Category Archives: Autosomal

AutoKinship at GEDmatch by Genetic Affairs

Posted on by
28

Genetic Affairs has created a new version of AutoKinship at GEDmatch. The new AutoKinship report adds new features, allows for more kits to be included in the analysis, and integrates multiple reports together:

  • AutoCluster – the autoclusters we all know and love
  • AutoSegment – clusters based on segments
  • AutoTree – reconstructed tree based on GEDCOM files of you and your matches, even if you don’t have a tree
  • AutoKinship – the original AutoKinship report provided genetic trees. The new AutoKinship report includes AutoTree, combines both, and adds features called AutoKinship Tree. (Trust me on this one – you’ll see in a minute!)
  • Matches
    • Common Ancestors with your ancestors
    • Common Ancestors between matches, even if they don’t match your tree
    • Common Locations

Maybe the best news is that some reports provide automatic triangulation because, at GEDmatch, it’s possible to not only see how you match multiple people, but also if those people match each other on that same segment. Of course, triangulation requires three-way matching in addition to the identification of common ancestors which is part of what AutoKinship provides, in multiple ways.

Let’s step through the included reports and features one at a time, using my clusters as an example.

Order Your Report

As a Tier 1 GEDmatch customer, sign in, select AutoKinship and order your report.

Note that there are now two clustering settings, the default setting and one that will provide more dense clusters. The last setting is the default setting for AutoKinship, since it has been shown to produce better AutoKinship results.

You can also select the number of kits to consider. Since this tool is free with a GEDmatch Tier 1 subscription, you can start small and rerun if you wish, as often as you wish.

Currently, a maximum of 500 matches can be included, but that will be increased to 1000 in the future. Your top 500 matches will be included that fall within the cM matching parameters specified.

I’m leaving this at the maximum 400 cM threshold, so every match below that is included. I generally leave this default threshold because otherwise my closest matches will be in a huge number of clusters which may cause processing issues.

For a special use case where you will want to increase the cM threshold, see the Special Use Cases section near the end of this article.

You can select a low number of matches, like 25 or 50 which is particularly useful if you want to examine the closest matches of a kit without a tree.

Keep in mind that there is currently a maximum processing time of 10 minutes allowed per report. This means that if you have large clusters, which are the last ones processed, you may not have AutoKinship results for those clusters.

This also means that if you select a high cM threshold and include all 500 allowable matches, you will receive the report but the AutoKinship results may not be complete.

When finished, your report will be delivered to you as a download link with an attached zipped file which you will need to save someplace where you can find it.

Unzip

If you’re a PC user, you’ll need to unzip or extract the files before you can use the files. You’ll see the zipper on the file.

If you don’t extract the contents, you can click on the file to open which will display a list of the files, so it looks like the files are extracted, but they aren’t.

You can see that the file is still zipped.

You can click on the html file which will display the AutoCluster correctly too, but when you click on any other link within that file, you’ll receive this error message if the file is still zipped.

If this happens to you, it means the file is still zipped. Close the files you have open, right click on the yellow zipped file folder and “extract all.”

Then click on the HTML link again and everything should work.

Ok, on to the fun part – the tools.

Tools

I’ve written about most of these tools individually before, except for the new combinations of course. I’ve put all of the Genetic Affairs Tools, Instructions and Resources in one article that you can find here.

I recommend that you take a look to be sure you’re using each tool to its greatest advantage.

AutoCluster

Click on the html file and watch your AutoCluster fly into place. I always, always love this part.

The first thing I noticed about my AutoCluster at GEDmatch is that it’s HUGE! I have a total of 144 clusters and that’s just amazing!

Information about the cluster file, including the number of matches, maximum and minimum cM used for the report, and minimum cluster size appears beneath your cluster chart.

22 people met the criteria but didn’t have other matches that did, so they are listed for my review, but not included in the cluster chart.

At first glance, the clusters look small, but don’t despair, they really aren’t.

My clusters only look small because the tool was VERY successful, and I have many matches in my clusters. The chart has to be scaled to be able to display on a computer monitor.

New Layout

Genetic Affairs has introduced a new layout for the various included tools.

Each section opens to provide a brief description of the tool and what is occurring. This new tool includes four previous tools plus a new one, AutoCluster Tree, as follows:

AutoCluster

AutoCluster first organizes your DNA matches into shared match clusters that likely represent branches of your family. Everyone in a cluster will likely be on the same ancestral line, although the MRCA between any of the matches and between you and any match may vary. The generational level of the clusters may vary as well. One may be your paternal grandmother’s branch, another may be your paternal grandfather’s father’s branch.

AutoSegment

AutoSegment organizes your matches based on triangulating segments. AutoSegment employs the positional information of segments (chromosome and start and stop position) to identify overlapping segments in order to link DNA matches. In addition, triangulated data is used to collaborate these links. Using the user defined minimum overlap of a DNA segment we perform a clustering of overlapping DNA segments to identify segment clusters. The overlap is calculated in centimorgans using human genetic recombination maps. Another aspect of overlapping segments is the fact that some regions of our genome seem to have more matches as compared to the other regions. These so-called pile-up areas can influence the clustering. The removal of known pile-up regions based on the paper of Li et al 2014 is optional and is not performed for this analysis However, a pileup report is provided that allows you to examine your genome for pileup regions.

AutoTree

By comparing the tree of the tested person and the trees from the members of a certain cluster, we can identify ancestors that are common amongst those trees. First, we collect the surnames that are present in the trees and create a network using the similarity between surnames. Next, we perform a clustering on this network to identify clusters of similar surnames. A similar clustering is performed based on a network using the first names of members of each surname cluster. Our last clustering uses the birth and death years of members of a cluster to find similar persons. As a consequence, initially large clusters (based on the surnames) are divided up into smaller clusters using the first name and birth/death year clustering.

AutoKinship

AutoKinship automatically predicts family trees based on the amount of DNA your DNA matches share with you and each other. Note that AutoKinship does not require any known genealogical trees from your DNA matches. Instead, AutoKinship looks at the predicted relationships between your DNA matches, and calculates many different paths you could all be related to each other. The probabilities used by this AutoKinship analysis are based on simulated data for GEDmatch matches and are kindly provided by Brit Nicholson (methodology described here). Based on the shared cM data between shared matches, we create different trees based on the putative relationships. We then use the probabilities to test every scenario which are then ranked.

AutoKinship Tree

Predicted trees from the AutoTree analysis are based on genealogical trees shared by the DNA matches and, if available, shared by the tested person. The relationships between DNA matches based on their common ancestors as provided AutoTree are used to perform an AutoKinship analysis and are overlayed on the predicted AutoKinship tree.

AutoKinship Tree is New

AutoKinship Tree is the new feature that combines the features of both AutoTree and AutoKinship. You receive:

  • Common ancestors between you and your matches
  • Trees of people who don’t share your common ancestors but share ancestors with each other
  • Combined with relationship predictions and
  • A segment analysis

Of course, the relative success of the tree tools depends upon how many people have uploaded GEDCOM files.

Big hint, if you haven’t uploaded your family tree, do so now. If you are an adoptee or searching for a parent and don’t know who your ancestors are, AutoKinship Tree does its best without your tree information, and you will still benefit from the trees of others combined with predicted relationships based on DNA.

It’s easier to show you than to tell you, so let’s step through my results one section at a time.

I’m going to be using cluster 5 which has 32 members and cluster 136 which has 8 members. Ironically, cluster 136 is a much more useful cluster, with 8 good matches, than cluster 5 which includes 32 people.

Results of the AutoKinship Analyses

As you scroll down your results, you’ll see a grid beneath the Explanation area.

It’s easy to see which cluster received results for each tool. My cluster 5 has results in each category, along with surnames. (Notice that you can search for surnames which displays only the clusters that contain that surname.)

I can click on each icon to see what’s there waiting for me.

Additionally, you can click at the top on the blue middle “here” for an overview of all common ancestors. Who can resist that, right?

Click on the ancestor’s name or the tree link to view more information.

You can also view common locations too by clicking on the blue “here” at far right. A location, all by itself, is a HUGE hint.

Clicking on the tree link shows you the tree of the tester with ancestors at that location. I had several others from North Carolina, generally, and other locations specifically. Let’s take a look at a few examples.

Common Ancestor Clusters

Click on the first blue link to view all common ancestors.

Common Ancestor Clusters summarize all of the clusters by ancestor. In other words, if any of your matches have ancestors in common in their tree, they are listed here.

These clusters include NOT just the people who share ancestors in a tree with you, but who also share known ancestors with each other BUT NOT YOU. That may be incredibly important when you are trying to identify your ancestors – as in brick walls. Your ancestors may be their ancestors too, or your common segments might lead to your common ancestors if you complete their tree.

There are other important hints too.

In my case, above, Jacob Lentz is my known ancestor.

However, Sarah Barron is not my ancestor, nor is John Vincent Dodson. They are the descendants of my Dodson ancestor though. I recognized that surname and those people. In other instances, recognizing a common geography may be your clue for figuring out how you connect.

In the cluster column at left, you can see the cluster number in which these people are found.

Common Locations Table

Clicking on the second link provides a Common Location Table

Some locations are general, like a state, and others are town, county or even village names. Whatever people have included in their GEDCOM files that can be connected.

Looking at this first entry, I recognize some of the ancestral surnames of Karen’s ancestors. The fact that we are found in the same cluster and share DNA indicates a common ancestor someplace.

Check for this same person in additional locations, then, look at their tree.

Ok, back to the AutoKinship Analysis Table and Cluster 136.

Cluster 136

I’m going to use Cluster 136 as an example because this cluster has generated great reports using all of the tools, indicated by the icon under each column heading. Some clusters won’t have enough information for everything so the tools generate as much as possible.

Scrolling down to Cluster 136 in the AutoCluster Information report, just beneath the list of clusters, I can see my 8 matches in that cluster.

Of course, I can click on the links for specific information, or contact them via email. At the end of this article in the “Tell Me Everything” section, I’ll provide a way to retrieve as much information as possible about any one match. For now, let’s move to the AutoTree.

Cluster 136 AutoTree

Clicking on the icon under AutoTree shows me how two of the matches in this cluster are related to each other and myself.

Note that the centimorgan badges listed refer to the number of cM that I share with each of these people, not how much they share with each other.

Click on any of the people to see additional information.

When I click on J Lentz m F Moselman, a popup box shows me how this couple is related to me and my matches.

Of course, you can also view the Y DNA or mitochondrial DNA haplogroups if the testers have provided that information when they set up their GEDmatch profile information.

Just click on the little icons.

If the testers have not provided that information, you can always check at FamilyTreeDNA or 23andMe, if they have tested at either of those vendors, to view their haplogroup information.

Today, GEDmatch kit numbers are assigned randomly, but in the early days, before Genesis, the leading letter of A meant AncestryDNA, F or T for FamilyTreeDNA, M for 23andMe and H for MyHeritage. If the kit number is something else, perform a one-to-one or a one-to-many report which will display the source of their DNA file.

The small number, 136 in this case, beside the cM number indicates the cluster or clusters that these people are members of. Some people are members of multiple clusters

Let’s see what’s next.

Cluster 136 Common Ancestors

Clicking on the Ancestors icon provides a report that shows all of the Ancestor Clusters in cluster 136.

The difference between this ancestor chart and the larger chart is that this only shows ancestors for cluster 136, while the larger chart shows ancestors for the entire AutoCluster report.

Cluster 136 Locations

All of the locations shown are included in trees of people who cluster together in cluster 136. Of course, this does NOT mean that these locations are all relevant to cluster 136. However, finding my own tree listed might provide an important clue.

Using the location tool, I discover 5 separate location clusters. This location cluster includes me with each tester’s ancestors who are found in Montgomery County, Ohio.

The difference between this chart for cluster 136 only and the larger location chart is that every location in this chart is relevant for people who all cluster together meaning we all share some ancestral line.

Viewing the trees of other people in the cluster may suggest ancestors or locations that are essential for breaking down brick walls.

Cluster 136 AutoKinship

Clicking on the anchor in the AutoKinship column provides a genetically reconstructed tree based on how closely each of the people match me, and each other. Clearly, in order to be able to provide this prediction, information about how your matches also match each other, or don’t, is required.

Again, the cM amount shown is the cM match with me, not with each other. However, if you click on a match, a popup will be shown that shows the shared cM between that person and the other matches as well as the relationship prediction between them in this tree

So, Bill matches David with a total of 354.3 cM and they are positioned as first cousins once removed in this tree. The probability of the match being a 1C1R (first cousin once removed) is 64.9%, meaning of course that other relationships are possible.

Note that Bill and David ALSO share a segment with me in autosegment cluster 185, on chromosome 3.

It’s important to note that while 136 is the autocluster number, meaning that colored block on the report, WITHIN clusters, autosegment clusters are formed and numbered. 

Each autosegment cluster receives its own number and the numbers are for the entire report. You will have more autosegment clusters than autoclusters, because at least some of the colorful autoclusters will contain more than one segment cluster.

Remember, autoclusters are those colorful boxes of matches that fly into place. Autosegment clusters are the matching triangulated clusters on chromosomes and they are represented by the blue bars, shown below.

AutoCluster 136 contains 5 different autosegment clusters, but Bill is only included in one of those autosegment clusters.

You’ll notice that there are some people, like Robin at the bottom, who do match some other people in the cluster, but either not enough people, or not enough overlapping DNA to be included as an autocluster member.

The small colored chromosomes with numbers, boxed in red, indicate the chromosome on which this person matches me.

If you click on that chromosome icon, you’ll see a popup detailing everyone who matches me on that segment.

Note that in some cases a member of a segment cluster, like Robin, did not make it in the AutoCluster cluster. You can spot these occurrences by scrolling down and looking at the cluster column which will then be empty for that particular match.

Reconstructed AutoKinship Trees in Most Likely Order

Scrolling down the page, next we see that we have multiple possible trees to view. We are shown the most likely tree first.

Tree likelihood is constructed based on the combined probability of my matching cM to an individual plus their likely relationship to each other based on the amount of DNA they share with each other as well.

In my case, all of the first 8 trees are equally as likely to be accurate, based on autosomal genetic relationships only. The ninth tree is only very slightly less likely to be accurate.

The X chromosome is not utilized separately in this analysis, nor are Y or mitochondrial DNA haplogroups if provided.

DNA Relationship Matrix

Continuing to scroll down, we next see the DNA matrix that shows relationships for cluster 5 in a grid format. Click on “Download Relationship Matrix” to view in a spreadsheet.

Keep scrolling for the next view which is the Individual Segment Cluster Information

Individual Segment Cluster Information

Remember that we are still focused on only one cluster – in this case, cluster 136. Each cluster contains people who all match at least some subset of other people in the cluster. Some people will match each other and the tested person on the same chromosome segment, and some won’t. What we generally see within clusters are “subclusters” of people who match each other on different chromosomes and segments. Also, some matches from cluster 136 might match other people but those matches might not be a member of cluster 136.

In autocluster 136, I have 14 DNA segments that converge into 5 segment clusters with my matches. Here’s segment cluster 185 that consists of two people in addition to me. Note that for individuals to be included in these segment clusters at GEDmatch, they must triangulate with people in the same segment cluster.

From left to right, we see the following information:

  • AutoCluster number 136, shown below

  • Segment cluster 185. This is a segment cluster within autocluster 136.

