Go Back   Family Tree DNA Forums > Paternal Lineages (Y-DNA) > Y-DNA Haplogroups & SNPs Basics

Y-DNA Haplogroups & SNPs Basics This forum is for those new to personal ancestry testing on the direct paternal line with Y-DNA SNP tests. All may view this forum, but you must register and sign in to post.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 24th April 2018, 07:40 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by benowicz View Post
. . . Still, as pointed out earlier, some legacy connections between the retinue of the earls of Chester seem to have lingered on into the Wac regime from the 1150s. So that must mean something.
Okay, now that I've had a chance to find transcriptions of some of the original Latin documents, I think that some other authors may have over-simplified the situation, and that the earls of Chester and their heirs may have retained a direct interest in Guernsey until the 1240s, and that the Wac family were merely their local vassals. For example, page 177:

https://books.google.com/books?id=N9...lla%22&f=false

That is part of an inventory of property rights under the late English regime, taken in 1220 by Philip II of France after his conquest of Normandy in 1204. Kind of a mini-version of the Domesday book, but focused on the prior rather than current regime.

Anyhow, it states, rather bluntly, that Estouvilla (modern Éturville, a constituent part of Carquebut, in the Cotentin), was held as a fief by the Boutevilain family from the earl of Chester as late as 1204.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carquebut

But, prior to 1174, about a generation earlier, there is a charter showing that the Wac brothers held a mansion house in Éturville, previously held by a man named Willelmus Doree (Dorey?).

The Wacs have previously been shown to have been direct tenants of the earls of Chester in Wahull, Northamptonshire, around 1130.

The channel islands were never conquered by Phillip II, but Éturville is reasonably nearby on the Cotentin peninsula. This pattern of dealings suggests to me that on Guernsey, documents which merely illustrate a change in the occupation of a property among the various followers of the earl of Chester were misinterpreted to indicate a passage of ownership. It would have been weird for king Stephen in the 1150's to let Ranulph of Chester retain most of his properties but confiscate Guernsey, only to regrant it to a vassal of Ranulph's.

Plus, having the earliest known document of the Dorey family refer to a fief of the earl of Chester is a huge bonus.

Last edited by benowicz; 24th April 2018 at 08:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 30th April 2018, 11:56 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
Two other pieces of information that probably reinforce the "fitz Gerard" hypothesis for the core FGC28370+ people:

1. The pedigree of the Edgeworths of Edgeworthstown only goes back with any certainty to the early 1500s. The precise relationship isn't clear, but they are connected in some way to the clergyman Roger Edgeworth, born at Holt Castle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Edgeworth

At the time of Roger's birth, Holt Castle was the property of Sir William Stanley, whose brother-in-law, Sir Richard Molyneux of Sefton, married, as his 2nd wife, a daughter of Sir Gilbert Gerard of Ince.

http://www.luminarium.org/encycloped...iamstanley.htm

http://www.historyofparliamentonline...rd-i-1559-1623

Like the Edgeworths, this branch of the Gerard family was active in the colonial administration in Dublin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas...t_Baron_Gerard

2. I believe that the earliest fully documented ancestors of the Garnett donor were living at Swanlow, Cheshire from the late 1500s.

https://books.google.com/books?id=YU...ton%22&f=false

Swanlow was purchased between 1542 and 1546 by Sir Thomas Holcroft, brother-in-law of this same Sir Gilbert Gerard of Ince.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

https://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi...&id=I6534Gi92a

Last edited by benowicz; 30th April 2018 at 11:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 12th May 2018, 11:13 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
I think I successfully resolved the ambiguous relationship of the Dorey haplotype to the modal Gerard/Garnett/Edgworth (i.e., GD 11 at 67) and to the modal Swift (i.e., GD 8 at 67, with a minimum of GD 6 at 67 against one member) haplotypes.

YFull's methodology estimates FGC28370 at 500 years old at the 50% confidence level, and my STR analysis--with all caveats about the potential skewing effect of lineage over-representation--says about 600 years, or 20 generations between the two proven FGC28370 branches (i.e., Swift and Gerard/Garnett/Edgeworth).

But comparing Dorey to all the others returns an equilibrium TMRCA (i.e., where the median confidence level approximates 50%) of 24 generations.

So when attempting to map the most likely relationship on a tree, Dorey should branch off before Swift branches off from Gerard/Garnett/Edgeworth. In other words, I should compare the Dorey haplotype to a modal derived from a comparison of the Swift modal and the Gerard/Garnett/Edgeworth modals.

I used McGee's Y Utility for this, but some manual intervention was required to better resolve ambiguous situations where there is no clear natural modal in the data presented. McGee defaults by assuming the larger count is the modal value, but I have over-ridden this by assuming the value closest to the overall FGC23343 modal (derived WITHOUT reference to the Gerard/Garnett/Edgeworth and Swift folks) is correct.

The result of this process returned about a 500 year gap between the MRCA Dorey shared with this group and the split between the Gerard/Garnett/Edgeworth folks. This would place, at the 50% confidence level, the birth date of the MRCA with Dorey at about 1050 A.D. In other words, just about the time of the Norman conquest of England, and thus probably more consistent with the alleged Norman origin of the fitz Gerard family, than the Doreys having arrived in the Channel Islands from later English migration.

