Monthly Archives: February 2026

AutoKinship by Genetic Affairs Builds Family Trees from Your Matches at FamilyTreeDNA, and More

Posted on by
6

Genetic Affairs released a new AutoKinship tool designed for FamilyTreeDNA’s autosomal Family Finder matches, which also incorporates information from other sources. I must have fallen asleep at the wheel, because AutoKinship has been available for more than six months now.

I’ve been testing this tool with my matches, and it’s an immense help to those of us trying to untangle complicated family relationships using DNA evidence. I don’t know about you, but I have a long list of brick well where I could use help!

How to Use This Guide

This article is long and there are many steps involved – but it’s well worth it at the end.

My suggestion for using this article effectively is to read it through, at least once, to see what you’re going to be doing, and why.

Then, after you get things set up at Genetic Affairs, and any files you want to include, come back and use this article as a step-by-step guide to navigate these new tools.

Here’s the bottom line. The Genetic Affairs tools use matches, along with shared and bucketed matches at FamilyTreeDNA, plus their archived trees, in addition to external GEDCOM files and other information that you can provide in order to create customized, focused clusters and potential family trees for your clustered matches.

These tools combine DNA matching with internal and external trees for the composite best of both types of information.

So grab your favorite drink and let’s get started.

FamilyTreeDNA

AutoKinship works in conjunction with FamilyTreeDNA’s tools, such as Shared Matching, the Matrix tool, and Family Matching, also known as bucketing, which assigns parental sides to your matches using linked matches.

Linked matches are your matches whose relationship to you is known. If you haven’t already, link them to their profile card on your tree by clicking on “Link on Family Tree.” This allows FamilyTreeDNA, by using triangulation, to “bucket” your matches either maternally or paternally – meaning if they are related to you on your maternal side, paternal side, or both.

In my cousin Patricia’s case, the little pink icon by her profile picture shows that she has been bucketed maternally. That occurred when I linked my mother’s DNA to my tree because Patricia matches us both, plus other linked maternal cousins, on the same segments. For bucketing to occur, you don’t have to do anything except link known relatives to their proper place in your tree. FamilyTreeDNA does the rest by assigning your matches either maternally or paternally if they match on common segments.

Upload DNA Files to FamilyTreeDNA from Other Vendors

If you have not taken the Family Finder test at FamilyTreeDNA or uploaded your DNA file from 23andMe (Dec 2010 to present), Ancestry (May 2012 to present), or MyHeritage (March 2019 to May 7, 2025) to FamilyTreeDNA, you should do so now to take advantage of their tools, plus AutoKinship at Genetic Affairs.

What is AutoKinship and Why is it Different?

AutoKinship takes traditional clustering and kicks it up several notches. Instead of just showing you which matches cluster together, it actually attempts to build family trees based on the shared DNA amounts between your matches.

AutoKinship looks at how much DNA your matches share with you, and with each other, and uses that information to predict their relationships. Then AutoKinship builds potential family trees showing how everyone might connect. Additionally, you get to provide input in the process.

The timing couldn’t be better, especially since FamilyTreeDNA recently launched their updated Matrix tool, showing how your matches are related to each other. I wrote about that, here.

Two Steps

There are two primary steps in the AutoKinship process that build on each other. However, within these steps, there are many stepping-stones, so I’ve documented each one.

We’re going to use these tools, one at a time, in order.

I suggest that you join the Genetic Affairs User Group on Facebook for additional support and information.

Using AutoKinship with FamilyTreeDNA

The AutoKinship functionality for FamilyTreeDNA provides an automated approach using both AutoCluster and AutoKinship, together, then AutoLineage, where you can refine the information in a number of ways.

🔹 Step 1: Automated AutoKinship via Genetic Affairs

The first step involves running the AutoKinship tool directly from the Genetic Affairs members’ site. This process is fully automated:

  • It starts with the FamilyTreeDNA AutoCluster option, which groups DNA matches into shared clusters based on their connections to each other.
  • AutoKinship is then automatically launched on each cluster, adding the DNA tester and generating relationship hypotheses among the group.
  • Several family tree models are produced, showing how the matches and the tester could be connected based on shared DNA and cluster structure.

This step is ideal for getting quick insights into how groups of matches may relate.

🔹 Step 2: Refined Clustering & Relationship Analysis Using AutoLineage

After the automated run, downloadable files for AutoLineage are generated. These files allow you to re-import the match, shared matches, and tree data into the AutoLineage web application for further analysis.

This second step offers greater control and customization:

  • You can redo the clustering, optionally tweaking parameters to fine-tune how matches are grouped.
  • You can redo the common ancestor analysis, optionally tweaking parameters to fine-tune the discovery of MRCAs
  • The AutoKinship tool within AutoLineage becomes available again, this time with additional functionality:
    • Define known relationships between matches, such as parent-child or cousin relationships
    • Define generational information, for instance, if you know certain matches are not on the same generational level
    • Integrate MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) data from reconstructed trees, e.g., from the Find Common Ancestors module.

This enhanced phase is especially useful for integrating genealogical trees for targeted clusters.

By combining both steps, automated clustering with AutoKinship, and manual refinement with known or tree-derived relationships using AutoLineage – you can leverage your FamilyTreeDNA data for in-depth relationship exploration.

Let’s Take AutoKinship for a Spin

As always, I’ll walk you through this process step by step, using my own DNA results as an example.

Getting Started

First things first – you’ll need to be a member of Genetic Affairs, so sign up for their free membership, here. Genetic Affairs’ customers purchase “credits” to spend on various features and reports, but you receive 200 free to start.

The automated AutoKinship analysis available on the Genetic Affairs website can be run using credits from the free tier – perfect for exploring the tool without any commitment. This allows users to generate relationship trees for FamilyTreeDNA clusters right away.

To access the more advanced features in the AutoLineage desktop application—including refined clustering, manual relationship input, and integration of MRCA data from reconstructed trees – you’ll need an active subscription.

To get started, sign in to the Genetic Affairs member site, here.

Let’s walk through the process step by step.

We’ll begin by registering a FamilyTreeDNA profile at Genetic Affairs. Click on “Register a new website” to get started.

FamilyTreeDNA account passwords are not stored at Genetic Affairs.

After clicking “Register profile,” you’ll see a message asking you to double-check the credentials for the kit you’re about to use. This is also a good time to log in to your FamilyTreeDNA account directly to make sure there are no pending actions — such as enabling two-factor authentication or accepting updated terms of service.

Once you click “I understand, continue,” you’ll see a list of all registered FamilyTreeDNA profiles at Genetic Affairs.

Locate the kit you want to analyze and click the blue “Start analysis” button.
This opens a guided wizard that walks you through each step of the setup.

First, select AutoKinship and click “Next.”

You’ll then be asked to define several thresholds:

  • Minimum and maximum shared cM
  • Minimum size of the largest segment
  • Minimum cluster size

A quick word of caution here: selecting a very low minimum cM value may actually reduce the number of usable matches. That’s because the system must download shared match data until it either reaches that threshold, or a preset timer expires, which can limit how much data is downloaded. When in doubt, start conservatively. You can always rerun the analysis later and change the parameters. Unfortunately, there’s no way to simoly “get everything” in one run which is, of course, what everyone would do.

Click “Next” to continue.

This section determines which matches will be included in the analysis.
For your first run, I recommend using the top matches within the selected range. This provides a strong foundation and usually produces the clearest results.

Later, once you’re more familiar with the output, you may want to experiment by analyzing only the shared matches of a specific person or group. For now, keep it simple and click “Next.”