  • Segment cluster 185 occurs on chromosome 3, between the designated start and stop locations.
  • The segment representation shows the overlapping portions of the two matches, to me. You can easily see that they overlap almost exactly with each other as well.
  • The SNP count is shown, followed by the name and cM count.

Cluster 136 AutoKinship Tree

The AutoKinship Tree column is different from the AutoKinship column in one fundamental way. The new AutoKinship Tree feature combines the genealogical AutoTree and the genetic AutoKinship output together in one report.

You can see that the “prior” genealogical tree information that one of my matches also descends from Jacob Lentz (and wife, if you click further) has now been included. The matches without trees have been reconstructed around the known genealogy based on how they match me and each other.

I was already aware of how I’m related to Bill, David, *C and *R, but I don’t know how I am related to these other people. Based on their kit identifier, I can go to the vendor where they tested and utilize tools there, and I can check to see if they have uploaded their DNA files elsewhere to discover additional records information or critical matches. Now at least I know where in the tree to search.

Cluster 136 AutoSegment

Clicking on AutoSegment provides you with segment information. Each cluster is painted on your chromosomes.

By hovering over the darkly colored segments, which are segment clusters, you can view who you match, although to view multiple matches, continue scrolling.

In the next section, you’ll see the two segment clusters contained wholly within cluster 136.

Following that is the same information for segment clusters partially linked to cluster 136, but not contained wholly within 136.

Bonus – Tell Me Everything – Individual Match Clusters

We’ve focused specifically on the AutoKinship tools, but if you’re interested in “everything” about one specific match, you can approach things from that perspective too. I often look at a cluster, then focus on individuals, beginning with those I can identify which focuses my search.

If you click on any person in your match list, you’ll receive a report focusing on that person in your autocluster.

Let’s use cousin Bill as an example. I know how he’s related to me.

You can choose to display your chosen cluster by:

  • Cluster
  • Number of shared matches
  • Shared cM with the tester
  • Name

I would suggest experimenting with all of the options and see which one displays information that is most useful to the question you’re trying to answer.

Beneath the cluster for Bill, you’ll see the relevant information about the cluster itself. Bill has cluster matches on two different chromosomes.

The AutoCluster Cluster member Information report shows you how much DNA each cluster member shares with the tested person, which is me, and with each other cluster member. It’s easy to see at a glance who Bill is most closely related to by the number of cMs shared.

Only one of Bill’s chromosomes, #3, is included in clusters, but this tells me immediately that this/these segments on chromosome 3 triangulate between me, Bill, and at least one other person.

Segments shown in orange (chromosome 22) match me, but are not included in a cluster.

Special Use Cases – Unknown People

For adoptees and people trying to figure out how they are related to closer relatives, especially those without a tree, this new combined AutoKinship tool is wonderful.

400 cM is the upper default limit when running the report, meaning that close family members will not be included because they would be included in many clusters. However, you can make a different selection. If you’re trying to determine how several closely related people intersect, select a high threshold to include everyone.

Select a lower number of matches, like 25 or 50.

In this example, ‘no limit” was selected as the upper total match threshold and 25 closest matches.

AutoKinship then constructs a genetic tree and tells you which trees are possible and most likely. If some people do have trees, that common ancestor information would be included as well.

Note that when matches occur over the 400 cM threshold, there will be too many common chromosome matches so the chromosome numbers are omitted. Just check the other reports.

This tool would have helped a great deal with a recent close match who didn’t know how they are related to my family.

You can see this methodology in action and judge its accuracy by reconstructing your own family, assuming some of your known family members have uploaded to GEDmatch. Try it out.

It’s a Lot!

I know there’s a lot here to absorb, but take your time and refer back to this article as needed.

This flexible new tool combines DNA matching, genealogy trees, genetic trees, locations, autoclusters, a chromosome browser, and triangulation. It took me a few passes and working with different clusters to understand and absorb the information that is being provided.

For people who don’t know who their parents or close relatives are, these tools are amazing. Not only can they determine who they are related to, and who is related to each other, but with the use of trees, they can view common ancestors which provides possible ancestors for them too.

For people painting their triangulated segments at DNAPainter, AutoKinship provides triangulation groups that can be automatically painted using the Cluster Auto Painter, here, plus helps to identify that common ancestor. You can read more about DNAPainter, here.

For people seeking to break down brick walls, AutoKinship Tree provides assistance by providing tree matching between your matches for common ancestors NOT IN YOUR TREE, but that ARE in theirs. Your brick walls are clearly not (yet) identified in your tree, although that’s our fervent hope, right?

Even if your matches’ trees don’t go far enough back, as a genealogist, you can extend those trees further to hopefully reveal a previously unknown common ancestor.

The Best Things You Can Do

Aside from DNA testing, the three best things you can do to help yourself, and your clusters are:

  • Upload your GEDCOM file, complete with locations, so you have readily available trees. Ask your matches to do so as well. Trees help you and others too.
  • Encourage people you match at Ancestry who provides no chromosome segment information or chromosome browser to upload a copy of their DNA files and tree.
  • Test your family members and cousins, and encourage them to upload their DNA and their trees. Offer to assist them. You can find step-by-step download/upload instructions here.

Have fun!

______________________________________________________________

Sign Up Now – It’s Free!

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to DNAeXplain for free to automatically receive new articles by email each week.

Here’s the link. Just look for the little grey “follow” button on the right-hand side on your computer screen below the black title bar, enter your e-mail address, and you’re good to go!

In case you were wondering, I never have nor ever will share or use your e-mail outside of the intended purpose.

Share the Love

You can always forward these articles to friends or share by posting links on social media. Who do you know that might be interested?

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Johann Peter Koehler (1724-1791), Innkeeper, Lawyer, Mayor of Ellerstadt – 52 Ancestors #351

Posted on by
6

My ancestor, Margaretha Elisabetha Koehler was born on April 30, 1772 in Ellerstadt, Germany to Johann Peter Koehler and Anna Elisabetha Scherer.

I wrote about the Kirsch and Koehler homes in neighboring Mutterstadt where Margaretha Elisabetha lived after her marriage, here.

Ellerstadt

The village of Ellerstadt is the heart of German wine country. The ideal location for an innkeeper. Johann Peter Koehler was just that, the innkeeper at The Lion, and an innkeeper with aspirations.

Ellerstadt was a small village in the 1700s when Peter Koehler lived there, although it had existed for hundreds of years, minus the years it was laid waste by invading armies. The first mention of Ellerstadt was in 783, nearly 1000 years before Peter took up residence.

Peter wasn’t born in Ellerstadt.

Rehutte

According to his death record, Peter was born on September 28, 1724. His parents were Johann Peter Theobald Koehler and Anna Elisabetha Ulzhofer and he was most likely born in the little village of Rehutte (Rehhutte), given that his father was the customs collector and innkeeper there. However, Rehutte was occupied by French troops from 1734-1745, so where the family might have lived during that time is open to speculation. Records from Rehutte would be very enlightening.

Peter spent his adult life in Ellerstadt.

We don’t know exactly when Peter took up residence there, but at age 22, on January 11, 1746, he married Charlotta Braun in Ellerstadt. He would have been a citizen by then, with a vocation sufficient to support a wife and family or he would not have been allowed to marry.

Ellerstadt

This map of Ellerstadt from the 1840s is probably very similar to life 50 years earlier, near the end of Peter’s time on earth. These are the streets that Peter would have walked, buttressed by the vineyards tended by the residents stretching long and narrow behind their homes.

Today, you can see the same roads embracing the beautiful “old,” village.

The lives of all of the villagers, their comings and goings, revolved around the center of the village where there was likely a communal well at one time and probably a marketplace too. You can easily see the Protestant church with the green roof near the old school on the corner.

There would have been a bakery nearby, the smell of freshly baked bread wafting down the street. Of course, every village had an inn that functioned as the local restaurant and pub, gathering place, and safe haven for travelers and their beasts.

The region’s fine wines would have been served at the tables there, and maybe some locally distilled fruit brandy too. Today there’s a generationally owned winery in Ellerstadt plus a few more in close proximity.

You have no idea how much I want to walk these streets.

Von Immanuel Giel – Eigenes Werk, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=70902203

The old white school, shown above on the corner, was likely something else before it served as a school. We know that during Peter’s day that the schoolmaster taught at the Lutheran church.

Kirchenstrasse runs alongside the church, north to south, and Ratstrasse, or city hall street, intersects in the center of town. The city hall would have been located there, as would the local inn. Peter would have lived and worked someplace in this long block. I’d bet that in the city’s dusty records, there is something that would tell us where the old Lion or Red Lion Inn was located, or where Peter lived, which might well have been the same building. His wife may well have cooked for the family and their guests.

Peter, his wives and some of his children are assuredly buried in the cemetery behind the church in long-lost graves. Many of his children married and moved away, to neighboring villages and eventually, some of his descendants sailed for America.

Ellerstadt History

Like the rest of the Palatinate, Ellerstadt was entirely abandoned during the Thirty Years War which began in 1618. While the war officially ended in 1648, families had either died or settled elsewhere and there was literally nothing to return to. Everythign was burned and gone, but some tried to return to their ancestral villages.

Repeated incursions lasted throughout the 1600s, with French troops once again ravaging the Palatinate from 1689-1697. Refugees fled across the Rhine, with some eventually returning after the French discovered that they needed people to work so they had someone to tax.

In 1707, Ellerstadt belonged to Casimir Kolb von Wartenberg and was part of the Imperial county that was of an Imperially immediate nature. An imperial immediate nature was a privileged political status rooted in feudal law under the Holy Roman Empire granting the holder a form of sovereignty, allowing them to extract taxes and tolls, among other forms of control. Often, they granted benefits to villagers such as allowing them to own some time of business, such as an inn. Of course, nothing was free – they would have selected a man they could depend on to pay their taxes.

We know that Peter was living in Ellerstadt by 1746 when he married and established himself as a citizen and innkeeper. A decade later in 1756 catastrophic weather conditions including hail destroyed the entire harvest.

Many people probably went hungry that year. Peter, then 32 years old and married for a decade had 6 children, including a babe in arms. What did they do? How did they survive? We’ll never know.

During almost the entire time that Peter lived in Ellerstadt, the village was owned by the Wartenbergs. However, in 1789, the impoverished Wartenbergs sold their rights to the Counts of Sickingen, another noble family who subsequently lost Ellerstadt, along with all of the Palatinate west of the Rhine to the French in 1794.

We don’t know exactly how many people lived in the village of Ellerstadt in the 1700s, but we do know that there were 24-30 families by 1548 and by 1614, that number had increased to 60-70. Of course, that was before the war.

The families who didn’t die left no later than 1620, and it’s unknown if any of the original families tried to return after 1650. A full generation had passed.

Regardless, Peter Koehler’s family was not from Ellerstadt, but Ellerstadt was probably a “young” village once again in the early and mid-1700s, in the process of rebuilding and reestablishing itself. If it was without an innkeeper, a newly established inn would have been quite welcome. Food, wine and travelers. More people and goods to tax, including luxuries like tea, coffee and chocolate.

By 1722, the population had not extended beyond the city center; Ratsstausse, Kirchenstrausse with Fliesstrasse bordering the south side of the village.

The 1840s map shows about 110 or so residences, but many are in the “newer” outskirts of town, outside the village center where the church would have been rebuilt. Perhaps there were 50 families when Peter lived in Ellerstadt, eventually serving as Mayor.

Peter died in 1791, before the French Revolution occurred in 1793 and 1794, once again ravaging Ellerstadt. Soldiers plundered homes and forced the inhabitants into labor if they did not flee across the Rhine River.

Peter’s home and the inn would have either been destroyed or at least repurposed – although soldiers like everyone else had to eat and likely enjoyed a drink. While Peter was gone, perhaps his inn survived due to its usefulness.

Reassembling Peter’s Life

Most of what we know about Peter came from the church records which of course reflect none of the turmoil taking place, at least not directly. Clearly, the family attended services regularly. All of Peter’s children were baptized in the church as was expected.

The church was the central, cohesive glue of the village, with the protestant religion a way of life in German Palatinate villages during this time. There was no Catholic church. The Thirty Years’ War had been about the differences between Catholicism and the Protestant faith and the protestants won.

Peter’s transcribed marriage record tells us that on the 11th of January, 1746, Johann Peter Koehler, legitimate son of the customs collector Mister Kohler was married to the local widow Braun’s daughter Charlotta, after 3 public announcements during open church services.

Charlotta died 16 years later, on March 6, 1762, in Ellerstadt.

Charlotta and Peter had 8 children between November of 1746 and March of 1761. There are two gaps of 4 years, suggesting that two children died, one in 1751 and one in 1759. Others might have died after they were christened during that timeframe.

Peter remarried shortly, just 3 months later, on June 29th, 1762 to Anna Elisabetha Scherer, 18 years his junior and the daughter of the innkeeper of the “Lion Inn” in Heuchelheim, about 20 miles away. Peter’s oldest child was only 5 years younger than his new wife who immediately acquired a family of 8 children, minus any who had died. The oldest was 16 and the youngest, an infant who would never have known any other mother other than Elisabetha.

The translation of their marriage record, courtesy of cousin Tom says:

The local innkeeper at the Löwenwirth (Lion’s Inn), Peter KÖHLER, widower with Anna Elisabetha SCHER(IN), the late Philipp SCHER(N) from Heuchelheim, surviving legitimate daughter were married after the reading of the three proclamation of the banns.

Their first child arrived in November of 1763.

In his daughter Christina Ottilia’s marriage record on August 4, 1763, Peter is referenced as “citizen and host of the Red Lion in Ellerstadt, of the reformed religion.”

In 1765, their child Anna Margaretha was christened with Peter’s brother, Tobias Kohler, citizen and resident of Zeiskem (Zeiskam) and his wife, Anna Margaretha, serving as godparents. Zeiskam is about 33 kilometers away, so not a trivial journey.

Until 1776, Peter was consistently referred to as the Innkeeper at the Lion’s Inn, but in September 1776 when a new daughter was christened, he was referred to as anwalt,” or “lawyer here”, meaning the person who checked the contracts for the village. Probably quite different than a lawyer today, but still a position of responsibility and one that required the trust of the residents. He was 52 years old.

Elisabetha had 11 children between 1763 and January 1784. She died on July 21, 1784, once again leaving Peter, then 60, a widower with young children ranging in age from 6 months to 19 years, plus his children from his first marriage who were all adults by that time.

Three of Peter and Elisabetha’s children had died, including young Johann Martin Koehler on January 22, 1784, just a few months before his mother. I wonder if something like typhoid, flu or maybe dysentery was affecting people in the village during that time.

After Elisabetha’s death, Peter waited nearly a year before remarrying on July 4, 1785 to the widow Anna Margaretha Volker of Assenheim, a neighbor village.

Elke translated the record as:

The 4th of July, Mister Peter Kohler, former mayor and widower and Anna Margarethe nee Volckerin, remaining widow of the former Johannes tock, former citizen and court cognant in Assenheim.

Former mayor suggests that in 1785, Peter was no longer mayor, but that may have changed.

Four years later, in 1789, when his son, Philip Jacob Kohler married, Peter was referenced once again as the village mayor.

Then Peter died, his demise recorded in the church record.

On August 11, 1791, Herr Johann Peter Kohler, village mayor and lowenwirth, Innkeeper at The Lion here, died. Age 67 years, less 1 month 2 weeks and 4 days.

