Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Viking FGC23343

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • benowicz
    replied
    To my knowledge, that Dorey fellow from the old YSearch database had never been tested for FGC23343, so his apparent "near match" to some members of the FGC28369 could be an extreme example of STR convergence. Certainly there is some level of convergence going on, given the observed level of matching among the various members of the FGC28369 group--it's just a question of how extreme it is. The relationship could be as near as 1000 A.D.

    Anyhow, there is one reference to a Geoffrey Dory in the Testa de Neville, at Holland, Lincolnshire, within the honour of Albemarle.

    https://archive.org/details/liberfeo...1grea/page/548

    The Testa was compiled in 1302 based on records of nearly 100 years earlier, when the de Forz family from Oleron, France that I mentioned earlier were earls of Albemarle.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willia...l_of_Albemarle

    Also mentioned in that entry from the Testa were the de Gresley/de Grelley family of Lancashire, who shared an interest in Ecclestone, Lancashire with the Garnet family at this same time (i.e., Henry III).

    http://www.shissem.com/Hissem_Gernets_of_Halton.html


    For a long time now the Dorey name has been primarily found in the Channel Islands and across the way in Dorsetshire, and there probably is no particular reason to believe that either of those branches relate to this Lincolnshire family. But it is interesting, may be worth noting as a place to begin future research. The de Gresleys were from Avranches on the Cotentin peninsula, as were the d'Aubignys with whom the Garnets allied themselves early on, so maybe that will become significant vis-a-vis the earliest recorded Doreys at Etourville in Manche.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Re: the presence of FGC23343 in the Scottish islands, there is one well documented historic incident that probably bears mention, although in context, it seems doubtful that it constitutes some type of origin story: The wreck of El Gran Grifon on Fair Isle in 1588.

    Captained by Juan Gomez de Medina, El Gran Grifon, part of the famous Spanish Armada, wrecked off Fair Isle in late September, 5 months after their defeat off the southern coast of England and in a desperate condition. Fair Isle is the island immediately south of the Dunrossness district of the southern Shetland mainland where FGC23343 has been noted.

    Although the crew of El Gran Grifon is supposed to have been composed primarily of German mariners from the Baltic port where the ship was built, at least 4 of the military officers commanding the troops intended for a mainland invasion of England were from the Basque country of Spain. Presumably many of those troops were also Basque, which, at least superficially, seems like it could be significant given the deep Basque origins of FGC23343, although they lay much further north, on the edge of the old duchy of Gascony, in France.

    A detailed contemporary account of the subsequent fate of Gomez de Medina and crew survives, and it seem very unlikely that they mixed easily with the natives. Although there was a lengthy, 2 month delay between El Gran Grifon's wreck and their eventual transportation to Fife for judicial repatriation, they were objects of intense suspicion and monitored very carefully, as one would expect in the context. Upon their wreck, the survivors numbered about 300 armed and desperate men, and the inhabitants of Fair Isle probably numbered no more than 17 families. Military discipline seems to have been maintained throughout, for despite their strained condition--about 50 men are supposed to have died from starvation, illness--no incidents of violence against the natives were noted.

    Interesting, even if only as an example of the wide range of historical incidents which theoretically could give rise to such an anomalous geographic distribution for this SNP, although I don't think this specific event explains it.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Another point that bears emphasis in order to put the 9th century millieu of FGC23343+ into context: the Christianization of the Basques is supposed to have been a very slow process, possibly extending from the 6th to the 13th century, extending only gradually from the cities throughout the rural hinterland.

    So Pepin II's opposition to Charles the Bald wasn't simply a matter of personal preference for Pepin's Basque supporters. It was probably also about local autonomy vis-a-vis politics and culture, with the Frankish empire representing some sort of encroaching alien hegemon.