Here, you’ll enter your FamilyTreeDNA password (twice) so the system can retrieve the required data.

If you use two-factor authentication, you can enter the 2FA code here, as well. To do that, log in to your FamilyTreeDNA account, retrieve the code from your email, and paste it into the wizard.

Then click “Next.”

You’ll now see a summary of all the settings you’ve chosen. Take a moment to review everything. When you’re ready, click “Perform analysis” in the bottom right corner.

At this point, the Genetic Affairs servers take over and begin processing your data.

The Results Arrive

When your report is ready, you’ll receive an email with a download link. You can also access it through the notification panel in the top right corner of the Genetic Affairs site.

Downloading the report will result in a zipped file. Save it in a location on your computer where you can find it.

Critical Step

This step is critical and will save you a great deal of frustration: If you’re using a PC, you MUST extract or unzip the files before you can properly use them. I can’t tell you how many people skip this step and then wonder why they’re receiving error messages. Ask me how I know!

This is your zipped file.

If you try to open the HTML file while it’s still zipped, it might appear to work at first, but when you click on any links within the file, you’ll receive an error.

If this happens to you, close everything, right-click on that yellow zipped folder, select “extract all,” and then try again.

Now you’re set up, so on to the fun part – viewing the results.

Exploring Your Results

Once you have everything properly extracted and open the HTML file, you’ll watch your AutoCluster literally fly into place on your screen. I love this part. It’s like watching my family fly into place. I wish the actual genealogy research was this easy.

The new Genetic Affairs reports include significantly more information than previous versions.

You can change what’s displayed using the dropdown menu.

By default, you’ll see the shared cM amounts between your matches, but you can change this to show paternal or maternal information if you’ve identified those lineages by linking your matches.

In my case, my maternal line has fewer matches because my mother’s ancestry includes both recent Dutch and German immigrants, so the majority of my high cM matches are US-centric on my father’s side. My father’s ancestors have been in this country since colonial times, and a lot of testers in the US are looking back to the old country for their origins.

Therefore, in my first several clusters, I see squares with the symbol P, indicating they are paternal matches – designated as such through linked family matches, aka bucketing.

You can see the faint Ps inside the orange cells.

Here’s a close-up so you can see the “P” for paternal. If you haven’t linked your matches, you won’t have bucketed matches. Your Genetic Affairs results don’t require bucketing – it’s just a really beneficial feature.

You can change your AutoCluster settings in several ways. I tend to start with the defaults and then modify from there.

Genetic Affairs functions based on the amount of server time a particular tool takes, so it’s not possible to just “run everything,” or trust me, I would.

The Common Ancestor Magic

In your report, scroll down several sections, and you’ll find Common Ancestors – my favorite feature.

This section shows you the common ancestors that have been identified between your matches’ trees.

Looking at the Common Ancestors cluster report, you can click on three things for each cluster:

  • FamilyTreeDNA Trees of Cluster #
  • Common Ancestors of Cluster #
  • Common Locations of Cluster #

Let’s examine the reconstructed trees based on the common ancestor analysis. The first cluster shows some of my close DNA matches that are descendants of my Vannoy line.

You can see that there are six testers, in addition to me, who descend from Joel Vannoy.

Next, scroll down to the AutoKinship section of your report.

The AutoKinship Analysis

The real treasure lies in the AutoKinship analysis, which is presented in a small table on the main HTML page. When you click on the AutoKinship results for any cluster, you’ll see reconstructed trees based on the shared DNA amounts between matches, meaning between you and each of them, and between each other.

You can see that I have 10 reports available based on the cluster numbers indicated.

I clicked on Cluster 1, which shows some of my close DNA matches who are Vannoy line descendants. This includes testers both with and without trees.

Since the AutoKinship algorithm doesn’t have access to age information, it sometimes struggles with generational differences – but the relationship predictions are still remarkably useful.

Alternative trees are also provided, giving you multiple hypotheses to investigate.

Some matches may not be integrated because of incompatible relationships.

The Next Step with AutoLineage – Adding Genealogical Trees to the Mix

We’ve seen AutoTree and AutoKinship. The new upgraded AutoLineage adds genealogical tree information to genetic information by allowing the user to:

  • Import other trees
  • Integrate most recent common ancestors (MRCAs) in AutoKinship trees
  • Set known relationships
  • Provide generational information.

AutoLineage, Genetic Affairs’ online clustering and tree-building tool, has been around for several years but was recently upgraded to create trees based on shared DNA and incorporate genealogical evidence.

This is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.

Setting Up AutoLineage

Return to the home page at Genetic Affairs and select AutoLineage.

If you’re new to this tool, you’ll see a simplified workflow on the start page that walks you through the process.

First, create a profile representing the DNA test taker – in my case, that’s me.

After creating the profile, you’ll be redirected to the landing page of the profile. From there, you can register DNA tests linked to the profile. From the home page, you can see the different profiles.

You’ll register a new FamilyTreeDNA test specifically for each user whose kit you manage and who took a test.

FamilyTreeDNA is the only DNA testing company for which Genetic Affairs runs automated analyses on their site.

Additionally, you can:

Importing the Data

After registering a FamilyTreeDNA test, you are redirected to the overview of this DNA page, where matches are imported.

Click on “Import matches” and select the CSV file from Genetic Affairs. Here’s where that AutoKinship report we generated earlier comes in handy. The unzipped report contains match and shared match information that we can import directly into AutoLineage.

Navigate to the gephi folder in your report and select the nodes.csv file to import your matches.

After importing the matches, a short dialog shows how many matches were imported.

After closing the dialog box, the DNA matches pane is opened.

You’ll see your DNA matches that were downloaded.

Next, import the shared match information from the edges.csv file in the same gephi folder.

Once both data sets are imported, you’ll see that the ICW (In Common With) column has populated, showing how many shared matches are available for each DNA match.

Clustering in AutoLineage

Now, with the shared match data loaded, you can perform your own clustering analysis.

The wizard allows you to set parameters for which matches to include based on:

  • The amount of shared cMs
  • Weighted or unweighted clustering
  • How much DNA is shared between shared matches

You can also define the cluster characteristics, from sparse to very dense clusters.

Last, you can select the coloring scheme. After setting the parameters, click on “Start Clustering,” at bottom right.

After clustering is finished, the clustering chart is displayed. It looks fairly similar to the ones obtained automatically from Genetic Affairs, but with some differences.

The first thing I noticed is that the large orange cluster 1 in the automated clustering is now mostly represented by the purple cluster 4.

Let’s zoom in on this cluster. By looking more closely at the numbers contained in each cluster, you can already make an estimated guess about the richness in relationship information for cluster members. This cluster has lots of close relationships. Clusters whose matches only share a small amount of DNA with each other are not the best candidates for an AutoKinship analysis because they most likely share a distant common ancestor. Unless, of course, it’s a distant ancestor you’re searching for. (Hello brick wall.)

Adding and Importing Tree Information

Now that we have the new clusters, we could continue to directly run the tree reconstruction on these clusters using the shared DNA information, but let’s wait  since we want to include the tree information as well to guide this process.

To use common ancestors, we need to import the available trees that are linked to the DNA matches. Luckily, just like (shared) match information, the tree information is provided with the automated analysis as well. Let’s import the data.

First, navigate to the tree management page. As you can see, no trees have been created or imported. Let’s start the wizard by clicking on the “Import Trees” button.

An “Import tree” wizard pops up, providing different ways to import tree information. It’s also possible to import GEDCOM files or tree data from other resources, but for now, I’m only using the archived trees at FamilyTreeDNA.