This tells us that Peter was born on September 28, 1724, and that he was still both the mayor and an innkeeper at his death. The title Herr was used as a sign of respect.

Peter’s daughter Anna Elisabetha’s marriage record on August 18, 1801 says:

Anna Elisabetha Kohlerin of Ellerstadt, 21 years old born in Fussgoenheim the ? of Oct residing in Ellerstadt, daughter of the former Peter Koehler, former citizen and mayor in Ellerstadt and his wife anna Elisabetha nee Schererin.

She was born October 3, 1781.

Peter’s daughter’s August 13, 1793 marriage record says:

Philipp Jacob Rhodt, citizen in Freudenheim a widower to Maria Eva Kohlerin unmarried daughter of the former Peter Kohler, former mayor, from here and Anna Elisabetha, nee Scherin, both are no more.

In 1823, Peter’s daughter died, providing a final confirmation:

On the 21st of April 1823 died and on the 23rd was buried, Anna Margaretha Kirsch, widow of the late Andreas Kirsch, aged 49 years 11 months 22 days. Her parents: Peter Kohler from Ellerstadt and Anna Elisabetha Scherr.

The Lion Inn

It has been suggested that perhaps the Lion Inn has something to do with the Hallberg crest or coat of arms. It’s worth noting that the inn in Heuchelheim was also known as “The Lion.”

Von Immanuel Giel – Eigenes Werk, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48993779

This Hallberg crest is affixed to the pulpit in the Hallberg castle church in neighboring Fussgoenheim, less than 2 miles away. There are two lions on the crest, and one way to obtain the rights to open a local inn would be to sell Hallberg wine and name the establishment after the local noble’s crest animal.

A Confusing DNA Puzzle

Several years ago, my Koehler cousin was gracious enough to take an autosomal and Y DNA test to represent our Koehler line.

The results are very interesting.

The Renner family is also present in this part of Germany, primarily in Mutterstadt, but also found in neighboring Fussgoenheim, Schauernheim, Dannstadt and Assenheim. Perhaps even more interesting is that one Jacob Wilhelm Renner married Peter Koehler’s sister. The couple stood as godparents for one of Peter’s children.

The Renner and Koehler families were both in this part of Germany since before written records. It’s certainly possible that the Renner and Koehler families had a common paternal ancestor, before the advent of surnames. Celts and Germanic tribes settled along the Rhine River in prehistory, and Ceasar crossed the Rhine in 55 and 53 BCE. The Rhine River has always been Europe’s water superhighway, serving as both passageways and boundaries – and always worth fighting for.

In other words, families existed, as did armies, in the Palatinate long before surnames.

My Koehler cousin descends from Peter Koehler and Elisabetha through their son, Philip Jacob Koehler who married Maria Catharina Merck.

Today, my Koehler cousin’s Y DNA matches several Renner and Rennard men. So far, no Koehler surname matches on Y DNA, but, there’s more…

  • Autosomal matching shows a match to another descendant of Johann Peter Koehler and Anna Elisabetha Scherer through Philip Jacob Koehler and Maria Catharina Merck, through their daughter. Therefore, the path back to at least Philip Jacob Koehler seems to be clear and unbroken. If the Y DNA Koehler line of Ellerstadt had been broken between Philip Jacob Koehler and my Koehler cousin, he would NOT match anyone else descended from that couple autosomally, and he does.
  • In other words, if Peter Koehler and Elisabetha Scherer’s son, Philip Jacob Koehler had been their son, but his son was a Renner male, then the Y and autosomal link would both have been broken, so my cousin today could not match a descendant of either Philip Jacob Koehler or Peter Koehler.

There’s additional information to consider.

  • My cousin also matches another Koehler male on the Family Finder test, but that person has not taken the Y DNA test and hasn’t provided genealogical information.
  • Another interesting tidbit – we find another Koehler line autosomal match and a Renner Y DNA match both in Frederick County, Maryland in the 1700s. Is this important? I don’t know.
  • One of the Renner Y DNA test matches shows their ancestor, Johann Peter Renner in Oberschleichach, Hassberge, Bavaria and his father Adam Renner born in 1739 in Neuschleichach, Haßberge, Bavaria, Germany. His father, Johann Adam Renner was born in Oberschleichach in 1689. Given the Y DNA direct connection, this link between Koehler and Renner seems to reach back beyond the birth of Peter Koehler in 1724 in the Palatinate. This connection, 250 kilometers east of Ellerstadt and far from the Palatinate looks like it reaches back to or before the Thirty Years’ War.

I can’t help but think back to the devastation of the Thirty Years War in the early 1600s west of the Rhine in the Palatinate, and how many children were orphaned. Fighting continued throughout the 1600s and the 1700s weren’t exactly stable either. The French Revolution in the 1790s caused massive upheaval as well. Was an orphan child taken in and raised by another family? Did a Renner family take a Koehler child, or vice versa?

I would LOVE to test a Renner male from the Renner line that lived in Mutterstadt or nearby. I descend from Johann Peter Renner (1679-1746) there was well. If you’re a Renner male that fits this description, I have a DNA testing scholarship for you!

Were the paternal ancestors of both of these lines the same man prior to the adoption of surnames? Had their ancestors lived in this region since prehistory? The answer to this question is never going to be found in the records – and only shadows and hints exist in the Y and autosomal DNA of descendants.

Perhaps in time, enough other people will test both Y and autosomal DNA that we can refine our knowledge.

Until then, we can only piece tidbits together about how Johann Peter Koehler was related to the Renner family, and when.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

DNA Shows Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Philips Are My Relatives, But Are They My Ancestors? – 52 Ancestors #350

Posted on by
10

One of the requests by several people for 2022 article topics revolved in some way around solving challenges and showing my work.

In this case, I’m going to show both my work and the work of a newly-discovered cousin, Greg Simkins.

Let’s start by reminding you of something I said last week in Darcus Johnson (c1750-c1835) Chain Carrier – Say What??.

Darcus is reported in many trees to be the daughter of Peter Johnson (Johnston, Johnstone) and his wife Mary Polly Phillips. Peter reportedly lived in Pennsylvania and died in Allegheny County, PA. However, I am FAR from convinced that this couple was Darcus’s parents.

The distance from Shenandoah County, VA to Allegheny Co., PA is prohibitive for courting.

The Shenandoah County records need to be thoroughly researched with various Johnson families reconstructed. I’m hoping that perhaps someone has already done that and a Johnson family was living not terribly far from Jacob Dobkins father, John Dobkins. That would be the place to start.

Greg, Peter Johnson’s descendant through son James reached out to me.

Hi Roberta, I read your essay today on Dorcas Johnson. I wanted to write to you because I am a descendant of Dorcas’s brother James and have DNA matches to support our connection.

Clearly, I was very interested, but I learned long ago not to get too excited.

Then, Greg kindly shared his tree and DNA results with me. He was also generous enough to allow me to incorporate his information into this article. So yes, this article is possible entirely thanks to Greg.

I was guardedly excited about Greg’s communication, but I wasn’t prepared for the HUGE shock about to follow!

Whoa!!!

Greg has done his homework and stayed after school.

First, he tracked the descendants of Peter through all of his children, to present, where possible, and added them into his trees at the genealogy vendors. The vendors can do much better work for you with as much ammunition as you can provide.

Second, he has doggedly tracked matches at MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, Ancestry and GEDmatch that descend through Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips’s children. By doggedly, I mean he has spent hundreds to thousands of hours by his estimation – and based on what I see, I would certainly agree. In doing so, he pushed his own line back from his great-great-grandmother, Elizabeth Johnson, three generations to Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips – and proved its accuracy using DNA.

Altogether, Greg has identified almost 250 matches that descend from Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips, and mapped those segments across his chromosomes.

Greg made notes for each match by entering the number of matching cMs into their profile names as a suffix in his tree. For example, “David Johnson 10cM” instead of “David Johnson Jr.” or Sr.  That way, it’s easy to quickly see who is a match and by how much. Brilliant! I’m adopting that strategy. It won’t affect what other people see, because no living people are shown in trees.

Of course, DNA is on top of traditional genealogical research that we are all familiar with that connects people via deeds, wills, and other records.

Additionally, Greg records research information for individuals as a word document or pdf file and attaches them as documents to the person’s profile in his tree. His tree is searchable and shareable, so this means those resources are available to other people too. We want other researchers to find us and our records for EXACTLY this reason.

One thing to note is that if you are using Ancestry and use the Notes function on profiles, the notes don’t show to people with whom you share your tree, but links, sources and attached documents do.

Greg has included both “Other Sources” and “Web Links” below.

Click images to enlarge

For example, if I click on Greg’s link to Historic Pittsburg, I see the land grant location for Peter Johnson. Wow, this was unexpected.

Ok, I love maps and I’m hooked. Notice the names of the neighbors too. You’ll see Applegate again. Also, note that Thomas Applegate sold his patent to Richard Johnson. Remember the FAN club – friends and neighbors.

Ok, back to DNA for now.

The Children

Ancestors with large families are the best for finding present-day DNA matches. Of course, that’s because there are more candidates. More descendants and that means more people who might test someplace. This is also why you want to be sure to have your DNA in all 4 major DNA vendors, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, Ancestry, and 23andMe, plus GEDmatch.

This is a portion of Greg’s tree that includes the children of Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips. Note that two Johnson females married Dobkins men. I’ve always suspected that Margaret Johnson and Dorcas Johnson were sisters, but unless we could use mitochondrial DNA, or figure out who the parents of either Peter or Mary are, there’s no good way to prove it.

We’re gathering some very valuable evidence.

At Ancestry, Greg has 85 matches on his ThruLines for Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips, respectively.

  • Of course, Greg has the most matches for his own line through Peter’s son James Johnson (1752-1826) who married Elizabeth Lindsay and died in Lawrence County, IL: 35 matches.
  • Next is Margaret Johnson (1780-1833) who married Evan Dobkins in Dunmore County, VA, brother of my ancestor, Jacob Dobkins. She probably died in Cocke County, TN: 25 matches. Dorcas named one of her children Margaret and Margaret may have named one of her children Dorcas.
  • Solomon Johnson (1765-1843) married Frances Warne and stayed in Allegheny County, PA: 8 matches. Notice one of Peter’s neighbors was a Warner family. Dorcas named one of her children Solomon, a fairly unusual name.
  • Mary Johnson (1770-1833) married Garrett Wall Applegate and died in Harrison County, IN: 7 matches. The Applegates were Peter Johnson’s neighbors and Garrett served in the Revolutionary War in the 8th VA Regiment. Clearly, some of these settlers came from or spent time in Virginia.
  • Dorcas Johnson (c1750-c1835) married Jacob Dobkins in Dunmore County, VA and died in Claiborne County, TN: 5 matches.
  • Peter Johnson (1753-1840) married Eleanor “Nellie” Peter and died in Jefferson County, KY: 4 matches.
  • Richard D. Johnson (1752-1818) married Hannah Dungan and Elizabeth Nash: 2 matches.

Unfortunately, since most of those matches are between 7 and 20 cM, and Ancestry does not display shared matches under 20 cM, we can’t use Ancestry’s comparison tool to see if these people also match each other. That’s VERY unfortunate and extremely frustrating.

Greg matches more people from this line at MyHeritage, GEDmatch and FamilyTreeDNA, and thankfully, those vendors all three provide segment information AND shared match information.

Cousins Are Critical

While Greg, unfortunately, does not match me, he does match several of my cousins whose tests I manage.

Two of those cousins both descend from Darcus Johnson through her daughter Jenny Dobkins, through her daughter Elizabeth Campbell, through her daughter Rutha Dodson, through her sons John Y. Estes and Lazarus Estes, respectively.

Another descends through Jenny Dobkins son, William Newton Campbell for another 5 generations. These individuals all match on a 17 cM segment of Chromosome 20.

Other known cousins match Greg on different chromosomes.

Looking at their shared matches at FamilyTreeDNA, we find more Dobkins, Dodson and Campbell cousins, some that were previously unknown to me. One of those cousins also descends through William Newton Campbell’s daughter for another 4 generations and matches on the same segment of chromosome 20.

DNAPainter

Emails have been flying back and forth between me and Greg, each one with some piece of information that one of us has found that we want to be sure the other has too. Having research buddies is wonderful!

Then, Greg sent a screenshot of a portion of his chromosome 20 from DNAPainter that includes the DNA of the cousins mentioned above. I didn’t realize Greg was using DNAPainter. It’s an understatement to say I’m thrilled because DNAPainter does the cross-vendor triangulation work automatically for you.

Just look at all of those matches that carry this Johnson/Phillips segment of chromosome 20. Holy chimloda.

Greg also sent his DNAPainter sharing link, and it turns out that this is only a partial list, with one of my cousins highlighted, dead center in the list of Peter Johnson’s and Mary Polly Phillip’s descendants. Greg has even more not shown.

Trying Not to Jump to Conclusions

I’m trying so hard NOT to jump to conclusions, but this is just SOOOO EXCITING!

Little doubt remains that indeed, Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips are the parents of Dorcas Johnson who married Jacob Dobkins and also of Margaret Johnson who married Evan Dobkins. I’ve eliminated the possibility of other common ancestors, as much as possible, and verified that the descent is through multiple children. This particular segment on chromosome 20 reaches across multiple children’s lines.

I say little doubt remains, because some doubt does remain. It’s possible that perhaps Dorcas and her sister weren’t actually daughters of Peter Johnson, but maybe children of his brother? Peter was reported to have a brother James, a sheriff in Cumberland County, PA. but again, we lack proof. If Dorcas is Peter Johnson’s niece, her descendants would still be expected to match some of the descendants of Peter and his wife.

Also complicating matters is the fact that Greg also has a Campbell brick wall with a James Campbell born about 1790 who lived in Fayette County, PA, in the far northwest corner of the state. Therefore, DNA matches through Dorcas Johnson Dobkins’s daughters Jenny and Elizabeth who married Campbell brothers need to be verified through her children’s lines that do NOT descend through her daughters who married Campbell men.

Nagging Questions

I know, I’m being a spoilsport, but I still have questions that need answers.

For example, I still need to account for how the Johnson girls managed to get to Shenandoah County, VA (Dunmore County at that time) to meet the Dobkins boys, spend enough time there to court, and then marry Evan and Jacob nine months apart in 1775. Surely they were living there. Young women simply did not travel, especially not great distances, and marriages occurred in the bride’s home county. Yet, they married in Shenandoah County, VA, not in PA.

What About the Records?

We are by no means done. In fact, I’ve just begun. I have some catching up to do. Greg has focused on Peter Johnson and Mary Polly Phillips in Pennsylvania. I need to focus on Virginia.

Of course, the next challenge is actual records.

What exists and what doesn’t? FamilySearch provides a list for Dunmore County, here, and Shenandoah, here.

Was Peter Johnson ever in Dunmore County that became Shenandoah County, VA, and if so when and where? If not, how the heck did his two daughters marry the Dobkins boys in 1775? Was there another Johnson man in Dunmore during that time? Was it James?

Where was Peter Johnson in 1775 when Dorcas and Margaret were marrying? Can we positively account for him in Pennsylvania or elsewhere?

Some information has been published about Peter Johnson, but those critical years are unaccounted for.