    Pepin spent 864 mostly in captivity, but did briefly escape to join his viking allies, and contemporary annals describe him as lapsing into a lifestyle of pagan license. So this idea that some die-hard Basque supporters could have absconded to the Scottish islands after Pepin's death doesn't seem so wild in context.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Vis-a-vis the FGC23343+ in the Scottish isles and Shetland, there is this interesting archaeological evidence:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=xw...0hoard&f=false

    3 coin hoards, 2 in Ireland (Mullaghboden, Derrykeighan) and 1 in Sweden (Kattilstorp), which effectively trace the path of the vikings active in Aquitaine through 848 A.D. We already knew from contemporary annals that the raiders were attributed to Vestfold, Norway, and these findings seem to confirm that, with some interesting additional details about their activities in Ireland.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%93...c_Cin%C3%A1eda

    So one plausible scenario explaining the FGC23343+ presence in Shetland could be slaves returned from the campaigns in Aquitaine--or collaborators. The overall context for these raids is that this viking fleet had previously been based further north, at Noirmoutier in Brittany, but were engaged by a rival claimant to the duchy of Aquitaine within the Frankish royal house--Pepin II.

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

    Pepin started his reign with a lot of local support, and no doubt some diehards stayed with him to the bitter end. And it makes sense that Pepin's viking mercenaries would have needed some local guides in the planning of their raids along the Garonne, in furtherance of this scheme. Which, of course, did not work out. So, having burnt their bridges, so to speak, it would make sense that some local Aquitainian (i.e., Basque) mariners might retreat along with the vikings to Ireland, Scotland, and maybe as far as Vestfold itself.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    The lands Roger 'the Poitevin' de Montgomery acquired by marriage to Almodis of La Marche were probably concentrated quite a bit further inland than Saintes or Oleron, but he did have a niece, Sybil, who was abbess at Saintes, where the de Forz family were Provosts to the counts of Poitiers, so there's that.

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

    Yes, this seems to be the place to look.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Yes, this must be the solution.

    If I recall correctly, another FGC23343+ participant has connections to a Quebecois family named Gendron aka Jhondrow, etc., whose immigrant ancestor was born at Chateau-d'Oleron, which was part of the medieval county of Poitou.

    If it were ever possible to take the Garnet line back further, a good bet would probably be the family de Forz, aka de Vivonne. They're named after a fief on the mainland, but their earliest documented estates are on the island of Oleron, in 1051 A.D. They were lieutenants of the counts of Poitou, the heiress of whom married the Roger 'Pictavensis' aka the Poithevin de Montgomery discussed above, who was the overlord of Vivian Garnet, first of the family in Lancashire before 1086. Also, the de Forz family were hereditary Provosts (like a deputy) of Saintes--the very city where the St. Vivian who popularized this name was bishop. The de Forz family had particularly close ties with the local cathedral chapter. Coincidentally, a branch of the de Forzes became feudal magnates in the very area where the Garnets settled in England, although that branch of the de Forz family daughtered out early, and in any event arrived nearly 100 years after the first Garnet is mentioned.

    Also interesting is that the fellow with the Quebecois links is FGC28369-, meaning that his line must have diverged from the Garnett group near the very origin of FGC23343, which I think is currently estimated at about 500 B.C. Plus, there is a reference, dated to the last quarter of the 8th century (i.e., ~775 A.D.) referring to Oleron as part of the "Vacetae Insulae"--"Basque Islands"--a very appropriate name for the homeland of a descendant clade of ZZ440.

    Precisely how those FGC23343 people got to the Scottish islands is still a mystery, but Viking activity remains a strong possibility. Vikings were definitely based in Oleron and nearby Ile de Re for 20 years during the mid-800's A.D. Although they never established permanent roots on the scale of the Danes in Normandy, their presence in Oleron and Re is an undisputed fact, as well as the Irish and Scottish origins of many of the Viking bands based here.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Actually, it may be significant the the first recorded Garnet in Lancashire was a fellow named Vivien, whose immediate overlord was Roger Montgomery, count of Poitou--which is on the western coast of France, which is a logical place for a subclade of Z209 to spread out from its apparent home base in Cantabria, Spain. Also, the name Vivien seems to owe its popularity to an early saint of the name based at Sainte in Angouleme. The lords of Angouleme and Poitou were closely related from an early date, swapping territory regularly. Chances are that the FGC28369 branch of FGC23343 originated in Poitou, entering the service of the de Montgomerys when Roger Montgomery married the heiress of that county, and the Dorey branch settled in Manche, Normandy after Montgomery's part in the failed rebellion of 1088. The fact that there are apparently branches in Shetland, etc. in the ancient Norwegian viking realms of the western isles may be coincidental, with no bearing on the origin of the Garnets, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Just noticed a member of the Garnett DNA project with a 67-marker haplotype that McGee predicts to have a TMRCA of about 700 years / MRCA about 1300 A.D. with the confirmed FGC28369 folks. It doesn't look as if he's done SNP testing, but he seems to have all the diagnostic marker for the ancestral clade FGC23343. So it looks like the clues to this cluster's origins should be found among the Garnett family rather than the Edgeworths, Swifts, Kunckles or even Gerards--although the Gerard and Garnett families do have a history of intermarriage. There's kind of an oblique relation between the Gerards and the Edgeworths through successive marriages to the Bridgeman family in the 17th century.

