In another blog of mine, I publish articles that would interest my family. One of the topics has been a great great grandmother of mine named Salucia Sophronia Clark. She has been a mystery to me and dozens of other researchers for many years. She married Robert F. Squibb in Clinton County, Iowa in the 1857. She reliably reported in census records that she was born in the early 1840s in Ohio. But I've never found her family. Some people list parents for her, finding similar names in census records, but none make sense as they still show her there in 1860. Salucia was in Iowa and married in 1860, so cannot be the same person.
I've studied the various Clarks of Clinton County, Iowa, and they were numerous. None seem to be related to Salucia.
So I finally took my DNA test and got the results back. I used Ancestry DNA, which looks at the general mix of DNA called autosomal DNA. It does not include the Y-DNA, which is only the male line, nor the mtDNA which is only the female line. The male line wouldn't help with Salucia, but since she is my mother's maternal grandmother, an mtDNA test applies to her and may be of help ultimately.
Ancestry shows other people who share matches with your DNA. They do not show chromosomes and locations where matches exist like other companies, but Ancestry has an extensive collection of personal family trees. Some of those people who have tested their DNA have chosen to link their DNA with their family tree. This has proven helpful in narrowing down matches to a specific line, while avoiding the long chromosome/location numbers of each match.
As I looked at matches I recognized one 3rd cousin match as being one of the people I've corresponded with regarding Salucia and the matching tree confirmed what I suspected. I clicked on her information which gave me twelve 1st through 4th cousin matches that we have in common. Five of them had useful trees attached, that could be used compare back to four generations where we should have a match. Some of them I could identify as Squibb line ancestors and not those of Salucia. But I could not find any Clarks.
Although my 3rd cousin and I both got some of the same pieces of DNA from Robert and Salucia, we also got unique DNA from them as well. We each have our own matches. I found that by looking at my matches' matches I could go deeper. I found more people, and more trees, all matches to me, and still likely to be related on the Squibb or Clark lines.I made a chart in Excel, where I could list each match, and who our shared matches were. So far 33 of my matches seem to fall under the Squibb/Clark lines. Not all of these matches, match each other. Some are Squibbs. Some are "Clarks". I use quotes around Clark because I really haven't found any Clarks.
After doing this, and it took a while, I was able to separate the two groups. I assumed that those whose trees did not include the Squibb family, and their close matches, must be related to Salucia. Making lists of the surnames in the trees from these people, two names popped out in multiple trees. Neither was Clark. I kept seeing Trotter and Ellis. One or the other. And in one case, both.
Hardy Ellis married Martha Trotter. Hardy Ellis, born 1789 in North Carolina, died 1874 Kentucky, and Martha Trotter, born 1800 in North Carolina, died 1885 in Kentucky. They had a large family, including a girl, Elizabeth Ellis, born 1835. Could she have run away and changed her name to Salucia Sophronia Clark? Far fetched, but that sort of thing did happen.
One thing that is striking about these lines is that they all run through the south. Ancestry DNA allows you to compare locations of birthplaces of your matches on a map. My ancestry pretty much runs within a couple hundred miles of modern-day I-80 and I-70 from the east coast to the midwest. Absolutely nothing south of Virginia. Those southern DNA lines really stand out. They are in my genealogy waiting to be discovered.
It's going to take some more work.
I'll report more later.
Bob Mesenbrink
December 2016
Monday, December 26, 2016
Tuesday, December 20, 2016
The DNA Results are In!
That was quick. Quicker than I expected. Quicker than Ancestry said. It's always good to under-promise and over-deliver.
My head is still spinning. There is a lot to take in, but ultimately, it isn't a huge surprise. Well, still a bit of a surprise.
I expected 40% Europe West and result was 46%. About right. A lot of German background.
I guessed 30% Great Britain and result was actually a lot lower at 11%. It seems like I've read some discussion about the Great Britain percentage, and I suspect this is because of the numerous outside influences to the island. in particular, Vikings. In fact, while I predicted a small amount of Scandinavian ancestry with 5%, the results show 17%. A lot more than I thought.