It appears that the Virginia Archives has a copy of the 1774-1776 rent rolls for Dunmore County, but they aren’t online. That’s the best place to start. Fingers crossed for one Peter Johnson living right beside John Dobkins, Jacob’s father. Now THAT would convince me.

Stay tuned!

Note – If you’d like to view Greg’s tree at Ancestry, its name is “MyHeritage Tree Simkins” and you can find it by searching for Maude Gertrude Wilson born in 1876 in Logan County, Illinois, died January 27, 1950 in Ramsey County, Minnesota, and married Harry A. Simkins. Elizabeth Ann Johnson (1830-1874) is Maude’s grandmother.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Darcus Johnson (c1750–c1835), Chain Carrier – Say What??- 52 Ancestors #349

Posted on by
9

The People’s History of Claiborne County, Tennessee tells us that, “Darcus Johnson was the daughter of Peter Johnson and Mary “Polly” Phillips, was born in 1750 in the area of Augusta County, Virginia that became Dunmore County, then Shenandoah. Her father might have come from Pennsylvania. She died in 1831 in Claiborne County, TN.”

This may or may not be entirely accurate.

Bill Nevils, long-time family history researcher provided a great deal of information about his Claiborne County ancestors, some of which, fortunately, are mine too. Unfortunately, he’s gone now and I can’t ask him about his sources. I don’t know what data might be available now that was not available to him at that time.

First Things First

There is some question about the spelling of Dorcas, Dorcus or Darcus’s first name. It’s listed as Darcus in the Shenandoah County (transcribed) Marriage records. In the 1852 Greene County, TN will of Andrew Dobkins (wife Joanna), Darcus’s probable son, he listed a daughter named Darcas in his will.

I’ve also seen her name spelled Dorcas, several times, but never in an original document. That’s one of the problems, there is only one known contemporaneous document that is positively her and lists her name – her marriage. And even that misspells Jacob’s surname. So who knows.

I’m spelling her name in all three ways because I don’t know which one to choose. That way, no matter who is googling in the future, they’ll find this article😊.

Darcus married Jacob Dobkins, who I wrote about here, here and here.

The Shenandoah Co., VA marriage records don’t give a date for the marriage of Jacob Dobkins (spelled Dobbins) and Darcus Johnson, but they appear to have been transcribed in entry order. The marriage above theirs took place on September 6, 1775, and the following date, 7 couples later is October 2, 1775. I can’t help but wonder if “no date” means “ditto”, but regardless, they were married sometime between those two dates.

Jacob and Darcus were actually married in Dunmore County that became and was renamed on February 1, 1778, as Shenando, now Shenandoah. The Dunmore records have been incorporated into the Shenandoah County records since Dunmore wasn’t split, just renamed.

Parents

Darcus is reported in many trees to be the daughter of Peter Johnson (Johnston, Johnstone) and his wife Mary Polly Phillips. Peter reportedly lived in Pennsylvania and died in Allegheny County, PA. However, I am FAR from convinced that this couple was Darcus’s parents.

The distance from Shenandoah County, VA to Allegheny Co., PA is prohibitive for courting.

The Shenandoah County records need to be thoroughly researched with various Johnson families reconstructed. I’m hoping that perhaps someone has already done that and a Johnson family was living not terribly far from Jacob Dobkins father, John Dobkins. That would be the place to start.

What DO We Know?

We know that Jacob Dobkins was born about 1751 based on his Revolutionary War Pension application in 1832 where he said he was 81 years old. If Dorcas was 20 when she was married, then she would have been born about 1755, but later records place her birth about 1750 or perhaps even somewhat earlier.

In 1773, Jacob appears on the Fincastle Co., VA tax list as “not found.” Fincastle County was the parent of Dunmore which was the parent of Shenandoah. Not found means he had likely moved on. It’s somewhat unusual for a single man to be living alone, but we have no reason to think he was married before Darcus.

By 1774, Jacob was likely serving in the all-volunteer militia as Lord Dunmore’s War had commenced and one Jacob Dobler was listed as defending the frontier in a Fincastle Militia unit. Interestingly, so was one Patrick Johnston.

In January 1775, Jacob’s brother, Evan, married Margaret Johnson. Were Margaret and Darcas related? Sisters perhaps? We’ll likely never know, well, unless someone who descends from Margaret through all females to the current generation takes a full sequence mitochondrial DNA test. Darcus’s descendants have tested and their mitochondrial DNA would match, or nearly so, if Margaret and Darcus are sisters. If this applies to you and you descend through all females from Margaret (but a tester can be male in the current generation), please let me know because I have a DNA testing scholarship for you! We could solve a mystery together.

In May of 1775, Evin, also spelled Evan, Jacob, and another brother, Reuben, appear on a militia list of Dunmore County.

Children

Of course, children began arriving soon after their marriage. Unfortunately, we only have a reconstructed list of children based on proximity, inferences and some legal and other documents. Unfortunately, the 1835 deed where the “Heirs of Jacob Dobkins” deeded his property is recorded in the missing Claiborne County Deed Book L, and the index entry only says “The Heirs of Jacob Dobkins.” I swear, every deed I “really need” is in that AWOL book.

  • Assuming Andrew Dobkins was the child of Jacob and Darcus, and I know assume is a dangerous word in genealogy, he was born about 1775 according to the 1850 Greene Co., TN census. He did name a daughter Darcus, and Jacob Dobkins did live in this area about the time Andrew would have been marrying. Alternatively, Andrew could have been the child of a different Dobkins man, probably one of Jacob’s brothers.
  • Darcus’s first proven child, Elizabeth was born about 1776 and died sometime after 1850. Elizabeth would marry George Campbell, a near neighbor in Hawkins County, Tennessee. They named their daughter born about 1799 Dorcus/Dorcas.
  • John Dobkins was born about 1777, lived his adult life in Claiborne County, TN, and reportedly married Elizabeth Shaw. His children are unknown and I cannot confirm his birth year estimate. He first appeared in the court notes in 1808.
  • Another possible daughter named Dorcas Dobkins fits here. The Murphy family Bible record shows her birth as May 29, 1780. She married Malachi Murphy in 1796, according to the Bible, although neither a birth or marriage location is recorded. She could also have been the daughter of one of the other Dobkins men, brothers of Jacob, or someone else. I’m not convinced that Dorcas is the child of Jacob and Dorcas Dobkins, in part because of her birth date. Let’s set this aside for the moment.

There was a gap between John and the next child. Jacob was serving in the military far from Shenandoah County. Darcas nearly lost her young husband. Bullets ripped through his clothes during the Battle of Pickaway. If Jacob hadn’t survived, the course of history, at least my history and Darcas’s, would have been forever altered.

  • Jacob Dobkins Jr. was reportedly born about 1782. There has been a lot of confusion surrounding this man, and he is listed as having married Johanna Woolsey. However, Andrew Dobkins married Johanna Woolsey and was listed as early as 1819 in Greene County, TN where he died in 1852 with a will. Jacob Dobkins Jr., spent most of his adult life in Claiborne County, TN, first appeared in the records in 1803 and was on the tax list of 1833 as Jacob Jr. when Jacob Dobkins Sr. was still alive. He was still noted in records in 1839 and 1842, and probably died between then and 1850 where he is still listed on the agricultural census but NOT in the regular census.
  • Reuben Dobkins was born in 1783 in Shenandoah County, married Mary Polly, last name unknown, and died in Claiborne County in 1823. Some people show this Reuben as Jacob Dobkins’ brother, not his son. Reuben first appears in the Claiborne County court notes in 1815.
  • Margaret, known as Peggy Dobkins was born about 1785, married Elijah Jones, and died in March of 1852. They were divorced before 1844 when he remarried, according to his widow’s pension application. Peggy named her daughter born in 1811 Dorcas.
  • Solomon Dobkins was born in 1787 in what would become Tennessee, married Elizabeth, surname unknown, and died in 1852 in Kaufman County, TX.
  • The youngest daughter, Jane, known as Jenny Dobkins was born between 1778 and 1780, probably in Virginia, and died between 1850 and 1860 in Claiborne County, TN. She married John Campbell, believed to be the brother of George Campbell who married her sister.
  • George Dobkins was born between 1782 and 1788 in Virginia, married Nancy Parks, and died after 1840 in Claiborne County, TN.

This may be only a partial list of children.

Inferred History

Most of what we know about Darcus Johnson Dobkins is extrapolated from the life of her husband and children. We’re taking it on faith that the woman who bore his children was the same woman Jacob married back in Virginia, and that she had not died along the way and he remarried. That’s probably a pretty safe bet at least through Margaret born about 1785 because she named a child Dorcas.

Darcus’s early married life was anything but settled.

In 1775, Jacob enlisted in the local militia in Shenandoah County and participated in Lord Dunmore’s War, a conflict between Virginia, which extended through present-day Kentucky and west without boundary, and the Shawnee and Mingo nations. In 1780, his unit was mustered out, but by then, Jacob was already in Kentucky, serving under the command of George Rogers Clark. Jacob marched from near Louisville to near Cincinnati, pursuing Shawnee Indians. For that matter, we don’t know if Jacob ever had a horse during these years. We do know the men were on foot most if not all of the time.

Jacob Dobkins had enlisted in the militia to fight specifically in the Revolutionary War in May of 1779 where he was already living – Harrod’s Fort that eventually became Harrodsburg, Kentucky, and served for at least two years. If you are counting on your 9 fingers, this means that if Jacob left before he enlisted and was already in Kentucky, he could not have fathered Dorcas Dobkins if she was born in May of 1780. Of course, sometimes birth years were recorded incorrectly, but this suggests that Dorcas Dobkins who married Malachi Murphy was not the child of Jacob and Dorcas Dobkins. Maybe she was named in honor of our Dorcas.

Why was Jacob Donkins already at Fort Harrod in 1779? Was he on a reconnaissance mission, thinking about moving west, when he needed to enlist because the war on the frontier had heated up? One John Dobbin filed for land on North Elkhorn Creek in 1778. John could have been his father or brother. Jacob would not have taken his wife on that type of expedition. By this time, she had small children at home and was probably pregnant again. The land claim was sold by 1780.

Jacob spent 1780 in Harrods Fort and Shawnee Springs, now in the state of Kentucky but then the western frontier of Virginia. Later that fall, he fought in the Battle of Pickaway in Ohio where the bullets flew fast and furious, shreddinging his clothes into tatters. It’s amazing that he escaped with his life. Many didn’t.

Home Again

In August of 1781, Jacob finally headed back to his bride in Shenandoah County who was waiting with at least two and possibly as many as four children. I’m using the word “waiting” loosely here, because she was certainly not sitting around waiting. Dorcas was doing the work of two people. Hers as the wife and mother, plus the tasks Jacob would have been doing too. Her tasks would have included childcare, cooking, cleaning, and doing everything by hand. Covering his responsibilities meant taking care of any animals, plowing, planting, weeding, harvesting, and obtaining food, generally by hunting – all with babies. I don’t know how she did it, but I hope fervently she had family nearby to help. I mean, think about it. How could you even plow, assuming you HAD a plow and an ox, with two babies in tow? And when you got done with all that – you still had all the inside traditional women’s work to do.

If she was pregnant when Jacob left, she gave birth without him nearby, and if the child died, she also buried her baby without her husband’s support.

Fortunately, Jacob did make it home and in 1782, 1783, and 1784 is recorded on the Shenandoah County, VA tax lists.

Their next child was born in 1783 as well.

The 1783 tax lists provided additional information and the family is shown with 8 whites, which would mean that they had 6 children or other people lived with them.

We don’t know exactly where they lived but we do know they were closely associated with the Holeman family. One of Jacob’s brothers married a Holeman woman and the men served in the militia together. The Holeman and Dobkins families both received land grants and settled along Holeman’s Creek near present-day Forestville, VA.

Holeman’s Creek runs between the two red arrows before dumping into the North Shenandoah River.

However, Jacob had caught an itch while he was away. And that itch was to move west.

Westward Ho

Jacob would have passed through Martin’s Station, located in Lee County, VA, just east of the Cumberland Gap on his way to and from Kentucky. That’s not far from where Jacob and Darcus would eventually settle permanently, but first, they tried a few other locations. Tennessee wasn’t yet a state, nor was that area open for settlement.

In 1785, the couple was not listed on the Virginia tax lists. The family had likely packed up and already started down the Great Wagon Road that eventually morphed into I81.

Jacob may have come and gone between two locations because in 1785, a Washington County, North Carolina document subpoenaed Jacob Dobkins of Shenandoah County to testify.

By Iamvered – I, Esemono, drew this map myself., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3874104

It appears that Jacob and Dorcas moved to the State of Franklin and likely became embroiled in early politics. The State of Franklin was not a state, but it wanted to be, seceding from North Carolina in 1784. Eventually, the area involved in the State of Franklin became the easternmost counties of Tennessee, but then, it was the wild west – the fringe of the frontier.

By 1786, the residents were negotiating with the state of North Carolina for readmission. “Oops, we’re sorry and had a moment.”

The State of Franklin had become a no man’s land meaning they weren’t a part of any government and had no rights or protections. Residents couldn’t file for land, for example, or vote, or hold court. The two sides were literally at war with one another. They had a mess on their hands and eventually, most people just wanted order to be restored.

By Iamvered – I, Iamvered, drew this map myself., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3868073

In 1787 and 1788, Jacob and his brothers were living in Washington County, NC, the part that had been the state of Franklin and would become the counties of Washington, Sullivan, Greene, and Hawkins in eastern Tennessee after Tennessee was admitted to the union in 1796. Jacob bought land in Washington County in 1788, so apparently intended to stay.

In 1789, Jacob’s name appeared on a petition along with a group of men who were considered to be living on Indian land not purchased by the US government. They petitioned the NC government, begging for help.

Jacob may have given up and moved back to Shenandoah County, VA because his name appears there on the 1790 reconstructed census with 8 whites. However, the reconstructed census used tax lists, and we already know he was listed in 1783 with 8 people, so his whereabouts in 1790 are unclear.

You might have noticed that children continued to arrive during this time. Was Darcus exasperated beyond her limits? Someplace between 6 and 8 children and constant threats to their safety? Did she perhaps give Jacob a wifely ultimatum? I have to wonder, because even the staunchest of pioneer wives could certainly have reached their limit under those circumstances. Sometimes situations change, and something that at one time seemed like a really good idea, in reality, wasn’t. This turmoil wasn’t short-lived either. Darcus was now approaching 15 years of upheaval. Her entire married life.

Many families did move back to a safer and less stressful environment. Holeman’s Creek probably looked quite welcoming!

That arrangement, if they did move back, did not last long.

Retry – Back Again

In 1792, the family is living in newly formed Jefferson County where Jacob sued John Sevier – yes – the governor. Sevier had been involved with the State of Franklin too, and Jacob had been called to testify in a lawsuit against Sevier in 1785. Perhaps whatever was going on in 1785 was still unresolved in 1792.

I can just hear the gossip and drama, even across 230 years. Everyone but everyone would have been talking about that and assuredly had an opinion – probably a strong one. Tongues would have been wagging, that’s for sure!

The church was not only the religious center, but also the social center of the community, especially for women. I don’t know what church they attended in Virginia, but in later years in Tennessee, they were assuredly Baptists.