    https://www.familytreedna.com/public...frame=yresults

    There's the great site with tons of cool information, but the bottom line seems to be that their 1st fully documented ancestor was a member of the entourage of the de Montgomery family, just after the Norman Conquest.

    https://shissem.com/Hissem_Gernets_in_England.html

    The assumption would be that they were also vassals of the de Montgomerys in Normandy before that, which doesn't necessarily tell us much since they had lands spread over much of the duchy. However, they did own some towns near Montebourg, which is *relatively* close to Eturville/Carquebut where the Doreys are first documented. So a Hiberno-Norse origin is still likely, even though the chance that they're a branch of the Neel family of Saint Sauveur seem remote. 2 or 3 generations in, the Garnetts did marry into the d'Aubigny family, which also used the praenomen 'Nigel', and were also from the Cotentin peninsula. But it feels too late to be a real smoking gun.

    The Garnett heraldry has some superficially striking similarity to both the original Gerard coat and the d'Aubigny coat, but the relevant motifs are so common generally (i.e., crowned lion) that it's hard to get excited about it. Plus there's plenty examples in history of female collateral lines adopting the bearings of more prominent relatives with whom they share no agnatic descent (e.g., the de Carterets).

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    . . . Remember, at the moment, the strongest piece of documentary evidence that the Great Smeaton de Colebys were a branch of the fitz Nigel family was that, like the Geoffrey de Coleby of Heworth (& Coleby, wapentake Manley), they were tenants of the abbey of St. Mary.
    All the evidence in both directions (i.e., pro-fitz Nigel vs. pro-Colby in Westmorland), except perhaps the DNA, is circumstantial. There were relatives of the Westmorland family holding land nearby (e.g., the Cabers & de Fulthorpes at Catterick parish).

    But for 10 years, 1189 to 1199 A.D., Ranulf, 6th earl of Chester, was also earl of Richmond. Sir Richard Fitton of Bollyn in Cheshire, a justiciar of the earl of Chester, was also seneschal for the earldom of Richmond, and held land at East Cowton and Great Smeaton, two places later closely associated with the de Coleby/Vincent family. They kept that land into the early 1300s, I think. At least until 1285, when de Kirkby's survey was prepared.

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...vol1/pp160-162

    The fitz Nigel family were constables of the earl of Chester until the 1150s, when it passed into another family through an heiress. The de Colebys retained some connection with the earls of Chester through the 13th century in their various holdings in Lincolnshire & Oxfordshire, so there are maybe plausible reasons beyond the connection with the abbey of St. Mary at York for the de Colebys to come this way.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by SDV View Post
    Joseph Vincent the fuller. I cannot find any record of other than he was there.

    Thank you for all this work. The Vincent lineage are not an easy path to discover. Very twisty.
    No problem. This is a very interesting historical puzzle. There are some well-established pieces, like the Edgeworth, Gerard & Garnett pedigrees to leverage off of. This could bring another into play.

    Just found this, which seems to be an extended abstract of the arms grant to Philip Vincent, including direct quotes. It's hard to read. I think the heralds did a bad job of documenting their work here.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=yz...ess%22&f=false


    It seems to suggest that there is record of Vincents attempting to register some version of the "Cowleby" arms in 1371 A.D. (i.e., the regnal year 45 Edward III), which is one generation back from the currently most authoritative version of the Great Smeaton pedigree.