Click on the last option and select the files.

Navigate to the matches folder and select the HTML files contained in the folder.

Each file represents a DNA match report, some of which have a tree associated with them.

After importing the trees, they are automatically associated with the concerned DNA matches (using the unique identifier present in each file name). The tree overview page shows which tree is linked to a profile or DNA test, and the amount of DNA shared with the linked DNA match.

If you have created trees for your matches based on your own research (like quick and dirty trees), now is the time to import these using the “Import Tree” wizard again. This is a wonderful feature, because it means you’re not entirely dependant on your match having uploaded a tree themselves.

If you don’t import trees from GEDCOMs, you don’t need the linking wizard.

Click on the “Import Tree” wizard and select the GEDCOM option.

Now that we have imported additional trees, we need to associate them with DNA matches.

You can use a wizard to link the unlinked trees to the DNA matches, or link them from each DNA match. The wizard will try to guestimate, based on the content of the tree file name, which DNA match could be associated with the tree. Change the search criteria if it does not provide the correct results.

TIP: Save the GEDCOM files with the name of the linked DNA match as well the shared cM, which speeds up the importing process

Don’t forget to import your own tree. I imported my GEDCOM file from my computer genealogy software and associated it with my profile so it’s included in the common ancestor identification. You can easily upload your GEDCOM from your computer software, or download your tree from either Ancestry or MyHeritage to upload here.

Visit the profile, and select the tree pane. The tree pane only shows a single individual and allows you to add ancestors to it manually. To associate that individual with an existing tree, click on “Link to Existing Tree”.

A wizard will be displayed, which shows all available trees on the left side. Sort by clicking on the “Created” column to display the most recent trees.

Next, you need to select the root person.

I selected my tree.

Next, the right side of the wizard fills with the people in the selected tree. Select the root person, which is me, and click on “Save” in the lower right corner.

Finding Common Ancestors

Now that we have associated a tree with the profile and imported trees for the FamilyTreeDNA matches, it’s time to locate some common ancestors. Fingers crossed!

Go back to the profile and select the profile overview. Scroll down to the “Find common ancestors” section and click on the “Find common ancestors” button.

The “common ancestors” wizard shows trees that are associated with this profile in the table on the left and provides information about the different steps on the right. You can change the settings to make the search more restrictive or more relaxed.

After running the common ancestor identification, a dialog shows the number of trees and tree persons that were used, and the number of common ancestors that were identified.

After the analysis runs, you’ll be able to view all reconstructed trees or filter them based on common ancestors, trees, or linked DNA matches.

Common ancestors, not surprisingly, often align closely with what the automated analysis discovered.

All six testers are now shown descending from our common ancestor, in the approximate location where they will fit in our common tree.

But we aren’t quite finished yet.

The Final AutoKinship Analysis

Finally, we’ve arrived. The earlier steps were necessary to pave the way.

We have the common ancestors and clusters, and it’s time to go back to the clusters to begin the reconstruction of trees using trees combined with DNA.

Click on the profile and go to the clustering results pane. Select the 1x view, which will show the clustering chart.

Now select the matches pane that shows the different matches that are contained in each cluster. Scroll down until you reach your cluster of interest, which is four for me.

After clicking on any cluster, you’ll be redirected to a cluster view with only the information for that particular cluster.

Let’s view purple cluster 4, which looks fairly dense, with only a couple of empty cells, indicating that these shared matches with white cells did not share (enough) DNA with each other to be included in the cluster. Now select the matches pane in the dashboard at the top of this cluster, which displays the matches linked to this specific cluster. As you can see, a button is now available that allows us to run the AutoKinship analysis. Click on the button.

Single cluster matches are displayed.

Now back to the wizard.

The wizard provides several important parameters:

  • Maximum number of generations between DNA matches
  • Number of trees to analyze in each iteration
  • Final number of trees to keep
  • Whether to include known relationships and/or MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) relationships

In this example, MRCA relationships were found because we performed the common ancestor identification that resulted in common ancestors between the matches of this cluster.

If you know specific relationships between matches, you can set those manually. Sometimes you might not know the exact relationship, but if you can estimate that a match is one or more generations older or younger than yourself, you can set that too.

In addition to setting the relationship between the test taker (indicated in green in the table) and the DNA matches, it’s also possible to set the relationship between shared matches, if known.

The Hybrid Results

After the analysis has finished, an overview of the identified trees is presented.

The final result is a blended tree where DNA evidence fills in the blanks for matches who haven’t uploaded trees, or you haven’t provided a tree, and known genealogy supports the structure where it exists. This hybrid approach gives us the best of both worlds – the precision of documented genealogy combined with the discovery power of DNA analysis.

I particularly like this approach, because when I identify how a DNA match is related to me from any vendor, I enter their lineage in my desktop genealogy software. Therefore, using that GEDCOM file is the most complete source of my identified relatives.

Testers 1-6 were shown using the regular AutoTree, without the integrated tree, but an additional 11 matches were placed for consideration using all available tools.

I was using this as an experiment because I know how most people in this cluster are related, and those are all placed accurately. There is one person, located on the branch between 1 and 5, who I had no idea how they fit into this puzzle. Now, at least I know where to look.

I can’t imagine trying to do all of this manually.

Why This Matters

For those of us dealing with unknown parent or grandparent situations, poorly documented lines, non-existent trees, or just plain stubborn brick walls, this combination of tools is nothing short of amazing. You can now explore relationship hypotheses even when traditional documentation is scarce.

The reconstructed trees show how common ancestor information provides the template, while the AutoLineage tool fills gaps using shared DNA information. The updated AutoLineage is the genealogical assistant that never gets tired and can deal with relationship possibilities much more effectively than traditional hand-based methods.

In Summary

If you haven’t explored Genetic Affairs recently, give it a look. The integration between AutoKinship and AutoLineage represents a significant step forward in DNA analysis.

While AutoKinship offers valuable insights on its own, its full potential is truly unlocked when you export the data into AutoLineage. The combination creates a comprehensive analysis that was previously impossible.

For researchers dealing with complex family relationships or challenging genealogical puzzles, this hybrid approach that combines matches at FamilyTreeDNA with DNA evidence and genealogical trees could be the key to breaking through stubborn brick walls that nothing else has budged.

Last but not least, I suggest reading Dr. Patricia Coleman’s blog articles about these tools and her methodologies here and here. Patricia works extensively with these tools, and I often recommend her for private autosomal research consultations. Patricia’s 2026 RootsTech Session, DNA Case Study: Finding an 1877 Birth Father with Genetic Affairs, BanyanDNA, and No Birth Record, details her work solving a long-standing problem for my cousin in the Speaks family.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate 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 Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Marie Josèphe LePrince (1715-after 1787), A Grandmother’s Choice to Preserve Acadian Culture – 52 Ancestors #468

Posted on by
3

The surnames Prince, Le Prince, and LePrince are used interchangeably in Acadian records and genealogical sources, as are Marie Josèphe and Marie-Josèphe, with or without a hyphen.

Marie Josèphe LePrince was born to Jean LePrince and Jeanne Blanchard on November 3, 1715, in Port Royal and baptized the same day. In her baptism record, her surname is written as simply Prince.

Her maternal half-sister, Marie D’Aigre, about 11, was her godmother, and her mother’s brother, Guillaume Blanchard, born about 1690, who would have been about 24, the son of Marie Josèphe’s grandfather by the same name, was her godfather. The only other Guillaume Blanchard this could have been was Marie’s grandfather, born about 1650, who would have been 65 in 1715. Generally, though not always, a younger person was preferred as a godparent because they were more likely to be available to fulfill the godparental obligations should both parents perish.