By 1792, Dorcas would have been about 40 years old. We don’t know of any children born this late, but there certainly could have been some that we aren’t aware of or that did not survive. Or, Dorcas could have been slightly older than we know. George was reportedly born between 1782 and 1788. If Dorcas was 43-45 when he was born, and he was born in 1788, that puts her birth possibly as early as 1743.

Jacob bought land again, this time in the area known as “The Territory of the United States South of the River Ohio” on Bent Creek in Hawkins County, near the main road between the ford of the Holston River and Bull’s Gap over the mountain.

Clearly, this part of the country, destined to become Tennessee, was having either birthing pains or an identity crisis, but that didn’t stop the settlers from arriving, clearing land, and staying.

By this time, Dorcas’s eldest children were of age to begin marrying. Elizabeth Dobkins married George Campbell and Jenny Dobkins married his (presumed) brother John Campbell, sons of Charles Campbell who lived near the Holston River.

In 1793 Jacob bought land in Jefferson County, and in 1796, Jacob sold at least some of that land. Around this time, the family likely migrated, probably with the Reverend Tidence Lane to what would become Claiborne County. We know that Jacob and Darcas were established in Claiborne County by October 1801 because Jacob is mentioned in the first court notes establishing the county. An entire group, including Jacob’s two Campbell sons-in-law, appear to have moved and settled together.

This was the last move for Jacob and Darcas. They packed up one last time, pulled out in a heavily loaded wagon, settled in Claiborne County, and stayed.

Now roughly 50 years old, I’d guess Darcas was VERY tired of packing everything into a wagon and moving. Their entire married life had been punctuated by instability. First, a war, then moving to “the west,” the State of Franklin, then not a state, then Washington County, NC, then the Territory South of the River Ohio, then Washington Co., TN, then Hawkins County, then Jefferson County, then finally Claiborne county which means they likely lived in Grainger County before Claiborne was formed. Oh yes, fighting Indians, clearing land and suing the governor sprinkled in there for good measure. I’m exhausted just thinking about this.

Darcus must have heaved a huge sigh of relief. By this time, they had older children and adult sons to help clear land and fell trees. They bought a tract large enough to entice all of their children to move with them. That was a brilliant strategy because that seems to be exactly what happened. Maybe that was what enticed Dorcas to move just one more time, into the peaceful little valley on the north side of Wallen Mountain.

Jacob and Dorcas built a log cabin, and their children built cabins nearby.

Amazingly, their cabin still stood into the late 1900s. I wrote about discovering the cabin, here.

The War of 1812

However, Darcus would be forced to deal with war once again, this time the War of 1812. Many local men joined or were drafted to fight, including her adult son, Solomon Dobkins, who was a Captain and fought in the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in 1814. Her son-in-law, Elijah Jones, fought alongside her son in Alabama.

Many Claiborne County men died, both of wounds and illness. Most men didn’t even have horses and walked to war, supplying their own armaments too.

Darcus certainly knew how close she came to losing Jacob all those years ago. I’m sure she wondered if she would lose Solomon and Elijah. She would have stepped up to help her daughter and daughter-in-law while the men were gone.

Court Martial

All was not well with the Dobkins family in Claiborne County. Some records are difficult to find and don’t show up for another generation or two. Solomon Dobkins died in 1852 in Fannin County, Texas. His son, Jake (Jacob) Dobkins was living in Gainesville, Cooke Co., Texas on July 5, 1856 when he made application for “anything the government may have to offer him as the heir of his father, Solomon Dobkins.” He states that his father served in the Creek Indian War in 1812 and 1813 under General Jackson. He further states that his father died in 1852 in Fannin County Texas.

Any benefits from the government to this heir were denied because Solomon Dobkins was Court Martialed and Cashiered.

Cashiering is a demotion as a result of a court martial. I always wondered why there was no pension application for Solomon. This answers that question.

Everyone would have known, and apparently, no one spoke of it. I can’t help but wonder what happened, when, and where. A court martial is very severe.

This situation must have caused Dorcas both pain and embarrassment.

I continue to find Solomon in the Claiborne County court records in positions of responsibility, so whatever happened seems to have been largely forgotten, although he was prosecuted by the state at one time.

A Fireside Chat Heralds Changes

Jacob and Darcus probably sat beside the fireplace one night, or maybe on the porch in rocking chairs, and had a talk. I’m guessing that they had many serious talks over the years. Whether to leave, or not. Whether to return, or not. Whether to move back, or not. Whether to move on, or not.

This talk was a bit different. They were aging, approaching 65 which was beyond “retirement age” back then. Well, I guess you never really got to “retire,” but you did get to stop paying taxes at some point when you were either infirm or old. That’s what retirement looked like in that era. You worked until you couldn’t anymore, then you died or lived with your children.

Jacob and Dorcas decided to begin distributing their land. In 1814, about the time Solomon and Elijah returned from the war, Jacob sold land to two sons-in-law, Elijah Jones and George Campbell. Nothing like a wake-up call to realize tomorrow simply isn’t guaranteed.

In about 1817, Jacob suffered a disabling shoulder and collarbone break in some type of accident. He stated in court in 1832 when he applied for his pension that he had not been able to attend court since that time and suffered greatly from “phrumatic pains.” This also means that Dorcas was probably caring for Jacob and once again had to pick up more chores, even though she assuredly had aches and pains herself by this time. Thankfully, she had children and grandchildren nearby to help.

In 1823, their (presumed) son, Reuben died. I wish we had more information. Was he ill or was there an accident? Without antibiotics, any farm injury could quickly become septic, and something like a ruptured appendix meant sure and certain death. Was Reuben actually their son, or was that Reuben Jacob’s brother?

The 1830s

The 1830 Claiborne County census shows columns for ages, with Jacob Dobkins listed as 70-80 and the female living in the household as 80-90. Of course, it’s easy to mismark a column or misunderstand an age, but if Dorcas was in fact 80-90 in 1830, that means she was actually born between 1740-1750. If she was born in 1750, she would have been slightly older than Jacob. That might also explain why we find no children born after roughly 1788 and possibly no later than 1782.

The 1830s are fuzzy for Dorcas. We know that Jacob died in 1835, but we don’t know if she died before or after Jacob. Some show her death in 1831, but I don’t know why.

There is, however, one very intriguing record.

Say What?

This March 27, 1833 survey is quite interesting.

Dorcas Dobkins is listed as a chain carrier. Say what?

Yes, a chain carrier, shown just beneath the drawing as, “Sworn Chainers.”

I’m not sure who else this could have been, unless it was a granddaughter. The problem is, other than the Dorcas Dobkins born in 1808 and who lived in Greene County, I don’t know who else this could have been, other than Dorcas, the wife of Jacob. It’s also fair to say that I only have two known children for Darcus’s son John, and no documented children for Reuben who died in 1823, assuming he was their son, nor for son Jacob who died or disappeared from the records between 1840-1850. Of course, there are questions about the identity of some of those men, and some of them may not have been old enough to have daughters serving as chain carriers in 1833.

Neither sons Solomon nor George have known children named Dorcas.

This survey is for Lorenzo Dow Dobkins, the son of John Dobkins. His brother was also named John, the name of the other chain carrier, so it’s possible that he had a sister by the name of Dorcas. Or, his grandmother wanted to help out.

Personally, I’m voting for an irreverent grandmother who was itching to get out of the house on a beautiful spring day.

Let’s eavesdrop…

“We don’t have another person as the chain carrier. We can’t do the survey today.”

Dorcas: “Oh yes you do!”

“Who?”

Dorcas, pointing to herself: “Me.”

With a slight smile, “Maam, with all respect, you can’t do that.”

Dorcas, more determined than ever: “Hrummph, watch me!” as she wipes her hands, takes off her apron and pins up a stray hair or two.

Men, looking at each other, shrugging, “OK.”

I think this is the first time I’ve ever seen a female chain carrier in a record. A chain carrier needed to be of age and able to testify as to the fairness and accuracy of the survey process if called upon. Not only that, chains were heavy and the terrain was sometimes rough.

I can’t help but wonder if Dorcas was a chain carrier because she wanted to keep her eye on what was occurring. After all, this survey did abut her son John’s land. If that was the case, she was clearly not dead at this time. And being a chain carrier, in spite of what someone might have thought, wasn’t likely to kill her😊.

We know from Jacob’s 1832 pension application and testimony that he was disabled and therefore he would not have been able to be a chain carrier. Dorcas would have been at least in her late 70s if not her 80s.

Jacob’s Pension Payments

Jacob’s pension payment records don’t say anything about Dorcas. One record, from 1835, shows the list of pensioners and does not indicate a death date for Jacob, although there are death dates in 1833 for others. That means that either he hadn’t died when this list was compiled in 1835, or the death date wasn’t entered. Since the legislation was to compile a list of pensioners being paid, it’s very unlikely that he died before 1835, but not impossible. He was also on the Claiborne County tax list in 1833.

A second record indicates the last pension payment was made in September of 1835. I was unclear whether that payment could have been to Dorcas as his surviving spouse, or, it would only have been paid to Jacob directly.

As it turns out, widows were not eligible to receive payments until an act of July 4, 1836. This confirms that Jacob was last paid, himself, in September of 1835. He died sometime between September of 1835 and the next payment date in March of 1836.

All we can surmise from this is that Dorcas did not apply for his pension beginning in 1836, so my presumption would be that she had died before July of 1836.

In 1835, Jacob’s heirs quitclaimed his land to Betsy Campbell, their daughter who had married George Campbell. Of course, that’s the deed in the book that’s missing, so I’ll never know if Dorcas signed, or who all of their heirs were.

I don’t find a woman of Dorcas’s age living with one of her children in the 1840 census, so I’d feel safe in saying she had died by then, and most likely by the end of 1835 when the land was conveyed.

Burial

For all that I don’t know, what I do know is where Jacob and Dorcas are buried. Of course, they established a graveyard on their land, behind the house and up the hill towards the Powell River. According to cousin Bill Nevils, when we visited some years ago, the family lore states that Jacob is buried beneath the huge tree in the center. That would make sense.

Jacob would have spared that tree when he cleared the land. Maybe he said to Dorcas one day, “That’s where we’ll be buried, with our kin, looking over our land.”

Maybe Dorcas figured if he established a burying ground, they were finally someplace to stay.

Jacob and Dorcas certainly weren’t the first to be buried there three decades after they purchased the land. Nor were they the last.

No stone marks their resting place, save for the beautiful tree of course.

  • I don’t know where all of Dorcas’s children are buried, but I’d wager that Elizabeth, called Betsy, is buried right there. Her son Barney wound up owning the land and last I knew, his descendants still do.
  • Son John is probably buried in the cemetery too, assuming he didn’t move away. He died sometime after 1834.
  • Darcus probably buried Reuben, throwing clods of dirt on top of his casket as her final act of motherhood. That had to be an incredibly sad day, but he was always nearby, up on the hill.
  • Peggy joined her mother in March of 1852. In the 1850 census, she was living with an unknown family. As a divorced elderly woman, she may have been supported by the court and placed with a family who would care for her. We don’t know when she divorced, but it was before 1844 when Elijah Jones remarried, according to his widow’s pension application after his death. I wonder if Peggy was able to retain any of her parent’s land that Jacob and Darcus sold to her husband, Elijah, in 1814. Divorce was virtually unheard of at that time and required the approval of the state assembly. It’s unknown when the divorce occurred, but it certainly could have been prior to Dorcas’s death.
  • Jane known as Jenny died between 1850 and 1860 and is either buried with her mother or on the Campbell land across the ridge.
  • George died in 1837, just a couple of years after Jacob, and would rest near his mother as well.
  • Jacob Jr. died sometime between 1840 and 1850 and likely rests in the family cemetery.
  • Solomon made his way to Texas, and of course, Andrew died in Greene County.

Of the 9 children believed to be hers, 7 are either buried with her or nearby. That idea of purchasing a large tract of land to share seemed to have worked. Solomon, while he did die in Texas, didn’t leave until after his mother had passed on. At least she didn’t have to wave goodbye to that wagon carrying her son and 11 of her grandchildren.

This beautiful, peaceful cemetery is populated with Dorcas’s descendants. The first person buried there would probably have been either Dorcas’s child or grandchild in one of the many unmarked graves.

Some of her 35 known grandchildren are buried here as well, as are a dozen generations of her descendants scattered across the sundrenched field.

DNA

I have more than 100 autosomal DNA matches with Dorcas’s descendants through 5 of her children. There is no question that she’s my ancestor.

However, what I really need is to discover more about her parents. Ancestry’s ThruLines only reach back 7 generations before you hit a hard stop, meaning Ancestry does not calculate ThruLines beyond 7 generations. Ancestry also does not provide segment information, so you have little to work with.

To find her parents, I need to be able to track specific segments that I’ve been able to confirm to Jacob Dobkins and Darcus Johnson back to people who have Johnson ancestors in their tree, hopefully in a timeframe that could be Dorcas’s parents.

Using segments from vendors who provide segment information, meaning FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, 23andMe, and GedMatch, I’ve identified several segments that I know descend from Jacob and Dorcas and painted them at DNAPainter.

I can’t associate segments with (my unknown) ancestors any further back than either Jacob or Dorcas without matching segments from people who descend from their parents, respectively.

What I DESPERATELY need is the ability to use these segments to focus on all of my matches and their trees that triangulate on these specific paternal segments assigned to Jacob and Dorcas. I need the ability to work with the trees of people who carry those segments but aren’t descended from Jacob and Dorcas in order to unravel the identity of their ancestors.

That feature isn’t offered anyplace, at least not yet. I’m hopeful though.

However, that’s not the end of the DNA resources. We can utilize mitochondrial DNA that is passed from women to their children – but only women pass it on. That means both men and women can test today. Mitochondrial DNA testing represents a special DNA unique to their direct matrilineal line.

Dorcas’s Mitochondrial DNA

I’m fortunate enough to have Dorcas’s mitochondrial DNA results through two different daughters of Jane “Jenny” Dobkins. They match exactly, which is a good thing because I want to be able to depend on an exact match to be able to help identify other people’s trees that may hold the key to Dorcas’s parents.

Our testers have 9 full sequence exact matches at FamilyTreeDNA, the only vendor that does full mitochondrial DNA testing.

Of those matches, some have listed an EKA, Earliest Known Ancestor, from this line, some have provided trees, some both, and some neither.

Tracking the information back through their trees I’ve discovered:

  • One EKA is Matilda Holt 1830-1889 from Monroe Co., TN. Matilda Holt married James Willis in Claiborne County. Her mother was Rutha Campbell whose mother was Jane Dobkins, daughter of Dorcas.

Now we have three of Dorcas’s descendants.

  • Another match shows their EKA as Margaret Ida Hamilton born in 1877 in Plattsmouth, Nebraska, died in 1947, and married John Lincoln Brown 1864-1942. She was the daughter of Margaret Adaline Jones (1849-1910) whose mother was Susan Caroline Terrell born about 1820 in Obion County, TN and married Paul Guy Jones (1823-1970). I lost the trail there.
  • A third match descends from the wife of Elias Harrison (1769-1836) who died in 1836 in Claiborne County, TN. With that same location, this match is VERY interesting. Elias Harrison’s wife is purported to be Martha Hedgepith or Hedgepath (1772-1820), although documentation points elsewhere. One record suggests Martha was the daughter of Richard Beasley whose will was probated on October 5, 1800, in Stokes County, NC leaving his estate to his wife Martha but named a daughter, Patty Harrison. Martha and Patsy are common names for each other. The first two daughters of Elias and Martha were reported to have been born in NC. On March 3, 1792, one Jonathan Harrison sold 100 acres on Marshal’s Creek, a branch of Big River in Stokes County to Richard Beasley. You can read more about this couple here and here.