Irish ancestry has always been a suspicion of mine, although I can't trace back to Ireland. With ancestral names like Brady, Brennan, McInytre, it seemed likely. I guessed 5% given what little I could prove. Irish is actually my second highest ethnicity at 20%.
It seems odd to me that having two great grandparents from Great Britain, and numerous old American lines going back to colonial times, that Great Britain would have such a small influence on my DNA makeup.
Those four, Europe West, Irish, Scandinavian, and great Britain make up 94% of my ethnicity. As I suspected, there are small amounts of Europe East and Iberian Peninsula, but even smaller than I thought. But 3% Italian/Greek is pretty interesting to me.
What does not show up is interesting as well. No African, no Asian, no Jewish, no native American - 100% European.
The folks at Ancestry DNA explain that this is all just an estimate. Our DNA varies, even between siblings, And our family trees cannot possibly be traced as deep as what our DNA shows.
The other advantage that DNA matching brings is matching other people who have DNA test results posted and many who have actually posted their trees. One of my matches is a first or second cousin in Georgia. I don't know who that is, so I am anxious to find out. And then there are dozens of other matches, more distant, a few of whom I have corresponded with in the past regarding genealogy. Sometimes the match shows the common ancestor on our trees. More often there is just a list of common surnames. But it depends on how complete our family trees are on ancestry. Sometimes, the connection isn't known at all. Ancestry allows you to display maps of birthplaces in both trees. In my short time, I haven't found that to be helpful, but I really like the idea.
You can also look at the ethnicity mix of others. Another Stephenson family related to me also shares more ethnicity from Scandinavian than Great Britain.
I'm sure a lot more will come up.
My head is still spinning. There is a lot to take in, but ultimately, it isn't a huge surprise. Well, still a bit of a surprise.
I expected 40% Europe West and result was 46%. About right. A lot of German background.
I guessed 30% Great Britain and result was actually a lot lower at 11%. It seems like I've read some discussion about the Great Britain percentage, and I suspect this is because of the numerous outside influences to the island. in particular, Vikings. In fact, while I predicted a small amount of Scandinavian ancestry with 5%, the results show 17%. A lot more than I thought.
Irish ancestry has always been a suspicion of mine, although I can't trace back to Ireland. With ancestral names like Brady, Brennan, McInytre, it seemed likely. I guessed 5% given what little I could prove. Irish is actually my second highest ethnicity at 20%.
It seems odd to me that having two great grandparents from Great Britain, and numerous old American lines going back to colonial times, that Great Britain would have such a small influence on my DNA makeup.
Those four, Europe West, Irish, Scandinavian, and great Britain make up 94% of my ethnicity. As I suspected, there are small amounts of Europe East and Iberian Peninsula, but even smaller than I thought. But 3% Italian/Greek is pretty interesting to me.
What does not show up is interesting as well. No African, no Asian, no Jewish, no native American - 100% European.
The folks at Ancestry DNA explain that this is all just an estimate. Our DNA varies, even between siblings, And our family trees cannot possibly be traced as deep as what our DNA shows.
The other advantage that DNA matching brings is matching other people who have DNA test results posted and many who have actually posted their trees. One of my matches is a first or second cousin in Georgia. I don't know who that is, so I am anxious to find out. And then there are dozens of other matches, more distant, a few of whom I have corresponded with in the past regarding genealogy. Sometimes the match shows the common ancestor on our trees. More often there is just a list of common surnames. But it depends on how complete our family trees are on ancestry. Sometimes, the connection isn't known at all. Ancestry allows you to display maps of birthplaces in both trees. In my short time, I haven't found that to be helpful, but I really like the idea.
You can also look at the ethnicity mix of others. Another Stephenson family related to me also shares more ethnicity from Scandinavian than Great Britain.
I'm sure a lot more will come up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)