Upheaval

Marie Josèphe was born in the midst of upheaval.

In 1713, following the 1710 English conquest of Port Royal, Acadia was ceded by the Treaty of Utrecht to the English. In subsequent years, the English, at first, wanted the French to leave, but reconsidered when they realized they would starve without the Acadian farmers to feed them.

Initially, the Acadians staunchly refused to leave, then they changed their minds and wanted to leave and escape the oppressive English, even going so far as trying to cut a road to walk from Port Royal to Les Mines. However, by 1717 they had tentatively decided to stay and ceased attempting to reach Les Mines by land.

In 1720, when Marie Josèphe was five years old, Port Royal was renamed Annapolis Royal, although I’d bet that the Acadians refused to EVER call it anything but Port Royal. An uneasy peace had been established, allowing the Acadians the freedom to practice Catholicism without interference. They could now leave, if they wished, but they couldn’t take anything with them.

The English and Acadians were constantly at odds with one another.

The primary sticking point in the English/Acadian relationship was, and remained, the requirement that the Acadians sign an unconditional loyalty oath to the British Crown. The Acadians refused, not wanting to ever find themselves in the position of having to fight their own French countrymen, or the Mi’kmaq, not to mention that they felt it was in their best interest to remain neutral.

From time to time, the English renewed the requirement that the Acadians sign an oath, and the Acadians would, once again, refuse. Marie Josèphe would have heard these discussions and incessant bickering about the Acadian relationship with the English – at church, at home, and anyplace Acadians gathered.

By 1725, when Marie Josèphe was 10 years old, a new English governor permitted the Acadians to take a more lenient oath, which alleviated many of their concerns. They agreed, the men signed, and everyone was greatly relieved. However, in 1729, the English decided that the 1725 oath was too lenient and declared it void.

I can hear the Acadian men screaming across the years. They would have felt betrayed and indignant.

Marie Josèphe’s father, Jean LePrince lived on the south side of the river, just above Bloody Creek, so named after a 1711 ambush. In 1729, Marie Josèphe’s husband-to-be, Jacques Forest, son of Rene Forest, who lived on the next farm over, according to this 1733 map, was 22 and probably a strapping, handsome young man.

Marie-Joseph was only 14, but I’d wager that she had already “noticed” Jacques. Many Acadian girls married about that age, but she wouldn’t marry for another five years.

In 1729, the men were required to sign a new, much stricter oath of allegiance, but they refused.

However, Governor Phillips, an earlier governor who returned in 1730, simply wanted this entire ordeal to be over. He had the Acadians sign a new oath. That oath itself was two pages in length, and the language on the first page sounded quite strict:

“I sincerely promise and swear, as a Christian, that I will be utterly faithful and will truly obey His Majesty King George the Second, whom I acknowledge as the sovereign Lord of Nova Scotia and Acadia. So help me God.”

The second page included the concessions that the Acadians wanted:

“… that the inhabitants, when they have sworn hereto, will not be obliged to take up arms against France or against the Savages, and the said Inhabitants have further promised that they will not take up arms against the King of England or against its government.”

The priest and a notary signed as witnesses to the signatures.

Governor Phillips only sent the first page back to England, along with their signatures on a third page. The second page that held the language that made the Acadians happy was never sent. No one on either side of the Atlantic knew the difference, save Phillips, and he certainly wasn’t talking.

All parties probably collectively heaved a sigh of relief. Everyone was happy – because no one but the Governor knew what really happened, how that second page had somehow been “lost.”

Peace in Acadia, at least for a time, had finally arrived, just in time for Marie-Josephe LePrince to marry and start her family.

By the time Jacques Forest had finally proposed to Marie Josèphe, and had asked her father for her hand in marriage, things seemed almost normal again in Acadia.

Salt-marsh dykes were patched, animals fed, crops sewn, and food prepared. One of two churches was attended every Sunday, plus whenever another pressing event, such as a wedding, funeral, or baptism summoned the faithful Acadians.

Funerals were held whenever the need arose, of course, generally the day following the death. Baptisms generally occurred as soon as possible, but marriages could be planned. Marriage celebrations, which often included music and flowers, were avoided during solemn, penitential seasons. Actual marriage vows could be administered anytime by the priest, but any accompanying celebration would have to take place another time. Typically, the entire marriage event was scheduled for a time outside those sacred dates.

Marriage

Perhaps Marie Josèphe LePrince and Jacques DeForest married in the dead of winter because there was less to be done then than during the other three seasons. People would have had more time for celebration. Since marriage was avoided during Advent, Lent, the festivals of Trinity, and other Holy or Feast Days, they wisely chose around those blackout dates and before the planting of spring crops.

The parish registers of St. Jean-Baptiste in Annapolis Royal record that on Friday January 25, 1734, the priest, De St. Poncy de La Vernède, married Jacques Forest, age 25, whose parents were René Forest and Françoise Dugas, to Marie Josèphe Le Prince who was 18. Her parents are given as Jean Le Prince and Jeanne Blanchard.

Witnesses were Claude Granger, Pierre Lanoue, Antoine Beliveau, René Forest, the groom’s father, and Pierre Granger.

The priest had to “dispense 3-3 consanguinity,” indicating that the bride and groom were related in the not too distant past. This article explains about Cannon law, but 3-3 consanguinity means they shared great-grandparents. Sure enough, looking at the pedigree chart for both the bride and groom, they do.

Not counting the bride and groom, their common ancestors are Etienne Hebert and Marie Gaudet, three steps up the tree for both people.

Home

The newlyweds probably lived someplace in or near the Rene Forest village, off of present-day Brickyard Road in Nova Scotia.

You can see on this 1733 map that Jacques’ father, Rene Forest is the neighbor of Marie Josèphe’s father, Jean Prince.

Mapannapolis shows the location using their GIS system.

Overlaid onto an aerial map today, the Forest Village was located along today’s rail trail, with the bend in Brickyard Road showing at right.

The LePrince land was located near Button Brook, across from today’s Bridgetown, about a mile from the Forest land, as the crow flies, or perhaps less.

Back then, the preferred mode of transportation for everyone was canoe.

Life Along the River

By the time Marie Josèphe was born, these families had been living here for four generations. It was the only home they knew. The far-off place called France was simply family lore that their great-grandparents had passed to their grandparents, who told their parents, who, eventually told them.

France seemed like another fairytale world from long ago – completely disconnected from Acadia – because it was.

Marie Josèphe Le Prince’s Children

The first several years of their marriage would have been spent blissfully living along the shore of the beautiful Annapolis River. For generations, Acadians had farmed the salt marshes. Marie Josèphe and Jacques took up the plow and scythe and did the same.

After their 1734 marriage, like typical Acadian couples, Marie Josèphe LePrince and Jacques DeForest settled down and began both farming and a family. They lived on this land, between their families.

Their first baby arrived about 14 months after their wedding.

Victor Forest was born on April 9, 1735. A supplemental baptismal was performed on July 25th of the same year, which means that for some reason, his parents could not have him baptized by the priest when he was born, so he would have been baptized by a neighbor or perhaps the midwife until a proper baptism could take place. Godparents were Jean LePrince, his maternal grandfather, and Francoise Dugas, his paternal grandmother. What a joyful day that must have been!