The fascinating thing about this record is that given the dates and locations, the wife of Elias Harrison is clearly not a daughter of Jacob Dobkins and Dorcas Johnson because one of Elias and Martha’s children was born in 1791 and another in 1792. Therefore, Martha’s connection to Dorcas reaches back into earlier generations.

The next logical step would be to research Richard Beasley’s wife who would have contributed Martha’s mitochondrial DNA through her mother’s line. A quick search shows that Richard Beasley was born in Essex County about 1730, reportedly married in Caroline County, and was in Stokes by 1790 where he died in 1800.

I do wonder if there is a reason that these families wound up in the same area of Claiborne County – did they previously know each other?

Haplogroup

Darcas’s mitochondrial haplogroup is H2a1.

Her Matches Map shows some matches in the UK, but many clustered in Sweden and Finland. You might also note that only one exact (red) match is shown on the map meaning that 8 people didn’t enter their geographic information. Just think how much more useful this tool could be with tree and location information included.

On the FamilyTreeDNA dashboard, at the bottom under “Other Tools,” you will find both “Advanced Matches” and “Public Haplotrees.”

Advanced matches provide you with the ability to see if any of your mitochondrial DNA matches also match you autosomally, assuming both people have taken both tests.

The public haplotree link allows you to view the countries where your haplogroup is found.

I selected “mtDNA Haplotree”, then “View by Country,” then haplogroup H, then entered the branch name. The requested haplogroup is displayed with the grey bar along with how many times a specific country has been selected by testers. You can mouse over each flag or click on the three dots at right to view the country report.

Just as a note, the “23” means that H2a1 has 23 subgroups, and Darcus’s DNA is not in any of them, just H2a1.

The takeaway with this report is that the deep ancestry of Darcus Johnson is found in Scandinavia, in Sweden, and Finland. How far back is deep? We don’t know exactly. Her more immediate ancestors’ most likely source of origin would be from the British Isles, or Scandinavia.

Haplogroup information alone may or may not be helpful genealogically – only time will tell. It can rule out a great number of possibilities – like Native American and other world regions in this case.

However, the Beasley line information is the most promising. Perhaps a proven daughter of Richard Beasley has a descendant through all females who will DNA test to either confirm or lay to rest that possibility.

Additionally, I’ll be contacting the matches who have not provided either earliest ancestor or pedigree information. Who knows what gems might still be hiding there.

Summary

Our trail has taken us far afield from Dorcas herself. She would be amazed or maybe amused to know that we are searching for the information that was familiar to her from birth. She would also be amazed to think we could connect her with her ancestors using something called DNA that her descendants carry inside of them, from her. That would have seemed a lot like magic, but then so would computers, phones, and automobiles.

Ironic, with all of our technology, we still have to search for what our ancestors knew.

Like, for example, the names of their children, grandchildren, and where they went. Who were her parents and where did they live? Where did they attend church and what were their religious beliefs? What was their life like?

When did Darcus die? What did she like to do? Did she sit on the porch of the old Dobkins home, when it was brand spanking new, and make quilts for her family? I like to think of her that way.

Darcus learned to be self-sufficient and independent early in her marriage when Jacob was gone not for days, weeks, or months, but for years during the Revolutionary War. She probably had no idea if he was alive or dead. She simply did what needed to be done, and prayed that one day he would ride or walk up the path to their house – wherever that was.

Given her resiliency, it’s no surprise then that the last record Darcus may have left us was a surprising one documenting a very non-traditional role for a southern pioneer woman – that of a chain carrier.

What a legacy she left, even though much of her life is revealed peeking through the shadows of her husband, children, and history that was unfolding around her.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Identify Your Ancestors – Follow Nested Ancestral Segments

Posted on by
15

I don’t think that we actively think about our DNA segments as nested ancestors, like Russian Matryoshka dolls, but they are.

That’s exactly why segment information is critical for genealogists. Every segment, and every portion of a segment, has an incredibly important history. In fact, you could say that the further back in time we can track a segment, the more important it becomes.

Let’s see how to unveil nested segments. I’ll use my chromosome 20 as an example because it’s a smaller chromosome. But first, let’s start with my pedigree chart.

Pedigree

Click images to enlarge.

Before we talk about nested segments that originated with specific ancestors, it’s important to take a look at the closest portion of my maternal pedigree chart. My DNA segments came from and through these people. I’ll be working with the first 5 generations, beginning with my mother as generation #1.

Generation 1 – Parents

In the first generation, we receive a copy of each chromosome from each parent. I have a copy of chromosome 20 from my mother and a copy from my father.

At FamilyTreeDNA, you can see that I match my mother on the entire tested region of each chromosome.

Therefore, the entire length of each of my chromosomes is assigned to both mother and father because I received a copy from each parent. I’m fortunate that my mother’s DNA was able to be tested before she passed away.

We see that each copy of chromosome 20 is a total of 110.20 cM long with 17,695 SNPs.

Of course, my mother inherited the DNA on her chromosome 20 from multiple ancestors whose DNA combined in her parents, a portion of which was inherited by my mother. Mom received one chromosome from each of her parents.

I inherited only one copy of each chromosome (In this case, chromosome 20) from Mom, so the DNA of her two parents was divided and recombined so that I inherited a portion of my maternal chromosome 20 from both of my maternal grandparents.

Identifying Maternal and Paternal Matches

Associating matches with your maternal or paternal side is easy at FamilyTreeDNA because their Family Finder matching does it automatically for you if you upload (or create) a tree and link matches that you can identify to their proper place in your tree.

FamilyTreeDNA then uses that matching segment information from known, identified relatives in your tree to place people who match you both on at least one significant-sized segment in the correct maternal, paternal, (or both) buckets. That’s triangulation, and it happens automatically. All you have to do is click on the Maternal tab to view your triangulated maternal matches. As you can see, I have 1432 matches identified as maternal. 

Some other DNA testing companies and third-party tools provide segment information and various types of triangulation information, but they aren’t automated for your entire match list like Family Finder matching at FamilyTreeDNA.

You can read about triangulation in action at MyHeritage, here, 23andMe, here, GEDmatch, here, and DNAPainter, which we’ll use, here. Genetic Affairs AutoKinship tool incorporates triangulation, as does their AutoSegment Triangulation Cluster Tool at GEDmatch. I’ve compiled a reference resource for triangulation, here.

Every DNA testing vendor has people in their database that haven’t tested anyplace else. Your best strategy for finding nested segments and identifying matches to specific ancestors is to test at or transfer your DNA file to every vendor plus GEDmatch where people who test at Ancestry sometimes upload for matching. Ancestry does not provide segment information or a chromosome browser so you’ll sometimes find Ancestry testers have uploaded to GEDmatch, FamilyTreeDNA  or MyHeritage where segment information is readily available. I’ve created step-by-step download/upload instructions for all vendors, here.

Generation 2 – Grandparents

In the second generation, meaning that of my grandparents, I inherited portions of my maternal and paternal grandmother’s and grandfather’s chromosomes.

My maternal and paternal chromosomes can be divided into two pieces or groups each, one for each grandparent.

Using DNAPainter, we can see my father’s chromosome 20 on top and my mother’s on the bottom. I have previously identified segments assigned to specific ancestors which are represented by different colors on these chromosomes. You can read more about how to use DNAPainter, here.

We can divide the DNA inherited from each parent into the DNA inherited from each grandparent based on the trees of people we match. If we test cousins from each side, assigning segments maternally or paternally becomes much, much easier. That’s exactly why I’ve tested several.

For the rest of this article, I’m focusing only on my mother’s side because the concepts and methods are the same regardless of whether you’re working on your maternal side or your paternal side.

Using DNAPainter, I expanded my mother’s chromosome 20 in order to see all of the people I’ve painted on my mother’s side.

DNAPainter allows us to paint matching segments from multiple testing vendors and assign them to specific ancestors as we identify common ancestors with our matches.

Based on these matches, I’ve divided these maternal matches into two categories:

  • Maternal grandmother, meaning my mother’s mother, bracketed in red boxes
  • Maternal grandfather, meaning my mother’s father, bracketed in black boxes.

The text and arrows in these graphics refer to the colors of the brackets/boxes, and NOT the colors of the segments beside people’s names. For example, if you look at the large black box at far right, you’ll see several people, with their matching segments identified by multiple colored bars. The different colored segments (bars) mean I’ve associated the match with different ancestors in multiple or various levels of generations.

Generation 3 – Great-grandparents

Within those maternal and paternal grandparent segments, more nested information is available.

The black Ferverda grandfather segments are further divided into black, from Hiram Ferverda, and gold from his wife Eva Miller. The same concept applies to the red grandmother segments which are now divided into red representing Nora Kirsch and purple representing Curtis Lore, her husband.

While I have only been able to assign the first four segments (at the top) to one person/ancestor, there’s an entire group of matches who share the grouping of segments at right, in gold, descended through Eva Miller. The Miller line is Brethren and Mennonite with lots of testers, so this is a common pattern in my DNA matches.

Eva Miller, the gold ancestor, has two parents, Margaret Elizabeth Lentz and John David Miller, so her segments would come from those two sides.

Generation 4 and 5 – Fuschia Segment

I was able to track the segment shown in fuschia indicated by the blue arrow to Jacob Lentz and his wife Fredericka Ruhle, German immigrant ancestors. Other people in this same match (triangulation) group descend from Margaret Elizabeth Lentz and John David Miller – but that fuschia match is the one that shows us where that segment originated. This allows us to assign that entire gold/blue bracketed set of segments to a specific ancestor or ancestral couple because they triangulate, meaning they all match me and each other.

Therefore, all of the segments that match with the fuschia segment also track back to Jacob Lentz and Fredericka Ruhle, or to their ancestors. We would need people who descend from Jacob’s parents and/or Fredericka’s parents to determine the origins of that segment.

In other words, we know all of these people share a common source of that segment, even if we don’t yet know exactly who that common ancestor was or when they lived. That’s what the process of tracking back discovers.

To be very clear, I received that segment through Jacob and Fredericka, but some of those matches who I have not been able to associate with either Jacob or Fredericka may descend from either Jacob or Fredericka’s ancestors, not Jacob and Fredericka themselves. Connecting the dots between Jacob/Fredericka and their ancestors may be enlightening as to the even older source of that segment.

Let’s take a look at nested segments on my pedigree chart.

Nested Pedigree

Click to enlarge.

You can see the progression of nesting on my pedigree chart, using the same colors for the brackets/boxes. The black Ferverda box at the grandparent level encompasses the entire paternal side of my mother’s ancestry, and the red includes her mother’s entire side. This is identical to the DNAPainter graphic, just expressed on my pedigree chart instead of my chromosome 20.

Then the black gets broken into smaller nested segments of black, gold and fuschia, while the red gets broken into red and purple.

If I had more matches that could be assigned to ancestors, I would have even more nested levels. Of course, if I was using all of my chromosomes, not just 20, I would be able to go back further as well.

You can see that as we move further back in time, the bracketed areas assigned to each color become smaller and smaller, as do the actual segments as viewed on my DNAPainter chromosomes.

Segments Get Progressively Smaller

You can see in the pedigree chart and segment painting above that the segments we inherit from specific ancestors divide over time. As we move further and further back in our tree, the segments inherited from any specific ancestor get smaller and smaller too.

Dr. Paul Maier in the MyOrigins 3.0 White Paper provides this informative graphic that shows the reduction in segments and the number of ancestors whose DNA we carry reaching back in time.

I refer to this as a porcupine chart.

Eventually, we inherit no segments from red ancestors, and the pieces of DNA that we inherit from the distant blue ancestors become so small and fragmented that they cannot be positively identified as coming from a specific ancestor when compared to and matched with other people. That’s why vendors don’t show small segment matches, although different vendors utilize different segment thresholds.

The debate about how small is too small continues, but the answer is not simply segment size alone. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.

As segments become smaller, the probability, or chances that we match another person by chance (IBC) increases. Proof that someone shares a specific ancestor, especially when dealing with increasingly smaller segments is a function of multiple factors, such as tree completeness for both people, shared matches, parental match confirmation, and more. I wrote about What Constitutes Proof, here.

In the Family Finder Matching White Paper, Dr. Maier provides this chart reflecting IBD (Identical By Descent) and IBC (Identical By Chance) segments and the associated false positivity rate. That means how likely you are to match someone on a segment of that size by chance and NOT because you both share the DNA from a common ancestor.

I wrote Concepts: Identical by Descent, State, Population and Chance to help you better understand how this works.

In the chart below, I’ve combined the generations, relationships, # of ancestors, assuming no duplicates, birth year range based on an approximate 30-year generation, percent of DNA assuming exactly half of each ancestor’s DNA descends in each generation (which we know isn’t exactly accurate), and the average amount of total inherited cMs using that same assumption.

Note that beginning with the 7th generation, on average, we can expect to inherit less than 1% of the DNA of an ancestor, or approximately 55 total cM which may be inherited in multiple segments.

The amount of actual cMs inherited in each generation can vary widely and explains why, beginning with third cousins, some people won’t share DNA from a common ancestor above the various vendor matching thresholds. Yet, other cousins several generations removed will match. Inheritance is random.

Parallel Inheritance

In order to match someone else descended from that 11th generation ancestor, BOTH you AND your match will need to have inherited the exact SAME DNA segment, across 11 generations EACH in order to match. This means that 11 transmission events for each person will need to have taken place in parallel with that identical segment being passed from parent to child in each line. For 22 rolls of the genetic dice in a row, the same segment gets selected to be passed on.

You can see why we all need to work to prove that distant matches are valid.

The further back in time we work, the more factors we must take into consideration, and the more confirming proof is needed that a match with another individual is a result of a shared ancestor.

Having said that, shared distant matches ARE the key to breaking through brick-wall ancestors. We just need to be sure we are chasing the real deal and not a red herring.

Exciting Possibilities

The most exciting possibility is that some segments are actually passed intact for several generations, meaning those segments don’t divide into segments too small for matching.

For example, the 22 cM fuschia segment that tracks through generations 4 and 5 to Jacob Lentz and Fredericka Ruhle has been passed either intact or nearly intact to all of those people who stack up and match each other and me on that segment. 22 cM is definitely NOT a small segment and we know that it descended from either Jacob or Fredericka, or perhaps combined segments from each. In any case, if someone from the Lentz line in Germany tested and matched me on that segment (and by inference, the rest of these people too), we would know that segment descended to me from Jacob Lentz – or at least the part we match on if we don’t match on the entire segment.

This is exactly what nested segments are…breadcrumbs to ancestors.

Part of that 22cM segment could be descended from Jacob and part from Fredericka. Then of Jacob’s portion, for example, pieces could descend from both his mother and father.

This is why we track individual segments back in time to discern their origin.

The Promise of the Future

The promise of the future is when a group of other people triangulate on a reasonably sized segment AND know where it came from. When we match that triangulation group, their identified segment may well help break down our brick walls because we match all of them on that same segment.

It is exactly this technique that has helped me identify a Womack segment on my paternal line. I still haven’t identified our common ancestor, but I have confirmed that the Womacks and my Moore/Rice family interacted as neighbors 8 generations ago and likely settled together in Amelia county, migrating from eastern Virginia. In time, perhaps I’ll be able to identify the common Womack ancestor and the link into either my Moore or Rice lines.