    It also seems to show that the "standard" version of the de Coleby coat of arms had a color scheme identical to the de Fulthorpe arms I discussed at footnote 36 in the memo.

    I'm also consulting with an expert on the 'Copley' family discussed in the memo. I think I may have been able to extend their pedigree back to about 1050 A.D., to a Saxon named Askelf (variants: Essolf, Asolf, etc.). There seems little chance that their name was ever confused with any version of "Cowleby", especially since they were already well established in the 13th century, even if the precise connection to later descendants is not clear. But their use of essentially identical arms with the 'Cowelbys' seems to require some explanation.

    It seems that there were a number of families using arms so similar to those described for the "Cowlebys" that I may end up just chalking it up to coincidence, just something that happens whenever you choose a very simple design. To date, these families include:

    1. de Fulthorpe, Richmondshire
    2. Copely of Sprotbrough, Yorkshire
    3. Upton of Northolme, Lincolnshire
    4. Sampson of Nun-Appleton, Yorkshire
    5. de Percehay of the Great Habton area of Yorkshire
    6. de Monceaux, also of the Great Habton area

    I'm almost sure that the Upton thing is a coincidence--they intermarried with a Bek family from around Boston, Lincolnshire, and I think the Uptons' choices were influenced by the Beks' heraldry.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony...shop_of_Durham)

    The de Fulthorpe, de Percehay and de Monceaux things just might have had a similar influence on the Cowlebys of Great Smeaton, as almost all the records of the Coleby family in Yorkshire since 1400 have also been with the area around Great Habton. Which could be good news for the fitz Nigel theory, because there was what I think was a "fiz Nigel" de Coleby fairly close by, at Brantingham, during de Kirkby's survey of 1284-5. Also named John, like the guy at Great Smeaton at that time.

    Plus, I got a little more detail about the history of the abbey of St. Mary in Great Smeaton. Their holdings originated there in the mid-12th century, through donations by Robert I de Brus.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=_c...Hornby&f=false

    The later Vincent family DEFINITELY acquired, at least temporarily, part of the old St. Mary holdings around 1551. For its early history, I believe Appleton Wiske was considered a part of the parish (i.e., a 'chapel') of Great Smeaton.

    https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vc...vol2/pp223-225

    Remember, at the moment, the strongest piece of documentary evidence that the Great Smeaton de Colebys were a branch of the fitz Nigel family was that, like the Geoffrey de Coleby of Heworth (& Coleby, wapentake Manley), they were tenants of the abbey of St. Mary.
    Last edited by benowicz; 9th September 2018, 07:53 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SDV
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    I have almost finished the little write up I made about my observations. To your knowledge, has anyone explored the possibility that your line somehow connects to this guy? Maybe someone from the DNA project?

    https://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm....nix&id=I081795

    Considering that currently I am the only person in my immediate family doing any geneological research, the answer would be, no.

    This branch of the Vincent surname would most likely be from the I-M253 Vincents the Cornwall-> Somerset,Maryland branch.
    The other possible line are the R-L1 Vincents which range from Rutherford NC to Surry VA area. The possibility of my Vincent line as a NPE event in early colonial America, is not out of the realm of possibility.

    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the nonconformist minister you were talking about? Named Nathaniel, son of John, and not John?

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

    No, The nonconformist Minister i refer was named John.

    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/00...1=John+Vincent

    He was a prisoner in Dorset, ss. Prisoners to be transported, to be delivered to Jerome Nipho, in all 62.

    I'm less confident that I correctly identified literature on either of the other Vincents you speak about in connection to Monmouths' rebellion. Generally, most of the action took place in the south western counties--where the surname Vincent is at its most common. It's just that I don't see any connections to Scotland or the gentry there.

    If the Captain John you speak about actually had family roots in Holland, and not just temporarily stationed there, I'm not sure I'd consider him a likely candidate. I'm focused right now mainly on English people of Norman origin or people from Normandy itself. Not that it couldn't be, but what little evidence there is doesn't suggest it's a particularly high probability, I think.

