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
  #41  
Old 2nd April 2018, 05:55 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
I thought I did see FTDNA offer this SNP at one point. I would probably send an email to FTDNA to find out why you can't find that option on their site before pursuing this, but there are other options.

http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=40766

In the long run it probably pays to have as much of your testing done with the same company as possible, to maximize any loyalty programs or integrate your test findings with any projects, etc. But there are options.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 2nd April 2018, 06:02 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
When you talk to FTDNA, be sure to ask about any equivalent SNPs. That link to YFull lists a couple of them for FGC28370, I think. I believe it is the only identified subclade of FGC23343 to date. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 2nd April 2018, 06:10 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by benowicz View Post
When you talk to FTDNA, be sure to ask about any equivalent SNPs. That link to YFull lists a couple of them for FGC28370, I think. I believe it is the only identified subclade of FGC23343 to date. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I guess I'm wrong. There is at least one other subclade, found only in a German family from the Saarland region.

I guess it's up to you, but given your family's history, I'd probably try FGC28370 or an equivalent before trying that German one.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 2nd April 2018, 06:36 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
Another thought just occurred to me. I don't participate in any projects, so I don't know this for a fact, but I believe some of them can arrange discounted pricing or some such. You might want to think about that before finalizing any order plans.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 4th April 2018, 09:20 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
The FGC28370 results fascinated me, so I wanted to be able to define their relationship to one another a little better.

Unfortunately, the STR networking programs I'm used to have some limitations that forced me to work outside, with some manually prepared spreadsheets. Which I guess is just as well, because the history of this SNP is longer than the period covered by FTDNA's standard guidance for STR interpetation, meaning I'd need to work a lot with unique confidence interval structures.

Other people may come to different conclusions, but based on the haplotypes I've found in the DF27 project and in YSearch.org, I have defined 3 main groups:

A: A group of 3 high-resolution profiles with surnames Knuckles, Thacker and Swift, with a MRCA born maybe 1600 or thereabouts. After looking at their pedigrees, I'm pretty sure the original surname was Swift, and that the ancestor lived in or near Tellisford, Somersetshire. Most testers seem to have their earliest definitely known ancestors in the American South, but they're cross-referenced against a Yankee line named Swift that settled at Philadelphia, with a Quaker leaving certificate from Wiltshire or Dorset.

B: A group of 2 donors named Edgeworth and Garnett, with a MRCA born maybe around 1700, probably a little earlier. Both of these lines seem to trace pretty confidently to some entries to Burke's landed gentry books, which is useful. It's a debatable call, but for my working hypothesis, I have assumed that Garnett is the "true" surname, on the basis of some ambiguous circumstantial evidence and the fact that the Garnett pedigree goes further back with more confidence towards Normandy.

C: A single individual named Dorey, whose earliest known ancestor was born around 1806 on the Channel Island of Jersey, formerly a constituent part of the duchy of Normandy. Nothing certain seems to be known beyond this, but earliest records of the Dorey family in the islands include men who served as Receiver of the King's Revenue. Researchers focusing on people of this name--specifically with spelling variants which end in "y", somewhat unique for the region--trace the name to 1200s in the adjacent parishes of St Germain de Tournebut, Montaigu la brisette, and Crasville, all in the canton of Montebourg on the Cotentin peninsula. Perhaps not coincidentally, these places figure in the history of the de Montgomery, Saint Sauveur and d'Aubigny families who form the backdrop for the earliest known ancestors of Garnett.

Dorey, to my knowledge, has not tested for either FGC28370 or its parent clade FGC23343, but given the genetic differences observed, I don't think it will be too controversial to assume that he also is FGC23870+.

As I said, the MRCA joining all three of these groups appears to be well outside the standard guidance for interpreting STR matches, so I had to resolve some ambiguities through manually calculated confidence intervals. A mistake in my calculations or judgment could lead other people to come to different conclusions.

But my current guess is that Group A and Donor C are much more closely related (i.e., MRCA born around 1350 A.D.) than Group B is to either. I estimate that the MRCA that Group B shares with the others was born around 1000 A.D., since that is the center point of the very narrow 15 year range that overlaps between the 50% to 95% confidence intervals for those comparisons.

