4 tax records show only 6 families and 25 people total – although that list appears to exclude the non-taxed Swiss.

The Hans Berchtol family who settled in Steinwenden, whose daughter Susanna married Michael’s son in 1714, seems to have sprung from this Swiss region too.

Was Michael leaving heartbreak behind, someplace that didn’t remind him of his departed love? Or, did Michael and his first wife leave Switzerland with a family group to start a new life – embarking on a great adventure with the rosy-cheeked promise of newlywed love?

And then, tragedy struck…

Kids? Were There Kids?

If Michael was a widower in 1684 at the time of his second marriage, and his first wife had died, were there living children? If Michael married Anna Andrist mid-April, she could have been having a child anytime from January 1682, assuming she wasn’t pregnant when they married.

There was even time for a second child to have potentially been born.

The only child who lived from Michael’s second marriage to Irene was Johann Michael Muller the second, the last child born in 1692. Michael and Irene would suffer the births and deaths of 5 children after their 1684 marriage and before Michael the second was born. Unbelievable grief, grief stacked upon grief for Michael. How did he survive?

Why were there no more children born to Michael and Irene?

Was Michael or Irene ill between 1692 and Michael’s untimely death in 1695? Why was there no record of another child born about October of 1694, which would have been when the next child would be expected? There are no Muller children’s death records either.

Originally, we thought that Irene had died and Michael had remarried, but she hadn’t. We simply don’t have any answers, except that Irene remarried in 1696 to Jacob Stutzman and subsequently had several more children, the first one arriving 11 months after their marriage.

This is killing me. If Michael married Anna Andrist in April 1681, IF Anna was his wife, the first child could have been born in January 1682. A second child could have been born in mid/late 1683. Anna could have died in childbirth with either child, or neither child. If there were two children, there’s certainly no guarantee that either survived, with or without the mother’s death. What we do know is that by April 17, 1684, Michael was a widower, in Miesau, far from where his father lived, marrying Irene.

Having said all of that, it’s possible that there were children born to Michael’s first marriage that did survive. If so, and if we have identified the correct wife and location, we’ll never know because the baptism records are missing for that time period in Boltigen.


  • Anna Andrist died before Boltigen death records began in 1683
  • Or they weren’t living there when Anna died
  • Or this is the wrong couple

Tom feels that, “if Michael had young kids, they would be evident in Steinwenden, which they weren’t. I don’t think we will get a handle on this aspect. I believe you are done with this chapter.”

There were other Millers evident in Steinwenden, BUT, Miller is an extremely common surname and there is nothing to tie Michael to any of them. Given the fact that the godparents might well have stepped in to raise any children by Michael’s first wife, especially if the child needed to be nursed, Michael might have been found in Steinwenden without his children. Michael’s children, if there were any and they survived, could have been being raised in Schwarzenmatt or someplace near Boltigen.

Clearly, we are now far into the land of speculation, an endless maze of rabbit holes without any shreds of evidence.

I think Tom is right, at least for now. This turnip really is bloodless and this chapter has closed. But of course, that’s what I thought before too. You never know, maybe one of those Boltigen Miller’s will DNA test and we’ll be bleeding turnips once again!

A huge, huge thank you (again) to Tom and Chris both, turnip bloodletters, without whom I’d still be eyeing Zollikofen longingly. RIP Zollikofen.