Using DNA and Thrulines to Breakdown Brickwalls- maternal

We have had the worst time with a few of my maternal grandmother's relatives. Most of her maternal side we could get back past third great grandparents, but her father's side, we were stuck with her great grandparents on his maternal side, and then the earliest ancestor we stop is her 2nd great grandfather, William Crawford on her father's paternal side.

So I have my great Aunt's DNA, and amazingly enough we have a lot of Paxton relatives who have tested, so much so that (she doesn't have many closer than 3rd cousin matches, and those are all from her grandparents), almost all of her third cousin matches and many of her highest fourth cousin matches are Paxton's.


Paxton Discoveries
I look into the matches, pretty regularly, and noticed someone new. A fourth cousin, whose a Paxton. This Paxton's ancestor was born in Canada, but he matched many of the Paxton's and descendants of a Martha Endersbee. So I did the genealogy. Turns out, we know Benjamin Paxton's parents, William Paxton and Mary Brown from his enlistment in the Civil War. We also know from 1850, that in St. Lawrence county, Benjamin Paxton has a sister Martha, both of these matches, the other Paxton who goes back to a William Paxton who emigrated to first Quebec then Ontario, Canada, and Martha who married William Endersbee and lives in St. Lawrence County, NY are our Paxton relatives.

William Paxton married a Catherine Bryans, a catholic, in Montreal, Quebec in 1835, and in 1833 the death of Mary Paxton is recorded in records in Quebec. William went on to have four more children with his second wife, two daughters Mary and Eliza Ann, and two sons, George and John P. Paxton. When I changed the tree, thrulines for these folks show up, unfortunately, because the Endersbee folks haven't changed their tree, and don't have a parent for Martha if they have her surname, they aren't showing up yet. Research shows that Martha Paxton Endersbee (maiden name on death certificate of her daughter) is the same age as Martha Paxton from 1850 census and she is also born in England.

I still haven't found baptisms for any of these folks. I am not altogether convinced that they were from Oxfordshire, though we do have one higher match, with roots to Bicester area that is matching in common many of the Paxton's.

Although the state census gives Mary Douglass Paxton's birth place as Clinton County, NY, I have yet been able to figure out how she relates to the Douglasses there.

Crawford Discoveries

William Crawford was born about 1766 in Ireland, and by his naturalization papers, came to the US in 1793 where he moved to Chenango County, NY. It is possible, he is a cousin of some degree to the Crawfords there, but they had been in the US for quite some time, so it is doubtful to me. However, we have again, some strong DNA matches to a descendant of a Crawford who came during the potato famine.  A letter in the probate records for a relative of this Crawford give her origins as Cloughy, County Down in Northern Ireland.

I have been able to track her father, and his brother with records I found online. It is my opinion, based on the size of the match and relationship, these men are nephews of William Crawford, and he is from County Down. Now, the name Crawford is very common at this time, and records aren't that great, but it is the first clue we have had, and given that he's the last arrival on my grandmother's paternal side (all of the rest being residents long before the American revolution), it's nice to be able to pinpoint his origins.

Using DNA and thrulines to breakdown brick walls- Paternal family

So when thrulines first came out I was like, no way. It's showing me folks as ancestors who aren't in my tree, I don't like this at all! Well, they have made changes and it's better, but still, I tend to completely ignore their "potential" ancestors because quite often, I find they are often based on really poorly researched trees. However, I have found a use for thrulines. That is taking my research, and my theories and testing them. And it works, I have gotten thrulines to multiple matches on most of the theories I have had, which were based on research and in common ancestry. So I want to take a little bit of time to share a few of the ancestry DNA shared matches who have proven valid with thrulines.


Hardy family, which has a lot of testers now. I noticed that everyone from Talulah Johnson that I had access to was matching descendants of Green Brantley and Mary Solomon. So I looked into it. Green Brantley was a neighbor of my family, living in the same section in the same county. My great grandmother had always said Talulah was illegitimate, and I assumed it was William Washington Johnson, but that's where I went wrong. See, Elizabeth is the same age as Matilda, who never shows up anywhere, yet is married to her sister's widower, John Diamond. Early census doesn't account for a third daughter, what if Matilda was Matilda Elizabeth. So I changed my tree, and made an unknown son of Green Brantley Talulah's father, and Matilda Elizabeth Johnson the mother. Bingo, we have a bounty of matches through thrulines from several children of Green Brantley. A few children are showing higher matches, but determining which one is her father, not possible, but we can safely assume, Talulah Johnson is the granddaughter of Green Brantley and Mary Solomon. A fellow researcher also changed her tree and has had the same results.