I’m hoping for a similar breakthrough on my mother’s side for Philip Jacob Miller’s wife, Magdalena, 7 generations back in my tree. We know Magdalena was Brethren and where they lived when they took up housekeeping. We don’t know who her parents were. However, there are thousands of Miller descendants, so it’s possible that eventually, we will be able to break down that brick wall by using nested segments – ours and people who descend from Magdalena’s siblings, aunts, and uncles.

Whoever those people were, at least some of their descendants will likely match me and/or my cousins on at least one nested Miller segment that will be the same segment identified to their ancestors.

Genealogy is a team sport and solving puzzles using nested segments requires that someone out there is working on identifying triangulated segments that track to their common ancestors – which will be my ancestors too. I have my fingers crossed that someone is working on that triangulation group and I find them or they find me. Of course, I’m working to triangulate and identify my segments to specific ancestors – hoping for a meeting in the middle – that much-desired bridge to the past.

By the time you’ve run out of other records, nested segments are your last chance to identify those elusive ancestors. 

Do you have genealogical brick walls that nested segments could solve?

__________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here. You can also subscribe to receive emails when I publish articles by clicking the “Follow” button at www.DNAexplain.com.

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends.

You Can Help Out and It’s Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

2021 Favorite Articles

Posted on by
8

It’s that time of the year again when we welcome the next year.

2021 was markedly different than anything that came before. (Is that ever an understatement!)

Maybe you had more time for genealogy and spent time researching!

So, what did we read in 2021? Which of my blog articles were the most popular?

In reverse order, beginning with number 10, we have:

This timeless article published in 2015 explains how to calculate the amount of any specific heritage you carry based on your ancestors.

Just something fun that’s like your regular pedigree chart, except color coded locations instead of ancestors. Here’s mine

The Autosegment Triangulation Cluster Tool is a brand new tool introduced in October 2021. Created by Genetic Affairs for GEDmatch, this tool combines autoclusters and triangulation.

Many people don’t realize that we actually don’t inherit exactly 25% of our DNA from each grandparent, nor why.

This enlightening article co-authored with statistician Philip Gammon explains how this works, and why it affects all of your matches.

Who doesn’t love learning about ancient DNA and the messages it conveys. Does your Y or mitochondrial DNA match any of these burials? Take a look. You might be surprised.

How can you tell if you are full or half siblings with another person? You might think this is a really straightforward question with an easy answer, but it isn’t. And trust me, if you EVER find yourself in a position of needing to know, you really need to know urgently.

Using simple match, it’s easy to figure how much of your ancestor’s DNA you “should” have, but that’s now how inheritance actually works. This article explains why and shows different inheritance scenarios.

That 28 day timer has expired, but the article can still be useful in terms of educating yourself. This should also be read in conjunction with Ancestry Retreats, by Judy Russell.

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard someone say that their ethnicity percentages were “wrong,” I’d be a rich woman, living in a villa in sun-drenched Tuscany😊

This extremely popular article has either been first or second every year since it was published. Ethnicity is both exciting and perplexing.

As genealogists, the first thing we need to do is to calculate what, according to our genealogy, we would expect those percentages to be. Of course, we also need to factor in the fact that we don’t inherit exactly the same amount of DNA from each grandparent. I explain how I calculated my “expected” percentages of ethnicity based on my known tree. That’s the best place to start.

Please note that I am no longer updating the vendor comparison charts in the article. Some vendors no longer release updates to the entire database at the same time, and some “tweak” results periodically without making an announcement. You’ll need to compare your own results at the different vendors at the same point in time to avoid comparing apples and oranges.

The #1 Article for 2021 is…

  1. Proving Native American Ancestry Using DNA

This article has either been first (7 times) or second (twice) for 9 years running. Now you know why I chose this topic for my new book, DNA for Native American Genealogy.

If you’re searching for your Native American ancestry, I’ve provided step-by-step instructions, both with and without some percentage of Native showing in your autosomal DNA percentages.

Make 2022 a Great Year!

Here’s wishing you the best in 2022. I hope your brick walls cave. What are you doing to help that along? Do you have a strategy in mind?

__________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here. You can also subscribe to receive emails when I publish articles by clicking the “Follow” button at www.DNAexplain.com.

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends.

Help Out, Please

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

DNA for Native American Genealogy – Hot Off the Press!

Posted on by
41

Drum roll please…my new book, DNA for Native American Genealogy, was just released today, published by Genealogical.com.

I’m so excited! I expected publication around the holidays. What a pleasant surprise.

This 190-page book has been a labor of love, almost a year in the making. There’s a lot.

  • Vendor Tools – The book incorporates information about how to make the best use of the autosomal DNA tools offered by all 4 of the major testing vendors; FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, Ancestry, and 23andMe.
  • Chromosome Painting – I’ve detailed how to use DNAPainter to identify which ancestor(s) your Native heritage descends from by painting your population/ethnicity segments provided by FamilyTreeDNA and 23andMe.
  • Y and Mitochondrial DNA – I’ve described how and when to utilize the important Y and mitochondrial DNA tests, for you and other family members.
  • Maps – Everyone wants to know about ancient DNA. I’ve included ancient DNA information complete with maps of ancient DNA sites by major Native haplogroups, gathered from many academic papers, as well as mapped contemporary DNA locations.
  • Haplogroups – Locations in the Americas, by haplogroup, where individual haplogroups and subgroups are found. Some haplogroups are regional in nature. If you happen to have one of these haplogroups, that’s a BIG HINT about where your ancestor lived.
  • Tribes – Want to know, by tribe, which haplogroups have been identified? Got you covered there too.
  • Checklist – I’ve provided a checklist type of roadmap for you to follow, along with an extensive glossary.
  • Questions – I’ve answered lots of frequently asked questions. For example – what about joining a tribe? I’ve explained how tribes work in the US and Canada, complete with links for relevant forms and further information.

But wait, there’s more…

New Revelations!!!

There is scientific evidence suggesting that two haplogroups not previously identified as Native are actually found in very low frequencies in the Native population. Not only do I describe these haplogroups, but I provide their locations on a map.

I hope other people will test and come forward with similar results in these same haplogroups to further solidify this finding.

It’s important to understand the criteria required for including these haplogroups as (potentially) Native. In general, they:

  • Must be found multiple times outside of a family group
  • Must be unexplained by any other scenario
  • Must be well-documented both genetically as well as using traditional genealogical records
  • Must be otherwise absent in the surrounding populations

This part of the research for the book was absolutely fascinating to me.

Description

Here’s the book description at Genealogical.com:

DNA for Native American Genealogy is the first book to offer detailed information and advice specifically aimed at family historians interested in fleshing out their Native American family tree through DNA testing.

Figuring out how to incorporate DNA testing into your Native American genealogy research can be difficult and daunting. What types of DNA tests are available, and which vendors offer them? What other tools are available? How is Native American DNA determined or recognized in your DNA? What information about your Native American ancestors can DNA testing uncover? This book addresses those questions and much more.

Included are step-by-step instructions, with illustrations, on how to use DNA testing at the four major DNA testing companies to further your genealogy and confirm or identify your Native American ancestors. Among the many other topics covered are the following:

    • Tribes in the United States and First Nations in Canada
    • Ethnicity
    • Chromosome painting
    • Population Genetics and how ethnicity is assigned
    • Genetic groups and communities
    • Y DNA paternal direct line male testing for you and your family members
    • Mitochondrial DNA maternal direct line testing for you and your family members
    • Autosomal DNA matching and ethnicity comparisons
    • Creating a DNA pedigree chart
    • Native American haplogroups, by region and tribe
    • Ancient and contemporary Native American DNA

Special features include numerous charts and maps; a roadmap and checklist giving you clear instructions on how to proceed; and a glossary to help you decipher the technical language associated with DNA testing.

Purchase the Book and Participate

I’ve included answers to questions that I’ve received repeatedly for many years about Native American heritage and DNA. Why Native DNA might show in your DNA, why it might not – along with alternate ways to seek that information.

You can order DNA for Native American Genealogy, here.

For customers in Canada and outside the US, you can use the Amazon link, here, to reduce the high shipping/customs costs.

I hope you’ll use the information in the book to determine the appropriate tests for your situation and fully utilize the tools available to genealogists today to either confirm those family rumors, put them to rest – or maybe discover a previously unknown Native ancestor.

Please feel free to share this article with anyone who might be interested.

_____________________________________________________________

Disclosure

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Sitting Bull’s Hair Confirms Relationship With Great-Grandson

Posted on by
15

Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake, known as the legendary Lakota warrior and leader, Sitting Bull, was born about 1831 and was killed in 1890. You’ll probably remember him for his victory over Custer and his troops in 1876 at the Battle of Little Big Horn, known as the Battle of Greasy Grass to the Native people and as Custer’s Last Stand colloquially.

By Orlando Scott Goff – Heritage Auctions, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=27530348

Pictured here, Sitting Bull was photographed in 1881.

After Sitting Bull’s murder, his scalp lock, a braided length of hair used to hold his feather in place was cut from his body as a souvenir of the grizzly event. In 1896, the scalp lock along with his leggings were donated to and held by the Smithsonian Museum for more than a century before being returned to his family in 2007. Sitting Bull’s great-grandson, Ernie LaPointe, now in his 70s, along with his three sisters are Sitting Bull’s closest living relatives.

The family needed to unquestionably prove a familial connection to be allowed to make decisions about Sitting Bull’s gravesite and remains. Genetic analysis was employed to augment traditional genealogical records. According to Ernie, “over the years, many people have tried to question the relationship that I and my sisters have to Sitting Bull.”

After the return of Sitting Bull’s scalp lock to Ernie LaPointe, Professor Eske Willerslev, one of the pioneers in ancient DNA, contacted Ernie and offered to assist the family by analyzing the hair sample.

By Von Bern – Sitting Bull family portrait, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49894969

Original text from the back of the above image:

“4 generations of Sitting Bull: Sitting Bull, two wives, their daughter, her daughter, her baby” “Copy from Mrs. Edward M. Johnson collection Spiritwood, N. Dak.” Sitting Bull and family 1882 at Ft Randall rear L-R Good Feather Woman (sister), Walks Looking (daughter) front L-R Her Holy Door (mother), Sitting Bull, Many Horses (daughter) with her son, Courting a Woman

LaPointe and his sisters descend from Sitting Bull through their mother, through one of Sitting Bull’s three daughters, so neither Y nor mitochondrial DNA were options to prove that they were the great-grandchildren of Sitting Bull. Generally, neither Y nor mitochondrial DNA establish exact recent relationships, but confirm or disprove lineage relationships.

DNA From Sitting Bull’s Hair

In 2007, obtaining autosomal DNA from hair was virtually impossible, even from contemporary hair, let alone hair that’s more than a century old. However, today, the technology involved has improved. Additionally, it’s also possible that some of the DNA from Sitting Bull’s skin or skin flakes were held within the scalp lock itself.

The fact that the hair had been treated with arsenic for preservation while in the possession of the Smithsonian made DNA analysis even more difficult. Unlike traditional contemporary DNA tests, a full autosomal sequence was not able to be obtained. Small fragments of autosomal DNA from the braid were able to be pieced together well enough to compare to Ernie LaPointe and other Lakota people, showing that Ernie and his family match Sitting Bull’s hair more closely than other Lakota.

The academic paper published by Willerslev, with other researchers and authors including LaPointe provides the following abstract:

Only a small portion of the braid was utilized for the analysis. The rest was burned in a spiritual ceremony. You can read the scientific paper, here.

This analysis of Sitting Bull’s hair opens the door for the remains in the two potential burial sites to be evaluated to see if they match the DNA retrieved from the scalp lock – enabling the family to rebury Sitting Bull in a location of their choice.

You can read additional coverage, here, here, here, and here.

Establishing a Relationship

Sitting Bull’s DNA is considered ancient DNA because it’s not contemporary, and it was degraded. But the definition of ancient needs to be put in context.

Sitting Bull’s “ancient DNA” is not the same thing as “ancient DNA” from thousands of years ago. In part, because we know positively that the DNA from thousands of years ago will not match anyone genealogically today – although it may match people at a population level (or by chance) with small fragments of DNA. We know the identity of Sitting Bull, who, on the other hand, would be expected to match close family members and other more distantly related members of the tribe.

Ernie and his sisters are great-grandchildren of Sitting Bull, so they would be expected to share about 887 cM of DNA in total, ranging from 485 cM to 1486 cM.

In an endogamous population, one could be expected to share even more total DNA, but that additional DNA would likely be in smaller fragments, not contiguous segments.

Great-Grandchildren Matches

For example, two great-grandchildren match their great-grandmother on 902 cM and 751 cM of DNA, respectively, with a longest contiguous block of 130 cM and 72 cM.

Another pair matches a great-grandfather at 1051 cM and 970 cM, with longest blocks of 220 cM and 141 cM.

A person would be expected to share about 12.5% of their autosomal DNA with a given great-grandparent. I wrote about how much we can expect to inherit, on average, from any ancestor, here.

In terms of the types of DNA matches that we are used to for genealogy, a great-grandparent would be one of our closest matches. Other relationships that could share about the same amount of DNA include a great-aunt/uncle/niece or nephew, a half-aunt/uncle/niece or nephew, a first cousin, half first cousin, first cousin once removed, or a great-grandchild.

Courtesy of DNAPainter

Since Sitting Bull’s DNA was extracted from hair, and we know unquestionably where that hair had been since 1896 when it was donated to the Smithsonian, we can eliminate some of those relationships. Furthermore, the genetic analysis supports the genealogical records.

What About Hair, DNA, and Your Genealogy?

I’m sure you’re wondering how this applies to you and your genealogy.

Like so many other people, I have a hair WITH a follicle belonging to my father and letters written by my paternal grandfather in envelopes that I hope he licked to seal. I tried several years ago, at different times, unsuccessfully. to have both of their DNA extracted to use for genealogy. Not only were the endeavors unsuccessful, but those attempts were also VERY expensive.

IT’S NOT SOUP YET!

I know how desperately we want to utilize those items for our genealogy, but the technology still is not ripe yet. Not then and not now. At least, not for regular consumers.

Remember that this extraction took a very specialized ancient DNA lab and many highly skilled individuals. It also took a total of 14 years. The DNA obtained was highly fragmented and had to be reassembled, with lots of pieces still missing. Then it had to be compared to currently living individuals. The ancient DNA autosomal file, like other autosomal forensic files, would NOT pass quality control at any of the DNA processing companies today, where the required QA pass rate is in the ballpark of 98%.

This type of ancient DNA extraction has only been successfully done using autosomal DNA once before, in 2015 on the remains of someone who died in 1916. While Y and mitochondrial DNA has been used to rule out, or *not* rule out direct patrilineal or matrilineal relationships in other burials, highly degraded autosomal DNA is much more difficult to utilize to establish relationships. The relationships must be close in nature so that enough of the genome can be reconstructed to infer a close familial relationship

I realize that more than one company has entered this space over the past several years, and you might also notice that they have either exited said space or are have not achieved any measure of reproducible success. Do NOT chance a valuable irreplaceable sample to any company just yet. This type of processing is not a standard offering – but ongoing research opens the door for more improvement in the future. I still have my fingers crossed.