    What i have found about John the Capt. It appears Jans was also an acceptable spelling, him being rooted firmly in Holland and caught up with the various other Vincents at the time appears coincidental in my eyes at this point due to the political winds.

    About Joseph Vincent the fuller, I can find nothing.
    Joseph Vincent the fuller. I cannot find any record of other than he was there.

    Thank you for all this work. The Vincent lineage are not an easy path to discover. Very twisty.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by benowicz View Post
    Here's the last draft. Should open as a read-only Word file.
    That was intended as much to establish a catalog of documents for future research as to present a coherent conclusion.

    Given the vast amount of critical information that is unknown, I don't suppose much confidence is possible. But it seems fair to ask for a more structured presentation. Below is a quantification of my gut-level feelings after having written, reviewed & edited that research document.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Here's the last draft. Should open as a read-only Word file.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    Originally posted by SDV View Post
    The wall i hit and possible expansion of my family lineage in time occurs in the early 1700's late 1600's. I refer to the Monmouth Rebellion in 1685, 7 Vincents took part in the rebellion. John Vincent the Captain from Holland, John Vincent the unconventional minister and Joseph Vincent the fuller are the three that i focus upon. John the Captain came from Holland and was sent to Barbados after the rebellion was quashed. John the nonconformist minister served time and was pardoned for storing munitions in churches. Joseph the fuller it is documented was presumably pardoned. (was he a child?) Its the documentation of presumably pardoned that has me thinking.

    I do not know with any certainty whether Josephs father was John the captain or John the minister, or he may have been the captains son and taken in by the minister. The Monmouth rebellion is documented history, my family lore is not. The minor nobility status of the ecclesiastical Vincents may have saved Joseph, the ones with ties in the Dumfrieshire area. Vincent gentry in Dumfrieshire puts us also in close proximity of the Ulster scots and quite possibly the Carroll family. What I am sure of, Joseph and John, are common names in my line of descendants in England. Also, that one Vincent made it to Virginia, and he lists Dumfrieshire, Scotland as to were he came from.

    I have almost finished the little write up I made about my observations. To your knowledge, has anyone explored the possibility that your line somehow connects to this guy? Maybe someone from the DNA project?

    https://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm....nix&id=I081795

    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the nonconformist minister you were talking about? Named Nathaniel, son of John, and not John?

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

    I'm less confident that I correctly identified literature on either of the other Vincents you speak about in connection to Monmouths' rebellion. Generally, most of the action took place in the south western counties--where the surname Vincent is at its most common. It's just that I don't see any connections to Scotland or the gentry there.

    If the Captain John you speak about actually had family roots in Holland, and not just temporarily stationed there, I'm not sure I'd consider him a likely candidate. I'm focused right now mainly on English people of Norman origin or people from Normandy itself. Not that it couldn't be, but what little evidence there is doesn't suggest it's a particularly high probability, I think.

    About Joseph Vincent the fuller, I can find nothing.
    Last edited by benowicz; 5th September 2018, 10:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • benowicz
    replied
    It would be nice to have an independent source for the coat of arms of this particular branch of the Coleby family.

    But it seems that I may be very close to a solid hypothesis for the origins of the FGC23343+ Vincents that makes them descendants of William fitz Nigel, 2nd baron Halton, constable of Chester. Either from William or a close relative.

    There was indeed a second, distinct gentry family of Coleby in Lincolnshire & Yorkshire, deriving their name from lands held by William fitz Nigel during Domesday. This record from 1252 gives a catalog of some of their early holdings, which at the time of Domesday, were held by William fitz Nigel himself, or his father-in-law, Gilbert de Gant.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=vM...nshire&f=false

    I'm going to want to gather my findings in pedigree format, with citation, but I'll have to iron out the typos, etc. first. There are a few, some in my sources, but some I made myself, in earlier posts here. But the conclusion seems to be coming clear that the Colbeys whose arms a descendant of the Great Smeaton Vincents assumed were relatives of some kind of William fitz Nigel.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X