There are a couple of layers of estimates supporting this conclusion, so I guess it's not completely closed off for debate. But at least it seems to make some geographic sense, considering the locations of the earliest known ancestors.

Last edited by benowicz; 4th April 2018 at 09:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 4th April 2018, 01:58 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
I guess there's room for doubt about this conclusion because, just based on the visible differences between haplotypes, Group B is only just barely more remotely related to Group A than Donor C is to Donor A. Like only 100 years more remotely, not the ~350 that I concluded.

I figured the reason companies don't offer clear guidance about predicting relationships past GD of 6 at 67 is because of an increased chance of masking mutations when the number of mutations >10% of the total number of markers. That is, the larger mutations are as a proportion of the number of markers, the higher the chance that the next mutation over-writes an existing one, or mimics the haplotype of a cousin's lineage.

So I calculated the probability distribution of X number of masking mutations for each generation's removal from the common ancestor, and recalculated a confidence interval for the relationship accordingly. That's reflected in the figures I quoted in my last post.

This narrow, 15-year overlap in the 50% to 95% confidence intervals of the B-A and B-C comparisons that I talked about was only enabled by this assumption of a number of masking mutations. In other words, I'm talking about an only 5% scenario. Very tight. Not implausible--one in twenty are not crazy odds. But very tight.

To me, this suggests a fairly specific mutation scenario, where the ancestors of the Group A experienced 3 mutations which coincidentally mirrored those experienced by Group B.

I'm thinking these were probably DYS390, DYS464C and DYS 476, experienced by Group A in the years after they branched off from Dorey but before they branched off from one another--roughly between 1350 and 1600 A.D. A little fast, but plausible.

The time frame for Group B experiencing these same mutations might be inferred by both members' identical genetic distance to Donor C, roughly between 1000 A.D. and 1600 A.D.

I wish there were a wider margin of error in this case, but this is just the way the numbers line up. I guess this is why the company doesn't express much confidence about genetic distances in this range.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 5th April 2018, 05:38 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
Here is a curious document that may be of particular interest to the FGC28370 people.

http://racineshistoire.free.fr/LGN/PDF/d_Aubigny

It seems to be a very large pedigree of the d'Aubigny family whom I've discussed several times in relation to the early history of the Garnett and Dorey families.

The Garnetts definitely descend from them in a female line (depicted here), but their heraldry suggests they may also descend from them in the direct male line. The earliest record of a Dorey family, spelled with a "y", relates to some lands held in the neighborhood of Valognes in the 11th century by the Garnetts' connections, including the d'Aubignys at Huberville.

I can't vouch for the document's accuracy, but it is very interesting that one line depicted (pages 4 & 5) shows a Ralph d'Aubigny born on Jersey (just like the earliest confirmed ancestor of the Doreys). Among Ralph's descendants were the Hungerford family of Farleigh, whose estates included Tellisford in Somersetshire--the earliest known residence of the Swift family, who form the single largest cohort within FGC28370.

I could go on and on about the coincidences, but this Ralph's 3X great grandmother was a Sibylla de Valognes, hearkening back once again to Dorey's family history.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 5th April 2018, 07:10 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
As far as I can tell, the earliest known ancestor of the Swifts was a London merchant named Flower Swift, born in the late 16th century at Tellisford or the adjacent parish of Norton St Phillip in Somerset. Both places were part of the estate of the Hungerfords of Farleigh who married into the d'Aubigny family as per the link in my last post.

There is some speculation as to whether the unusual given name "Flower" reflects a connection to the Flower family of Norton St Phillip, who seem to have held a lease on the manor grange and been successful enough to entertain some pretensions to being gentry. One member of this family, Jeffrey Flower, "gent.", had a small armorial plaque near his tomb in Bath cathedral.

https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_KA...AQAAJ_djvu.txt

From the mid-1500s at least there was an industrial cloth mill at the adjacent Farleigh Hungerford. Could this have been the line of business that the first Flower Swift was engaged in?

https://hardingtonvale.org.uk/farlei...hurch-history/

It seems Tellisford--and maybe some of the other surrounding manors?--came into the possession of the Hungerfords in the late 15th century, right around the time of the marriage with the d'Aubigny family.