So another Hardy member, Gardner (I believe to be Gardner Sheppard after a great Uncle) Hardy. I know his guardian was Robert Kelley. I know Robert Kelley married a Rebecca. I know that George Washington Hardy in Coffee county is also matching my Hardy's and other Hardy folks in common. And we were matching Kelley's. I found a newspaper with the statement that Robert Hardy was not going to be responsible for the bills of his wife Rebecca who had abandoned him, about a month before he died. So, I changed Rebecca to also being the wife of Robert Kelley, and bingo, we have a lot of matches. It doesn't help that folks have the Kelley tree wrong, either. When you trace their records, Wentworth Webb and Rachel Sorter had a daughter, first name unknown who is the mother of Robert Kelley Jr. There is no indication that Rebecca is a Webb.

 In fact, DNA is linking two families to descendants of  Rebecca, but I can't find the connection, the descendants of the Bobo family and equally the Chambliss family. It's possible that the match is through Harriet, Gardner's wife, but based on the location and the time frame, it looks like Rebecca makes the most sense.

Holy Hale... What a mess!

It's not that I haven't spent much time on my maternal great grandmother's ancestor's, it's just not the same intensity I have some of my Dad's side. First, it's in England, which can be a pain. It has taken me 20 years to figure out not just the parish thing, but to realize that there are I am not sure, hamlet's, villages, what you call them, but places that people are from in the Shire and Parish!

So, with my grandmother's sister's DNA matches, I have been working on some of the road blocks. For this blog, it's the Hale family. So I know Rosannah Hale born around 1813 in Oldbury or Rowley Regis is my ancestor. She's my grandmother's great great grandmother. But, I couldn't (I have since I found the other's on this blog) find a baptism. I was at a loss.

So I looked at someone in common with my great Aunt descended from Rosannah Hale and their shared matches, (none of them  Timmins by the way), one was a Hale, and her daughter. I was like OMG! So then I looked at in common matches to her, because, no, they don't have a tree. I found two more Hale ancestor's in common in this group, sisters who were illegitimate and born in Oldbury. Elizabeth and Hannah Hale. I reached out to them. I also found someone from another person who was illegitimate, who is matching, and is most likely a grandson of a James Hale (which hours of research using free BMD and ancestry was also the ancestor of the Hale we were matching).

James Hale in the various records states he was born in Oldbury, but then Whiteheath Gate. So Whiteheath gate is a 3/4 mile square-ish part of Oldbury. There is a great little book about the area here.  So then I started looking at that specific area in the 1841 census, which is a little hard because turns out, part of it is in one shire and the other in another. Because part of Whiteheath gate is  in the parish of Halesowen, and the other was in Rowley Regis parish and then Oldbury. Don't ask, I still have trouble. James Hale ends up in an area just off Portway Rd, about a mile away on Langley Green Rd in 1841 is an Esther Hale. Esther is a bit older than James and Rosannah. (Census shows her 1811, but her baptism is actually in 1807). Esther had an illegitimate son, Thomas Hale in 1831. Now, Esther is my pick for mother of Elizabeth and Hannah, though, to be honest, there may be another child, because evidently, Esther's parents didn't baptize anyone in the Church of England after 1807, and since Oldbury area has a lot of non-conformist (that's not Church of England for you Americans), which have missing records, it's been impossible to find anything.

So Esther was married in the Quinton parish Church, and that record shows her father as John Hale, a tailor. Quinton Church covered the area of Warley Wignon, and it looks like part of Langley Green.  Esther shows her place of birth as Whiteheath Gate also. The only other Hale to name that. So I was like, okay, we are going with this, but I needed more information. So I purchased the transcriptions of the parish records for Tipton, Rowley Regis and Halesowen parishes online. Going through it I found, Rosannah Hail, daughter of John and Nancy Hail, a tailor, age about 19 years living in Warley Wignon baptized in 1831. I also found baptisms for a Thomas and Esther children of John and Nancy Hale. Thomas Hale is the one who married Honor Hodgetts but dies within 2 years, and apparently has no children. Based on all the other baptisms and records between the two parishes, (Tipton not included), it looks like John had a wife, Sarah, prior to Nancy. She died in 1800 and is mentioned as the wife of John in Rowley Regis Parish. Prior to 1800, everything Hale related is in the Halesowen parish.