It was quite a distance, at least 10 miles, not including paddling the bends of the river, from the area where Marie Josèphe Le Prince and Jacques Forest lived to the Catholic church in Annapolis Royal. They probably worshipped at the Mass House, St. Laurent, right across the river, which was very close to where her mother, Jeanne Blanchard, was raised.

The same priest would have performed baptisms in both locations and recorded them together in one parish register. Sometimes the priest indicated that the location was St. Laurent, but often not.

  • Victor, born in 1735 is probably the same Victor Forest found after the Expulsion in Connecticut in 1763, married, with 3 children.
  • Marie Josèphe’s next child, Joseph Forest was born on February 8, 1737 in Annapolis Royal and a supplemental baptism was performed on June 9, 1737. Godparents were Honnoré Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Catherine Joseph Forest, Jacques’ sister. It would have been quite cold in February which is probably why they didn’t brave the river for an immediate baptism.

Some have suggested that this Joseph is the Benoist Forest recorded in Connecticut who petitioned to go to France in 1763.

  • Anne Forest was born and baptized on April 15, 1739, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Joseph Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Anne Forest, Jacques’ sister.
  • Pierre Forest was born and baptized on July 8, 1741, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Pierre Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Elisabeth Godet, sometimes called Isabelle, Marie Josèphe’s second cousin, and Jacques’ third cousin.

These families had lived on both sides of this river for generations, and Godparents who were typically family members or very close friends were one way of assuring that someone was designated, and agreed in front of God and everyone present, to parent orphan children should the unthinkable occur.

  • Marie Josèphe Forest was born and baptized on March 15, 1743, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Jean Forest, brother of Jacques and also the husband of the other godparent, Anne Richard, daughter of Marie Josèphe’s aunt.
  • Félicité Forest was born on November 13, 1745, and baptized two days later on November 15, 1745. Godparents were Pierre Bastarache, who lived just upriver, and Felicité Bourgeois.
  • Marguerite Forest (Laforet) was born and baptized on January 16, 1748, in Annapolis Royal. Marguerite is the only one of Marie Josèphe’s children we conclusively know anything about after the 1755 Expulsion – aside from the fact that this Acadian family was exiled to Connecticut.

Marguerite Forest married Francois LaFay (Lafaille) someplace in New England on November 10, 1767, before a justice of the peace due to the lack of a priest. Their marriage was revalidated on June 23, 1792, at Sainte-Marguerite-de-Blairfindie in Quebec. She died in L’Acadie, Quebec, on February 16, 1819, at age 71.

  • Charles Tranquille Forest was born on February 14, 1750, and baptized the same day in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Joseph Hebert and Marie Beliveau. He may have been the Charles Fores, “about 20 years of age” who died on August 7, 1770 and was buried at Sainte-Geneviève church in Montreal. The witnesses were Joseph Lefebre and Joseph Hetier.
  • Michel Forest was born and baptized on June 9, 1753, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Isidore Beliveau and Anne Forest.

Marie Josèphe and Jacques had baptized nine children over a period of 18 years. None of their children had yet married, so we really don’t know if these children survived to adulthood, although we find no burials in the parish records.

Their lives were about to change in a way that they could only have imagined in their worst nightmares.

Given that Marie Josèphe’s last known child was born in June of 1753, and she was only 38, it’s probable that she had at least one if not two or maybe even three or four more children.

The 1755 Expulsion Order

It was in the heat of the summer, July 28, 1755, that the horrific Expulsion order was signed by Governor Charles Lawrence of Nova Scotia, and with the drying of the ink, their fates were sealed.

The order was first read to the horrified Acadian men who had been summoned and gathered in the church at Grand Pré on September 5th, 1755.

The Acadian men were held hostage in the church for around five weeks while the women were rounded up separately, ordered to gather their children, and prepare for departure as soon as the transport ships arrived. More than half of the people herded onto the ships were children.

From the museum at Grand Pré.

The reading was followed by the agonizing deportation itself.

According to John Winslow’s journal, the women were in great distress, carrying their children while others pushed their decrepit parents in their carts towards the ships with all their goods.

Everything, absolutely everything, was stripped away from the Acadians and forfeited to the English.

By December, the same process was being carried out against the Acadians in Port Royal where Marie Josèphe and her family lived.

Walk the Wharf

The Acadians were rounded up like so many cattle, and herded onto English transport ships waiting in the river in Annapolis Royal, formerly Port Royal, at the foot of the fort.

The English wanted the Acadians’ land for much more pliable and cooperative New England settlers – and they extracted it from the Acadians in a horrific, genocidal, clean sweep.

The families were forced to leave their homes and livestock behind. They could hear their pets and livestock, calling to be fed and milked – but there was nothing they could do to save them. They couldn’t even save themselves.

They carried what they could as they walked to the end of the wharf, overseen by English soldiers, but the ships were overcrowded, and they were forced to leave everything they carried beside the wharf.

Forced below deck in cramped quarters, with no provisions for bathroom facilities, many died. Some ships sank during a winter crossing that one could argue was meant to thin the population. The last thing the Acadians saw were their homes and farms burning, and in many cases, their family members being forced to board different ships. Not only did many never find each other again, we have never found them in records since, either.

Poor Marie Josèphe, with however many of her nine children were living, and very probably heavily pregnant. We can only hope that she managed to keep all nine of her children with her, and they weren’t separated onto different ships.

On December 8th, early in the morning, they sailed away from Port Royal, forever, amid incredibly crowded and abhorrent conditions.

God help Marie Josèphe if she delivered a baby on that horrific transport ship, below deck, in the freezing cold, surrounded by filthy frigid seawater and death amid the slurry of human excrement.

I can’t even go there. If she did deliver a child under those circumstances, the baby assuredly perished.

We have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not Marie Josèphe had any children after 1755, or if they survived.

The ship that Marie Josèphe and Jacques were on landed someplace in Connecticut. Let’s hope that they were on the ship, Elizabeth, with her 280 unwilling passengers that arrived on January 21, 1756. Three people had died, so 277 paupers were now totally dependent on the charity of others for their mere existence.

If they weren’t on the ship, Elizabeth, then they may have been among the unfortunate people aboard the ship, Edward, with 278 passengers. The Edward was blown off course by a violent storm. She finally landed at Antigua with gravely ill passengers. Several had already died at sea, and more perished in Antigua. The ship eventually continued on to Connecticut, arriving on May 22, 1756, with only about 180 people. Roughly 100 had been claimed by malaria and other maladies.

Upon arrival, the refugees were forced to burn all of their remaining possessions on the beach before being allowed ashore, in case of contamination. The officials didn’t know what kind of diseases had killed so many, and they certainly didn’t want them sharing whatever they had with people in Connecticut.

There may have been a third ship, Two Sisters, that also departed Annapolis Royal on December 8th, along with the other two, with 280 people aboard, but there is no further record, although one record suggests another ship arrived on January 22nd and another possibly on the 30th.

Yet another vessel reportedly left with between 250 and 280 unwilling passengers, but never arrived. It could have sunk, or may have been replaced by the Elizabeth, but we will never know. Records are very sparse, confusing, and inconclusive.

There is no Port Royal roster of Acadians either before the Expulsion, when boarding ships, or after landing, but some families have been tentatively reconstructed from later records.

The last thing the Acadians saw of Port Royal was smoke as the English burned their homes, barns, and farms so there was no question in their minds that there was nothing left to return “home” to. The English hoped this would prevent the Acadians from trying.

Exile in Connecticut

Fortunately, Jacques and Marie Josèphe, along with their family, wound up in Connecticut. This luck of the draw fell in their favor for a change.