On the face of the raw STR data, the relationship of Dorey to the others was odd and had to be resolved in an orderly way in order to gain any kind of interpretive confidence. It's not perfect, but perfection wouldn't be possible with this odd data. Clearly, some level of convergence has occurred. But at least this method is conceptually sound.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 12th May 2018, 12:11 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
So here is an updated chart, to incorporate everything I've learned to date, and correct some earlier typos. It's a little busy, but I think it might necessary to encompass it all, especially the Hebridean branches of this family which stayed behind. They could be useful points of reference in assessing this theory's validity going forward, as DNA matches accumulate.

P.S. It may seem weird to show both William Fitz Nigel, 2nd baron Halton, and William Dorée as sons of Néel II and Adčle de Reviers, but it is technically possible. The much-quoted charter dated 1060 A.D. confirming some church donations in Guernsey clearly listed two distinct sons named William, an odd but not unheard of practice in Medieval times.
Attached Images
File Type: png FGC28370 - hypothesis # 3.png (60.1 KB, 3 views)

Last edited by benowicz; 12th May 2018 at 12:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 19th May 2018, 07:10 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
In case you were wondering about the curious distribution of FGC23343 along what are usually considered viking migration routes, given the heavily Iberian concentration of the ancestral clade, Z209:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...te-Urzainqui-2

https://rud.is/cod/the-basque-and-vikings.html

http://dodona.proboards.com/thread/7...-viking-origin


So not only is there reason to believe Scandinavians were in regular contact with the Basque country at the very dawn of the viking age, but there is documentary evidence that Basques were renown for their feats of navigation well beforehand.

If anyone here can access a magnified copy of the map in the wikipedia article, and can come upon a translation of the Basque captions, I would be very grateful. It seems to indicate specific (archaelogical? documentary?) evidence that early Basque mariners had a presence in Shetland and the Scottish isles.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 19th May 2018, 07:33 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by benowicz View Post
. . .If anyone here can access a magnified copy of the map in the wikipedia article, and can come upon a translation of the Basque captions, I would be very grateful. It seems to indicate specific (archaelogical? documentary?) evidence that early Basque mariners had a presence in Shetland and the Scottish isles.
Maybe the Shetland caption is in reference to this, an Ogham stone once speculated to be written in a Basque language:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunnasting_stone

It seems to be discredited now. Not that it necessarily disproves an early Basque presence in Shetland, just that it may not directly support it.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 20th May 2018, 01:02 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 131
"It is not clear when Basque mariners first began fishing off the coast of Ireland but the ordinances of 1553 of the confraternity of fishermen of the Spanish Basque port of Bermeo indicate that men from there were already fishing in Irish waters by then. Furthermore, in a lawsuit over the fishing voyage of the ship Bárbara of San Sebastián to the Irish coast in 1506 witnesses testified that fishermen from that port ‘have been accustomed to go fishing [in Ireland] from times immemorial’."

https://www.historyireland.com/early...eenth-century/
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 20th May 2018, 01:54 PM
John McCoy John McCoy is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 649
Regarding multiple children of the same father who bear the same baptismal name, there are numerous examples at least as late as the 16th Century. Working with (Latin) medieval documents in French-speaking Switzerland (where occasional links to England appear as well!), I have found several examples where three sons of the same father had the same given name. Examples where two sons have the same name are more numerous, frequent enough to be a perpetual source of confusion. It is not always the case that they had different mothers. I even found a family where two brothers both named Petrus married two sisters from another family both named Claudia. I'm sure the families thought this was so cute! (Endless couples are found named Johannes and Johanneta, Claudius and Claudia, Stephanus and Stephaneta, Perretus and Perreta, Vulliermus and Vulliermeta, etc. Seemingly too frequently to be the result of chance alone -- marriages arranged to be cute!)
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 20th May 2018, 03:59 PM
dna dna is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by John McCoy View Post
Regarding multiple children of the same father who bear the same baptismal name, there are numerous examples at least as late as the 16th Century. Working with (Latin) medieval documents in French-speaking Switzerland (where occasional links to England appear as well!), I have found several examples where three sons of the same father had the same given name. Examples where two sons have the same name are more numerous, frequent enough to be a perpetual source of confusion. It is not always the case that they had different mothers. I even found a family where two brothers both named Petrus married two sisters from another family both named Claudia. I'm sure the families thought this was so cute! (Endless couples are found named Johannes and Johanneta, Claudius and Claudia, Stephanus and Stephaneta, Perretus and Perreta, Vulliermus and Vulliermeta, etc. Seemingly too frequently to be the result of chance alone -- marriages arranged to be cute!)
For some of those cases there is a known simple explanation.
The patrons or patron saints were different.
For example, to many there is just one name John. On the other hand:
  • John Chrysostom (Saint John Chrysostom)
  • John Damascene (Saint John of Damascus)
  • John the Baptist (Saint John the Baptist)
were three different people. If the designated feast day was close, the baptismal records could have omitted the designation, as it was obvious which John...


Mr. W.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Viking? royfarnol Scandinavian Y-DNA forum 8 19th December 2014 08:29 AM
Viking? wilson Paternal Lineage (Y-DNA STR) Advanced 12 13th September 2012 11:42 AM
Viking anyone? robertgau mtDNA - Advanced Topics 6 20th July 2006 05:01 AM
Viking? robertgau The Genographic Project 2 22nd June 2006 05:58 PM
Viking DNA / mutations, etc. DAVIDMC DNA and Genealogy for Beginners 2 22nd December 2003 03:09 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:58 AM.


Family Tree DNA - World Headquarters

1445 North Loop West, Suite 820
Houston, Texas 77008, USA

Phone: (713) 868-1438 | Fax: (832) 201-7147
Copyright 2001-2010 Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.