So I have been able to put together a tree, finally, for Rosannah Hale. Now, Ancestry is not my favorite DNA company because shared matches can be incidental/coincidental, and not valid as a family match, because you can't triangulate them. However, since I can do a papertrail on this one, I am satisfied that in this case, the incommon matches, which aren't that many, and share the same trees are in fact the relationship.

Joseph Hale  married Sarah Birch married 1757, father of John Hale who married Sarah Stringer then Nancy unknown.

John and Nancy had
Thomas Hale, born 1805, died 1827.
Esther Hale born 1807 died 1881, she may be the mother of Hannah Hale b. 1825 Elizabeth Hale b. around 1831, she is the mother of Thomas Hale born prior to October 1831.
Rosannah Hale born about 1812-1813 died 1876
James Hale born about 1818 and died 1874.

It looks like the other children of Joseph are related to the various Hales in and around Oldbury that I have researched in the past, including Samuel Hale and Emmanuel Hale. Nancy Hale age 70 was living on Spon Lane in Smethwick and is buried by the Rowley Regis parish in 1844. I cannot find anything on a death for John Hale.

Immigration and Immigrants

Technically speaking, my great great grandfather was an illegal immigrant. He said he was born in the United States. He wasn't, his family moved to Philadelphia for almost 10 years when he was an infant before returning to England, but he, the eldest was born not in the United States but in jolly old England.

So technically, only my great grandmother was a legal citizen. Her mother and brother's didn't apply for citizenship, because based on her father's claim, they claimed they were already United States citizens through her father, but they weren't. A path to citizenship back then certainly seems easier than now, but was it?

Congress enacted a bill that required immigrants pass a literacy test in 1917, and in 1924 enacted further quotas on country of origin.  Did you know that? It's one of the tragedies of World War 2. Immigrants, many Jewish, were unable to immigrate because of these laws. Sadly, many of them died because of it.

Nearly a 130 years after my great grandmother was born in 1889, it doesn't seem all that important that her family came here illegally. And why should it? She married a man whose paternal ancestor's had been in the country 1-10 years after the Mayflower arrived in Plymouth. His maternal ancestors were immigrants, but when they immigrated in 1840, you didn't need to apply for citizenship.

Her brother and sons served in World Wars I and II. Some of her grandchildren served lifetime careers in the Navy. And no one ever wondered if any of them were illegal. I doubt, because they were English, that they even cared that they were immigrants. 

My maternal grandfather's families all resided in the Unites States long before the American Revolution, from German and British immigrants to native Choctaws. My father's family likewise has been in the United States since the 17th century. So when I look at my family history, it is for the most part, uniquely American, except for that one little branch.

Immigration has been a big topic now a days. Lots of opinions are expressed both in favor and against immigrants, legal and illegal. Yet, the truth is, for most of us, our families were all immigrants at some point. Now, yes, my grandfather's Choctaw ancestors are considered native, but the rest, they weren't always here, they came here to a country for economical, political or religious reasons.

It is the hallmark of what I believe our country stands for. Years ago, when I had my website, the home page had the following words. I wish more of us realized who we have been, and base who we are on that. 

America ... land of the free, home of the brave.

Genealogy has taught me more about the truth in those words

than any history class I ever attended. While to the novice

genealogist, or the casual browser these pages may seem

mostly lists of names, to the experienced and avid genealogist

they tell stories of how our country developed and was made

into the land we know today.

The lives of these individuals are the basis for the foundation of

our country, the dangerous and wild paths they emigrated

along stretched this country from sea to shining sea. Each

generation has it's own story to tell ...

From the first colonists who came over two hundred and fifty years ago to a strange land looking for religious freedom,

To the Scot Irish immigrants who blazed the trails of the

wilderness looking for land they could own that was cheap or

free,

To the Native Americans who struggled to maintain their land

and their culture amist the white intruders,

And to the European immigrants of the latter 19th and early

20th century who were seeking out a better opportunity, we

learn not only their names and their families, but can trace the

growth of our nation.

Each has faced their sorrows and their triumphs, laughter and

tears, and with courage and determination shaped for

themselves, their families and their descendants a land we can

call home. As you browse through these pages, some stories

are told, others remain hidden to be found and treasured. Amid

these pages you will find murderers and statesmen, preachers

and outlaws, mothers and warriors. Looking back allows us to

see that while we view our own lives as ordinary, time and

history can give it a different perspective. So journey along

with me through these pioneers of our past, their lives are

what made this country the land of the free and the home of

the brave.