According to Acadie:

“In general, the approximately 1,000 Acadians deported to Connecticut were treated with respect. A law concerning their distribution throughout the settlement was adopted by the colonial Legislature in advance of their arrival, which allowed the citizens to prepare themselves for cohabitation. In some cases, Connecticut citizens made unoccupied homes available to Acadian families. Others funded the trip of Acadians wishing to resettle in Quebec via the Albany, Hudson, and Richelieu rivers through lakes George and Champlain.”

Little is known about the exile of the Forest family in Connecticut after the 1755 Expulsion, although we can piece a little together. The commentary above regarding Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River may be important.

We do know that both Jacques and Marie Josèphe survived, because Jacques eventually signed a petition requesting relocation to France. Under the Treaty of Paris of 1763, Acadian exiles had 19 months to leave British North America for any French colony.

The Acadians quickly signed petitions requesting transportation to Nova Scotia, Quebec, France, or the French West Indies.

Jacques, with 10 family members, petitioned for removal to France.

Also on the list were Victor Forest and Benoist (possibly Joseph) Forest with their families. The petition for transportation to France was denied for all 666 Acadians who signed the petition. Some migrated to Saint Domingue, some to Louisiana, New Brunswick, or Quebec, and others remained in Connecticut.

Reconstructing the Family Using the Petition

The only glimpse we have of Jacques Forest and family in Connecticut is the petition after the 1763 Treaty of Paris. Some have reported that the petition date was actually in 1767, but that doesn’t make sense because it’s outside the 19-month window.

In 1763, Marie Josèphe’s known children would have been:

  • Victor – age 28
  • Joseph – age 26
  • Anne – age 24
  • Pierre – age 22
  • Marie Josèphe – age 20
  • Felicite – age 18
  • Marguerite – age 15
  • Charles – age 13
  • Michel – age 10

Here’s what we do know:

  • Jacques Fourest indicated that his family consisted of 10 people, which one must presume included both he and Marie Josèphe plus 8 children. He was petitioning for passage to France.
  • Adjacent his request is Mathieu Forest with 6 people. Mathieu is probably the son of Rene Forest, so is Jacques’ brother.
  • Marie Josèphe and Jacques’ presumed son, Victor, asks for passage for 5, which would include himself, his wife, and 3 children.
  • Listed beside Victor is Benoist, with 5 persons. Benoist could be Joseph, as there was no baptism for a Benoist or anything similar.
  • Two further down the list is Jean-Pierre Fouret, with 7 persons, who would be another brother of Jacques Forest.

Thus, this leaves us with Jacques Forest and Marie Josèphe LePrince, excluding Victor and Benoist, assuming they are their children. We know of a total of 9 births through 1753, which leaves (at least) 7 children at home, assuming everyone lived and no more were born after arrival in Connecticut. By the way, neither of those assumptions are safe. Therefore, one of three things has occurred:

  • Benoist is not their child, so Joseph, now age 30, is still at home, has died, lives elsewhere, or did not petition for removal to France.
  • Benoist is their child, and they had another child in either 1755 or after, who survived.
  • They are raising someone else’s child or children.

Assuming the Jacque who petitioned for removal with a family of 10 is our Jacque, that tells us that 7 or 8 of their children are still living at home. Other than Victor, their children in 1767 would have been 30, 28, 26, 24, 22, 19, and 14. Of course, we can’t account for any children born after they arrived in Connecticut.

For all nine of their children to survive that hellish winter crossing in the worst possible conditions seems nearly impossible. Yet, on the ship, Elizabeth, only three people are reported to have died. Perhaps they were fortunate, and not only did all of their children survive that passage, they survived everything else too.

The fact that they have that many surviving children suggests strongly that they were NOT on the Edward that was blown off course to Antigua, where more than one third of the passengers perished.

That’s at least some small relief. What they did have to endure was bad enough.

We know almost nothing about what happened to the Forest family after 1763, except for daughter Marguerite, who married Françoise Lafaille (Lafay) and ultimately settled in L’Acadie, Province of Quebec, and possibly Charles Forest, who may have died in the same province in 1770 at age 20.

We don’t know when or where Jacques Forest or deForest died, but it was likely in Connecticut. By 1767, he would have been about 60 years old, and given the one tidbit we know about Marguerite, the family likely remained there for at least the rest of Jacques and Marie Josèphe’s lives.

I can’t help but wonder how many of my unknown autosomal DNA matches that I absolutely cannot place, but cluster with distant Acadian cousins, are due to the displaced family members who “disappeared” in Connecticut and elsewhere.

Marie Josèphe’s Daughter, Marguerite DeForest

Marguerite DeForest, born in 1748, was exiled along with her family to Connecticut. She married Francois Lafay in the colonies in 1767 and had her first 10 children wherever it was that they lived.

Her eldest daughter, Marie Lafay (LaFaille), was born about 1767, so would have known her grandparents, or at least her grandmother, Marie Josèphe, well.

After moving north to L’Acadie, Quebec, along the Richelieu River, about 1788, Marie later told Protestant Missionaries that her elderly grandmother, who would have been Marie Josèphe LePrince, became upset in about 1787 because her grandchildren were losing both their Catholic religion and their culture. Marie had been educated in Protestant schools, given that Catholicism could not be practiced in the colonies.

Therefore, the rest of Marie Josèphe’s children would have been educated in Protestant schools as well. Marie indicated that she was leaning towards the Protestant religion, herself, which would have been her grandmother’s nightmare come true. Especially given how much the Acadians had sacrificed to maintain their freedom to worship as Catholics.

Marie said that her grandmother made the decision to “send the family back to Canada,” which is how they wound up in L’Acadie, south of the St. Lawrence River, across from Montreal.

Marie Josèphe would have been 77 years old in 1787. What we don’t know is whether Marie Josèphe stayed behind in New England or accompanied all or part of her family who relocated.

Either way, by the 1790 census in Connecticut, Marie Josèphe (LePrince) Forest, DeForest, or any similar spelling or recognizable name is not to be found. If she was still living, she was probably residing with someone else, but we have no idea who or where. It’s also possible that she was living in Massachusetts or another location in New England.

Marie Josèphe’s granddaughter, Marie LaFay, was given a Bible by Pliny Moore who was associated first with Sheffield and Spencertown, Massachusetts, then with Vermont and Champlain, New York, which is just down the Richelieu River and across the border from the location in L’Acadie, Quebec where the LaFay family settled.

Pliny Moore, about 8 years older than Marie, may well have been her heartthrob. He was an American military Lieutenant, a Baptist, and then a Congregational Church leader. Marie LaFay cherished that Bible for the rest of her life, even after it was taken away from her and she was forbidden to read it. As an adult, Marie eventually converted away from the Catholic Church.

This connection to Pliny, along with “a fearful disappointment”, described by Marie, was likely the motivating factor for Marie Josèphe to become upset in 1787 because her children were “losing their religion and culture.” That’s when Marie Josèphe decided that her family needed to remove themselves from under the influence of a location where Catholicism could not be freely practiced. Her granddaughter, after all, was at risk, which probably meant the rest of her grandchildren were too.

Marie confessed years later that she had encouraged her father to make the 1788 trip to Canada following that “fearful disappointment.”

I strongly suspect that Marie had marital aspirations towards Pliny, an affection that was not returned in the same way. Pliny married someone else in January 1787, in Vermont.

It’s worth noting here that in 1816,  Marie somehow obtained Bibles for all of her children from Pliny, who was then living in Champlain, New York on Lake Champlain, near the mouth of the Richelieu River, about 60 miles away.