Could the Swifts descend from an illegitimate son of this branch of the d'Aubignys? Commerce would have been a typical career path for other non-inheriting sons of the gentry in those days.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 6th April 2018, 02:04 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by benowicz View Post
Here is a curious document that may be of particular interest to the FGC28370 people.

http://racineshistoire.free.fr/LGN/PDF/d_Aubigny

It seems to be a very large pedigree of the d'Aubigny family whom I've discussed several times in relation to the early history of the Garnett and Dorey families.. . I can't vouch for the document's accuracy. . .
I've had a chance to kick the tires a bit and I see some problems with this document.

The consensus of academic historians is that there were two distinct d'Aubigny families in England immediately after the conquest--one headed by a fellow nicknamed William 'Pincerna' (i.e., "butler") and another headed by William 'Brito' (i.e., "the Breton"). It's not an unchallenged consensus--some have favored the interpretation that they were two branches of the same family, or even that the two Williams represented one and the same person.

https://www.theislandwiki.org/index....a_Norman_Baron

Inconveniently, the Garnetts descend from the 'Pincerna' family and the Jersey connections relevant to the Dorey family belong to the 'Brito' family.

I'm a little weirded out by the coincidence of the Tellisford connections of the 'Brito' descendants, though. As I mentioned in an earlier post, Tellisford definitely belonged to Geoffrey de Mowbray, bishop of Coutances, at the time of the Domesday book.

http://opendomesday.org/place/ST8055/tellisford/

The passage of the bishop's estate to his nephew Robert de Mobray, and through his widow to the d'Aubigny 'Pincerna' descendants of her 2nd marriage is clear.

I think the pedigree in that first link may simply be too ambitious. I think the author may have just speculatively tried to incorrectly force in the Elizabeth d'Aubigny who married William Botreaux into the 'Brito' family. Tellisford and Petherton, the main seat of the 'Brito' family in Somerset, are at opposite ends of the county, and the other marriages in these lines seem otherwise to bear more geographic coherence. I believe that Tellisford did come to the Hungerfords from a d'Aubigny 'Pincerna', but that her precise parentage is not known.

Unfortunately, even if this is the case, this still leaves the connection to Jersey and the Dorey family unresolved.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 6th April 2018, 02:45 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by benowicz View Post
I've had a chance to kick the tires a bit and I see some problems with this document. . .
Though maybe the problems are not completely insurmountable. There is a very interesting piece of circumstantial evidence linking the 'Pincerna' and 'Brito' families. William 'Pincerna' and William 'Brito' definitely were married to sisters--Maude and Cecily Bigod--suggesting that perhaps 'Brito' and 'Pincerna' were close relations as well, maybe paternal cousins. Both seem to have been born around 1100 A.D.

Much is made of tracing the 'Pincernas' to St Martin d'Aubigny in La Manche, and the 'Britos' to St Aubin d'Aubine in Ille-et-Vilane, but this is a little bit like putting the cart before the horse. Just as often, maybe more often, the places are named after the family, not the family after the place.

These places would have fallen within different feudal jurisdictions in the 11th century, but that's doesn't necessarily mean anything, either. The 'Pincernas' are often speculatively made a branch of the Neel family of Saint Sauveur in La Manche, but it is an historical fact that several members of this family spent a number of years in exile in Brittany. The Saint Sauveurs even gave the characteristically Breton name 'Eudes' to several of their members. It is easily possible that one branch of d'Aubignys from La Manche permanently set up shop in Ille-et-Vilane.

There is not, I think, enough information known about the early 11th century origins of the 'Pincerna' or 'Brito' families to preclude them sharing a common agnatic origin.

A scenario reconciling these findings could be as follows:

The 'Brito' family acquired Tellisford from their 'Pincerna' cousins. We've already seen such a swap for geographic convenience with regard to the de Montgomery family lands in Montaigu-la-brisette and Lancashire.

Elizabeth d'Aubigny Botreaux may really have been a 'Brito', and brought Tellisford to the Hungerfords upon her marriage, and the Swifts may descend from an illegitimate son of one of her brothers or uncles.

This would make the Swifts close relatives to Sir Phillip d'Aubigny, warden of Jersey in the 13th century, leaving plenty of scope for a direct relationship to the Dorey family.

The observed genetic differences between the Swifts, the Garnetts and Dorey are probably consistent with this hypothesis, although they don't leave much margin of error.
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 05:19 PM.


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.