If you are interested in preserving your items, such as hair, teeth, hairbrushes, electric razors, etc. for future analysis, be sure to keep them in paper, preferably acid-free (archival) paper, NOT plastic, and in a relatively temperature-controlled environment. By that, I mean NOT in the attic and NOT in a humid basement. Someplace in the house, comfortable for regular humans, and not sealed in a ziplock baggie. Don’t touch or handle them either.

Test Older Relatives NOW!

If you can test your oldest relatives, do it now. Grandparents, great-grandparents, aunts, uncles, great-aunts/uncles. All of your oldest family members. Don’t wait.

FamilyTreeDNA performs the test you order and is the only DNA testing company that archives the DNA sample for 25 years. The remaining DNA is available to order upgrades or new products as technology advances.

That’s exactly how and why some younger people have great-grandparent DNA available for matching today, even if their great-grandparents have walked on to the other side and joined Sitting Bull.

————————————————————————————————————-

Disclosure

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

Books

Genealogy Research

Genetic Affairs – New AutoKinship Tool Predicts Relationships and Builds Genetic Trees

Posted on by
15

Genetic Affairs recently introduced a new tool – AutoKinship. Evert-Jan (EJ) Blom, the developer was kind enough to step through these results with me to assure that I’m explaining things correctly. Thanks EJ!

AutoKinship automatically predicts family trees and pathways that you may be related to your matches based on how they match you and each other. Not only is this important for genealogists trying to piece our family tree together, it’s indispensable for anyone searching for unknown ancestors, beginning with parents and walking right on up the tree for the closest several generations.

Right now, the automated AutoKinship tool is limited to 23andMe profiles, but will also work as a standalone tool where users can fill in the shared DNA information for their matches. MyHeritage, 23andMe, and GEDMatch provide centiMorgan information about how your matches also match each other. Here’s a tutorial for the standalone tool.

Unfortunately, Ancestry does not provide their customers with segment information, but fortunately, you can upload a copy of your Ancestry DNA file to MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA or GEDmatch, for free. You’ll find step-by-step instructions, here.

Automated AutoKinship Tool

After signing into to your Genetic Affairs account, assuming you have already set up your 23andMe profile at Genetic Affairs, click on “Run AutoKinship for 23andMe.”

I manage multiple profiles at 23andMe, so I need to click on “Profiles.”

Select the correct profile if you manage multiple kits at 23andMe.

You’ll see your various options that can be run for your 23andMe kit.

Select AutoKinship

If you select AutoKinship, you automatically receive an AutoCluster because AutoKinship is built on the AutoCluster functionality.

Make your selections. I recommend leaving these settings at the default, at least initially.

The default of 250 cM excludes your closest matches. You don’t want your closest matches because they will be members of too many clustered groups.

In my initial run, I made the mistake of changing the 50 cM lower threshold to 20 cM because I wanted more matches to be included. Unfortunately, the effect this had on my results was that my largest two clusters did not produce trees.

Hint: EJ states that the software tool works from the smallest cluster to the largest when producing trees. If you notice that your largest cluster, which is usually the first one displayed in the upper left hand corner (orange here), does not have associated trees, or some people are missing, that’s your clue that the AutoKinship ran out of server time to process and you need to raise either the minimum match threshold, in this case, 50 cM, or the minimum amount of DNA shared between your matches to each other, in this case, 10 cM.

You can also select between shared matches and triangulated groups. I selected shared matches, but I may well rerun this report with triangulated groups because that provides me with a great deal of even more useful information.

When you’re ready, click on the big green “you can’t miss it” Perform AutoCluster Analysis button.

Make a cup of coffee. Your report is processing. If your email doesn’t arrive, you can click on the little envelope in your Genetic Affairs profile and the report can be downloaded to your computer directly from that link.

Your Report Arrives!

You’ll receive a zip file in the email that you MUST SAVE TO YOUR COMPUTER to work correctly. You’ll see these files, but you can’t use them yet.

First, you MUST EXTRACT THE FILES from the zip file. My zip file displays the names of the file inside of the zipped file, but they are not extracted.

You must right click, as shown above, and then click on “Extract All” on a PC. Not sure what MAC users need to do but I think it autoextracts. If you click on some of the files in this article and they don’t load correctly, or say they aren’t present, that likely means:

  • You either forgot to save the file in the email to your computer
  • Or you failed to do the extract

The bottom two files are your normal AutoCluster visual html file and the same information in an excel file.

Click on the AutoCluster html file to activate.

Personally, I love watching the matches all fly into place in their clusters. This html file is going to be our home base, the file we’ll be operating from for all of the functions.

I have a total of 23 interrelated autoclusters. The question is, how are we all related to each other. You can read my article about AutoClusters and how they work here.

People who are members of more than one cluster are shown with those little grey squares signifying that they match people in two clusters, not just one cluster.

For example, one cluster might be my grandparents, but the second cluster might be my maternal great-great-grandfather. Membership in both clusters tells me that my matching DNA with those people in the second cluster probably descends from my great-great-grandfather. Some of the DNA matches in the first cluster assuredly also descend from that man, but some of them may descend from other related ancestors, like my maternal grandmother. It’s our job as genealogists to discern the connections, but the entire purpose of AutoKinship is to make that process much easier.

We are going to focus on the first few clusters to see what kinds of information Genetic Affairs can produce about these clusters. Notice that the first person in row 1 is related to the orange cluster, the green cluster, the purple and the brown clusters. That’s important information about that person, and also about the interrelationship of those clusters themselves and the ancestors they represent.

Remember, to be included in a grandparent cluster, that person’s DNA segment(s) must have descended from other ancestors, represented in other clusters. So you can expect one person to be found potentially in multiple clusters that serve to trace those common ancestors (and associated segments) back in time.

AutoKinship

The AutoKinship portion of this tool creates hypothetical trees based on relationships of you to each person in the cluster, and to the other cluster members to each other.

If you’re thinking triangulation, you’re right. I selected matches, not triangulated groups which is also an option. Some people do triangulate, but some people may match each other on different segments. Right now, it’s a jumble of hints, but we’ll sort some of this out.

If you scroll down in your html file, below your cluster, and below the explanation (which you should read,) you’ll see the AutoKinship verbiage.

I want to do a quick shout-out to Brit Nicholson, the statistician that works with EJ on probabilities of relationships for this tool and describes his methodology, here.

AutoKinship Table

You’ll see the AutoKinship Table that includes a link for each cluster that could be assembled into a potential tree.

Click on the cluster you wish to view.

In my case, clusters 1 through 5 are closely related to each other based on the common members in each cluster. I selected cluster 1.

Your most probable tree for that cluster will be displayed.

I’m fortunate that I recognized three of my third cousins. AutoKinship constructed a probable genetic pedigree, but I’ve overlayed what I know to be the correct pedigree.

With the exception of one person, this AutoKinship tree is accurate to the best of my knowledge. A slot for Elizabeth, the mother of William George Estes and the daughter of Joel is missing. I probably know why. I match two of my cousins with a higher than expected amount of DNA which means that I’m shown “closer” in genetic distance that I normally would be for that relationship level.

In one case, Charles and I share multiple ancestors. In the other case, I don’t know why I match Everett on so much more DNA than his brother Carl or our other cousin, Vianna. Regardless, I do.

In one other instance, there’s a half-relationship that throws a wrench into the tree. I know that, but it’s very difficult to factor half-relationships into tree building without prior knowledge.

If you continue to scroll down, you’ll see multiple options for trees for this cluster.

DNA Matrix

Below that, you’ll see a wonderful downloadable DNA matrix of how everyone in the cluster shares DNA with everyone else in the cluster.

At this point, exit from cluster one and return to your original cluster file that shows your cluster matrix.

Beneath the AutoKinship table, you’ll see AutoCluster Cluster Information.

AutoCluster Cluster Information

Click on any one of those people. I’m selecting Everett because I know how we are related.

Voila, a new cluster configuration forms.

I can see all of the people I match in common with Everett in each cluster. This tells me two things:

  • Which clusters are related to this line. In particular, the orange cluster, green, red, purple, brown, magenta and dark grey clusters. If you mouse over each cell in the cluster, more information is provided.
  • The little helix in each cell tells you that those two people triangulate with each other and the tester. How cool is that?!!

Note that you can display this cluster in 4 different ways.

Return again to your main autocluster page and scroll down once again.

This just might be my favorite part.

Chromosome Segments

You can import chromosome segment information into DNAPainter – instructions here.

What you’ll see next is the clusters painted on your chromosomes. I love this!!!

Of course, Genetic Affairs can’t tell you which side is maternal and which is paternal. You’ll need to do that yourself after you import into DNAPainter.

Just beneath this painting, you’ll see a chart titled Chromosome segment statistics per AutoCluster cluster.

I’m only showing the first couple as an example.

Click on one of links. I’m selecting cluster 1.

Cluster 1 has painted portions of each chromosome, but I’m only displaying chromosomes 1-7 here.

Following the painting is a visual display of each overlap region by cluster, by overlapping segment on each chromosome.

You can clearly see where these segments overlap with each other!

Surname Enrichment

If you select the surname enrichment option, you’ll receive two additional features in your report.

Please note that I ran this option separately at a different time, so the cluster members and clusters themselves do not necessarily correlate with the examples above.

The Enriched Surname section of your report shows surnames in common found between the matches in each specific cluster.

Keep in mind, this does NOT just mean surnames in common with YOUR surname list, assuming you’ve entered your surnames at 23andMe. (If you haven’t please do so now.) 23andMe does not support user trees, so your entered surnames are all that can be utilized when comparing information from your matches.

These are surnames that are found more than once among your matches. I’ve framed the ones in red that I recognize as being found in my tree, and I’ve framed the ones in black that I recognize as being “married in.” In other words, some people may descend through children of my ancestors who married people with that black bracketed surname.

I can tell you immediately, based on these surnames, that the first cluster is the cluster formed around my great-great-grandparents, Joel Vannoy and his wife, Phebe Crumley.

Cluster 6 is less evident, but Anderson might be connected to the Vannoy family. I’ll need to view the common matches in that cluster at 23andMe and look for additional clues.

Cluster 9 is immediately evident too. Ferverda is Hiram Ferverda, my great-grandfather and Eva Miller is his wife.

Cluster 10 is probably the Miller line as well. Indiana is a location in this case, not a surname.

Click on “Detailed Surname Table” for more information, as shown below.

Each group of people that shares any surname is shown in a table together. In this case, these three people, who I happen to know are brothers, all share these surnames. The surnames they also share with me are shown with red boxes. The other surnames are shared only with each other and no one else in the cluster. I know they aren’t shared with me because I know my tree.

While your initial reaction may be that this isn’t terribly useful, it is actually a HUGE gift. Especially if you find a cluster you aren’t familiar with.

Mystery Cluster

A mystery cluster is an opportunity to break down a brick wall. This report tells you which people to view on your match list who share that surname. My first step is to use that list and see who I match in common with each person at 23andMe.

My relatives in common with my Cluster 10 matches include my close Ferverda cousins who descend from our common Miller ancestor, plus a few Miller cousins. This confirms that this cluster does indeed originate in the Miller line.

Not everyone in that cluster shares the surname Miller. That might be a good thing.

I have a long-standing brick wall with Magdalena (surname unknown) who was married to Philip Jacob Miller, my 5-times great-grandparents. My cousins through that couple, at my same generation, would be about 6th cousins.

These matches are matching me at the approximate 4th cousin level or more distantly, so it’s possible that at least some of these matches COULD be through Magdalena’s family. In that case, I certainly would not recognize the common surnames. Therefore, it’s imperative that I chase these leads. I can also adjust the matching threshold to obtain more matches, hopefully, in this cluster, and run the report again.

Are you in love with Autokinship and its associated features yet? I am!

Summary

Wow is all I can say. There’s enough in this one report to keep me busy for days, especially since 23andMe does not support a tree function in the traditional genealogical sense.

I have several matches that I have absolutely no idea how they are related to me. This helps a great deal and allows to me systematically approach tree-building or identifying ancestors.

You can see if 23andMe has predicted these relationships in the same way, but other than messaging your matches, or finding them at another vendor who does support a tree, there’s no way to know if either 23andMe’s autogenerated tree or the Genetic Affairs trees are accurate.

What Genetic Affairs provides that 23andMe does not is composite information in one place – as a group in a cluster. You don’t have to figure out who matches whom one by one and create your own matrix. (Yes, I used to do that.)

You can also import the Genetic Affairs information into DNAPainter to make further use of these segments. I’ve written about using DNAPainter, here.

Once you’ve identified how one person in any cluster connects, you’ve found your lever to unlock the identity of the ancestors whose DNA is represented in that particular cluster – and an important clue/link to associated clusters as well.

If you don’t recognize these cousins at 23andMe, look for common surnames on your DNA Relatives match list, or see if a known close relative on your maternal or paternal side matches these people found in a cluster. Click on each match at 23andMe to see if they have provided notes, surnames, locations or even a link to a tree at another vendor.

Don’t forget, you can also select the “Based on Triangulated Groups” option instead of the “Based on Shared Matches” option initially.

Run A Report

If you have tested at 23andMe, give the Genetic Affairs AutoKinship report a try.

Is it accurate for you? Have you gained insight? Identified how people are related to you? Are there any surprises?

Do you have a mystery cluster? I hope so, because an answer just might be hiding there.

If you’d like to read more about Genetic Affairs tools, click here for my free repository of Genetic Affairs articles.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here. You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends.

Disclosure

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

Books

Genealogy Research

Free Webinar: 10 Ways to Find Your Native American Ancestor Using Y, Mitochondrial and Autosomal DNA

Posted on by
3

I recorded 10 Ways to Find Your Native American Ancestor Using Y, Mitochondrial and Autosomal DNA for Legacy Family Tree Webinars.

Webinars are free for the first week. After that, you’ll need a subscription.

If you subscribe to Legacy Family Tree, here, you’ll also receive the downloadable 24-page syllabus and you can watch any of the 1500+ webinars available at Legacy Family Tree Webinars anytime.

In 10 Ways to Find Your Native American Ancestor Using Y, Mitochondrial and Autosomal DNA, I covered the following features and how to use them for your genealogy:

  • Ethnicity – why it works and why it sometimes doesn’t
  • Ethnicity – how it works
  • Your Chromosomes – Mom and Dad
  • Ethnicity at AncestryDNA, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage DNA
  • Genetic Communities at AncestryDNA
  • Genetic Groups at MyHeritage DNA
  • Painted ethnicity segments at 23andMe and FamilyTreeDNA
  • Painting ethnicity segments at DNAPainter – and why you want to
  • Shared ethnicity segments with your matches at AncestryDNA, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage DNA
  • Downloading matches and segment files
  • Techniques to pinpoint Native Ancestors in your tree
  • Y DNA, Native ancestors and haplogroups
  • Mitochondrial DNA, Native ancestors and haplogroups
  • Creating a plan to find your Native ancestor
  • Strategies for finding test candidates
  • Your Ancestor DNA Pedigree Chart
  • Success!!!

If you haven’t yet tested at or uploaded your DNA to both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage, you can find upload/download instructions, here, so that you can take advantage of the unique tools at all vendors.

Hope you enjoy the webinar and find those elusive ancestors!

_____________________________________________________________

Disclosure

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

Books

Genealogy Research