Marie Josèphe’s Final Years

From granddaughter Marie’s information, we know that Marie Josèphe LePrince was living in 1787 and wanted her children to move to Canada. We know that Marie encouraged her father, Francois Lafay (Lafaille), to visit Canada and select a site there. We know that Marie’s family, including both parents and their 10 children relocated to Canada in 1788.

In July 1788, Marie Josèphe’ daughter, Marguerite DeForest and her husband had three of their children baptized into the Catholic Church, and in September, the family rented a farm, clearly settling in permanently.

On January 6th of 1789, Marie and two of her sisters were baptized into the Catholic Church at Ste. Marguerite de Blairfindie at Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, on the Richelieu River, which empties into Lake Champlain.

If Marie Josèphe was lucky, she was present for those baptisms, closing the loop on restoring their Acadian heritage. She never returned home to her beloved Acadia along the river in Nova Scotia, but the new L’Acadie, built by many of the same families, was the next best thing.

All of this information, combined, probably places Marie Josèphe’s death after 1787 and before 1790, although nothing is certain.

Of course, there would be no death records in the States, but if Marie Josèphe went to Quebec with her daughter’s family and died there in 1788 or after, it’s likely that her death and burial would have been recorded in the parish register. Of course, parish registers aren’t necessarily complete, and she may have remained wherever she was living – which I suspect was someplace near enough to Lake Champlain that Marie had the opportunity to meet Pliny.

Marie Josèphe was probably incredibly relieved that her daughter and grandchildren had made it back to a French, Catholic, Acadian environment. Perhaps that relieved her mind enough that she was free to “go on” and meet her maker.

All things considered, it’s amazing that Marie Josèphe overcame so many obstacles to live so long. Given what she faced, before the days of modern medicine, it’s remarkable that she lived to be at least 72.

In the closing days of her life, Marie Josèphe LePrince was able to salvage at least something of her Acadian heritage by returning her daughter, along with her grandchildren, back to an Acadian resettlement region of Canada.

In L’Acadie, Marie Josèphe’s beloved Acadian culture, including their Catholic faith, endured and did not perish!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate 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 Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

A Forest of Fathers: FamilyTreeDNA’s Y-DNA Tree Tops 100,000 Branches

Posted on by
Reply

Congratulations to FamilyTreeDNA and all of their customers who contributed to this absolutely monumental milestone. The Y-DNA tree has now reached 100,000 branches.

Chart courtest of FamilyTreeDNA

I knew they were getting close because the official January numbers were 99,777.

Congratulations to the entire team, but especially to Michael Sager, Senior Phylogeneticist, who has been the chief architect of the tree “forever.” This is definitely his baby.

Here’s Michael in 2020 at RootsTech discussing the Y-DNA tree construction methodology.

The Y-DNA tree is built using the results of 698,000 individual Y-DNA testers, plus thousands of both academic and ancient results.

These 100,000 tree branches are built from 857,000 variants, known as SNP mutations. Think of those as a huge 857,000-piece puzzle that Michael Sager has spent the past decade assembling into the Y-DNA tree of mankind, reaching all the way back to Y-DNA Adam.

In the tree today, haplogroup A-PR2021, named for variant or SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) PR2921, is Y-DNA Adam, who lived in Africa about 234,000 years ago.

Click on any image to enlarge

FamilyTreeDNA has made their entire Y-DNA tree public and free, and that’s in addition to the baker’s dozen reports available through Discover for each haplogroup.

Let’s take a look!

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Country

You can view the public Y-DNA tree, here, and can select to view the tree by:

  • Variants (mutations) that define each haplogroup
  • Country
  • Surname

For example, here is the oldest, or top portion of the tree, using “by Country,” the first of three options.

Notice two things at far right:

  • There may be a “+” when there are too many countries to display
  • The 3 dots

Clicking on the three dots provides you with the option for a “Country Report” or “Surname Report” for that specific haplogroup.

The Country Report shows the number of haplogroup members from each country. Remember that countries are self-reported by the testers. The country should be the location where the tester’s earliest known paternal ancestor (EKA) was living or from.

You can see how many people are members of this specific branch, and in the next column, how many people are members of this branch plus all “son” or downstream branches. One column excludes new haplogroup letters (when a different base haplogroup is formed), and the other includes all downstream haplogroups, even if the beginning branch letter changes. The final “Distribution” column shows the percentage of people in that haplogroup who originated from each country.

In this case, 43% are from the US, which probably means that they are brick-walled here, given that the only people originally “from” the United States were Native Americans who fall into specific subclades of haplogroups C and Q.

If you’d like more information about A-V148, or any other haplogroup, you can go to Discover and enter a haplogroup name. I always check the Ancient Connections because archaeological remains anchor haplogroups in a particular place at a particular time. We’ll cover more about Discover in a minute.

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Variant

This haplotree view “by Variant” shows the variants, or SNP mutations, that identify each haplogroup.

You can see that Haplogroup A-PR2921, the granddaddy of the tree, is based on only one mutation, PR2921, which is also the haplogroup name. This means two things:

  • Every haplogroup beneath this branch on the tree also has the mutation, PR2921, which is how we know it’s the “original” founding mutation
  • This haplogroup cannot be split further, because there are no additional variants

For example, look at the branch, A-L1090, the first “child haplogroup” of A-PR2921. A-L1090 has the 26 mutations displayed, plus more, for a total of 695.

This means that as more men test, there are literally more than 695 opportunities for various men to match on a unique subset of those mutations, plus new mutations never discovered before, forming new haplogroups.

Some lines have died out over time, and others may be quite rare. This is the perfect example of why it’s important for every male to take the Big Y test, aside from genealogy.

Looking on down the tree to the next haplogroup “generation,” we can see that haplogroup A-V148 has 21 descendant haplogroups, but its sibling subclade, A-V168 has 99,967 – essentially the rest of the tree.

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Surname

Viewing the tree “by Surname” can be very useful. Surnames are shown beside their haplogroup if there are two or more individuals:

  • With the same spelling of the surname who are assigned to this haplogroup
  • Who are members of a public DNA Group Project
  • Who have given permission for their information to be displayed publicly within the project

You can see that haplogroup A-V148 has one surname showing – Goddard.

Haplogroup A-M31 shows four: Bass, Johnson, Evans and Cruise.

Clicking on the three dots shows the Surname Report.

This report reveals that there are seven men with the Goddard surname and no other surnames are currently lissted for this haplogroup.

You might be a member of this haplogroup even if your surname isn’t Goddard. Surnames were only adopted in the past few hundred years, and many have changed during that time for a wide variety of reasons, including spelling variations. Not everyone who is in the matching database has joined a project, so they may show up on your match list, but not be visible here.

Since we know that several Goddard men are in some project, how do we figure out which project or projects they have joined?

Discover’s Suggested Projects

Go to Discover and enter the haplogroup. Click the big orange “Search” button, which will display the Haplogroup Story page for that haplogroup.  .

From the Discover menu at left, select “Suggested Projects”.

For haplogroup A-V148, 10 projects are listed based on which projects members of this haplogroup have joined or on project administrator settings. Those projects alone may provide ancestral hints. Many people, if not most, join multiple projects, such as haplogroup projects, surname projects, and geographic or ethnic projects.

You can click through to any of the projects listed for any haplogroup to take a look. I use my browser search function to search for specific surnames on project pages.

You may find that someone who descends from your ancestor has tested and is waiting for you to match them – plus other genealogical hints as well.

Is Your Surname in the Database?

How can you tell whether your surname is in the database? That’s a great question!

In the public tree, there’s a “Search by Surname” feature. I searched for Estes, and discovered that Estes appears on 8 different branches of haplogroup R. Next, I need to click on haplogroup R, which is directly beneath the search box.

This doesn’t mean there are only 8 men who have tested, but that they are found on 8 different tree branches.

Remember that men who obtain a Family Finder haplogroup are also included on the free Public Tree, so I’ll probably find some Estes men on higher branches of the tree than they would appear if they had taken a Big Y-700 DNA test. Hopefully, they will upgrade, which will help them and all Estes descendants by piecing together our Estes lineages.

Sure enough, using my browser search to search for “Estes”, I discovered the name included with 500 other surnames in haplogroup R-L21, in R-DF49, in R-1690, and then the goldmine – four haplogroups that have ONLY the surname Estes listed.

These are our Estes twigs on the haplotree’s branches, and define four lines that begin with Silvester Estes born in 1522 in Kent, England. These haplogroups are how we proved where our line originated, and how we place testers who are uncertain about their genealogy on their correct tree branches today.

Don’t forget about both the surname and country reports available to the right when searching by surname in the Public Tree. You can also navigate to Discover to learn more about any of these haplogroups in which your surname appears.

Iff you’re an Estes male, you may or may not land in one of these haplogroups. You might even be a member of a different lineage altogether. The only way you’ll know is to take the Big Y-700 test, or minimally, the introductory 37 and 111 marker tests to view your matches. These entry-level tests provide a predicted haplogroup based on STR markers, but you’ll only be placed in your proper place in the tree with the definitive Big Y-700 test. I wrote about the difference between STRs and SNPs here.

Obviously, Y-DNA is only applicable to biologically male testers who have a Y chromosome, and you’ll only see surnames on the tree if multiple people with that exact surname have tested and joined projects, but there’s one more place to look if you want to see how many people with your surname have tested at FamilyTreeDNA.

Group Projects Search

In the footer of every FamilyTreeDNA page, under Community, you’ll find “Group Projects.” No, I don’t know why they buried this tool here, because I find it very useful, and you’ll never find it if you don’t know where to look. But now you do!

Enter the surname you are seeking and click “Search.”

You’ll see at the bottom of the search results page that 391 people whose surname is spelled exactly “Estes” have taken a DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA.

Clearly, some will be males, and others female, and they may have:

  • Taken the autosomal Family Finder test
  • Uploaded an autosomal test from another vendor
  • Taken the mitochondrial DNA direct matrilineal test (your mother’s mother’s mother’s direct line through all females)
  • Taken a Y-DNA test (males only) for the direct patrilineal (surname) line

Lots of people in the database will be descended from Estes ancestors, but won’t carry the surname. This search is an invaluable resource for genealogists seeking their ancestors’ surnames and lineages. Check it out by entering the surnames of your four grandparents and see what’s there!

I use this search tool, combined with projects to find actual testers who represent my ancestral lines and their haplogroups. Then I search the public tree and use Discover to learn about my ancestors. Which brings me back to why this milestone is so important.

Congratulations on a HUGE Milestone for Mankind

The trip to 100,000 haplotree branches was a long and sometimes challenging road. What an amazing accomplishment! Today, the tree is growing at warp speed, but it began with “horses and buggies” in 2003.

  • In 2003, the YCC Consortium published a paper defining the structure of the Y-DNA tree which, then, consisted of 153 branches based only on 243 SNPs. That’s all that had been discovered in academia at the time. But citizen science was coming into its own and many more haplogroup discoveries would soon follow, thanks to our testing pioneers.
  • In 2006, ISOGG committed to developing and maintaining a public, manually curated haplotree based on SNPs discovered at different labs. The ISOGG tree was published annually, with the final version released in July 2020.
  • In 2006, there were about 250 branches on the Y-DNA tree and SNP discoveries were rare events. Today, with the Big Y-700, new SNP discoveries occur at the rate of several hundred per week, thanks to the testing public.
  • In 2010, the YCC consortium released its final tree that included only 440 branches.
  • In 2013, FamilyTreeDNA introduced the Big Y test, which used the newer NGS (next generation sequencing) scanning technique instead of targeting specific locations on the Y-chromosome. The Big Y-700 test scans millions of locations in the gold standard region of the Y chromosome. It reads known Y-DNA SNP locations for haplogroup placement, but also identifies mutations not previously discovered that are often lineage-specific. That’s the key to identifying new haplogroups. Haplogroups are literally named after their SNP.
  • 2018 was a banner year. There were 17,966 branches on the tree.
  • By 2018, the haplotree was benefiting from what was termed a “SNP tsunami,” which rapidly expanded the tree. In June, 2018, FamilyTreeDNA named their 100,000th SNP. That too was a huge milestone, which I wrote about, here. Not every SNP discovered becomes its own haplogroup, of course, but they all must be placed appropriately on the tree.
  • In September of 2018, FamilyTreeDNA introduced their Public Tree.
  • That avalanche of SNP discovery meant that the volunteer-maintained ISOGG tree was struggling mightily to keep up with the onslaught, publishing one final tree in 2020. The landscape had changed. A yearly, independent tree that compiled information from multiple sources was no longer necessary. Haplogroup and SNP discoveries were being made almost exclusively at FamilyTreeDNA, who publishes and maintains their Y-DNA tree organically as SNPs are discovered and added to the tree.
  • In December 2021, the FamilyTreeDNA Y-DNA haplotree reached 50,000 branches. I wrote about that milestone, here.
  • In just over four years, that has doubled at a rate of about about 1000 new branches per month. That’s mind-boggling!
  • On February 5, 2026, the haplotree reached 100,000 branches! I checked earlier today (Feb. 6th) and there are already 39 more haplogroups. No moss growing under their feet. They’ve reached for the treetops and gone beyond!

Reaching 100,000 branches on the Y-DNA tree is an absolutely amazing achievement, both scientifically and genealogically. Perhaps best of all, reconstructing the lineage and paths of our ancestors is the only way we can reach indefinitely back in time. Beyond surnames and far beyond what autosomal DNA can touch.

Based on that, we can add genetic anthropology to the fields that have benefited immensely from the achievements of the tree. Conversely, genetic anthropology has contributed to the construction of the tree with the sequencing of ancient DNA results, allowing thousands of ancient samples to be incorporated.

Every contemporary haplogroup descends from Y-DNA Adam. Given that Adam lived at least 234,000 years ago, that represents about 9,360 direct-line ancestors (at 25 years per generation) for each one of us. At 20 years per generation, we have 11,700. Wouldn’t Y-line Adam be utterly dumbstruck to learn that he has 8 billion descendants, of which slightly more than half are males who still carry his defining haplogroup mutation, A-PR2021!

Thanks to the FamilyTreeDNA public Y-DNA tree and searches, plus the amazing Discover tools, we can now peel back the curtain of time on both recent and distant ancestors by walking our haplogroups back one at a time until we meet our earliest ancestor of all – Adam

Want to Meet Adam? Here’s How You Can Participate

You can participate in building the Y-DNA tree of humankind and meet Adam by taking a Big Y-700 DNA test, which you can order here. If you’re a female, you can sponsor a Y-DNA test for a male relative, such as a father, uncle, or brother who represents one of your surname lines. But don’t stop with your own paternal line – reach out and make those same discoveries for all of your ancestral lines! Your ancestors are waiting to meet you!!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate 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 Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research