The Bobo and Chambliss families- making a connection

For the last three years I have had matches in common for my father and other Hardy family members with the Bobo family (linking back to Tillman Bobo and his wife Beulah Yarborough), but I never could figure out the how. Dad in fact matches four siblings from this line, among several others.

This week a cousin of Dad's results showed up, and when I started looking at our in common matches, I found another surname Chambliss, and all of those Chambliss matches were in common with the Bobo. So how on earth do the two relate.

My current working theory is that Margaret Carlisle who married John Humphreys (an ancestor of Beulah Yarborough), is the daughter of Richard Carlisle and his wife, Mary Chambliss, a daughter of Henry Chambliss, and sibling to the John Chambliss Sr line that we are matching.

Of course there is an issue. All the Bobo researchers say she was born in Ireland and died there, despite the fact that her child was born in Virginia. And none of the Richard Carlisle researchers have a daughter Margaret, just other children her age.

So if that is the link it explains the connection between the two lines, but what about the Hardy connection? There are only two females, Rebecca the mother of Gardner Hardy or his wife Harriet. Rebecca lived in the same area as other Chambliss' so she makes the most sense as the first place to look, but it just as easily can be Harriet.

Though we can't triangulate (all the matches are on ancestry), we are showing multiple (at least 5) matches across descendants of different lines for Gardner Hardy, so the Chambliss lead is the most substantial one we have had come up.

DNA the advantages and pitfalls for Genealogy

I am a fan of DNA testing. I find it fascinating and interesting to find out the things we learn from it. However, as much as it adds to my genealogical research, it is not a replacement for it. That is the key bit of information for those who are still considering if they want to test or not. Testing your DNA can help you, but you will still spend hours researching trees.

So what are the advantages? What are the Pitfalls?

1. DNA matches can lead to discoveries on your dead end ancestors, but generally only within the first 5 generations, with the odds decreasing for every successive generation.

the pitfall, you have to be able to triangulate for these type of discoveries, which makes the ancestryDNA matches useless if you can't convince the matches to use gedmatch or the free ftdna transfer.

2. You may find relatives you never knew you had. Personally, I think this is an advantage, but I am not someone who was adopted and never knew it, like a recent second cousin tester just found out. Mostly for me it's been being able to help others who have a question, they are adopted, they don't know who their father is, that even with just ancestryDNA and solid genealogical research we have found the answers for.

the pitfall, you may find information you would rather not know, and to help someone else, it's still a long road of research.

3. If you triangulate, you can find some interesting information. That's the part I love, seeing how some family DNA has been passed down more than others. Seeing the amazing way in which we become who we are.

the pitfall, you can only triangulate with 23andme, ftdna and gedmatch And, it is sometimes hard to get responses from matches.

These are pitfalls only.

1. less than 5% - 10%  of your matches on average will have a tree, and if your lucky, about 25% of those you contact will answer your message.
2. Ancestry trees are riddled with errors. While I don't recommend using shared matches and trees as a way to identify a match alone in general, larger matches (above 75 cM) can be identified however, it means really doing the research on your own to verify the match and trees are compatible.
3. Matches that are below 30 cM can be helpful only with triangulation, and only if they can illuminate a larger match or have multiple matches that can point you in a direction.

Don't let the internet DNA scare tactics scare you

There are multiple articles and even news stories on how taking your DNA test is a bad idea. Not only do I not believe that, but I want to be blunt about it. The anti-DNA camp is using scare tactics that the general public will readily believe because they don't know better.

Just this week with the help of DNA and genealogy research I was able to identify the birth father's family for three different individuals. With the thousands of people who are trying to find answers, DNA is definitely useful, and scare tactics just may drive testers away that can be vital for those who are searching.

So what about DNA and what you can or cannot learn from it about another tester.

1. Someone who matches me can tell if I carry a specific gene for a disease. Mostly FALSE.
 DNA matches are only for 1/2 of the chromosome. So even if someone knew that for example 1377 CT a genetic SNP variant dealing with metabolism of folic acid was located on Chromosome 14, and they knew the exact location in correlation with the DNA match, they only know 1/2 of the result for the comparison, and only if they already looked at their raw data and knew what their result was and had identified if it was a paternal or maternal match.

Because without testing at least one parent, a tester with raw data who does research their snp's for genetic markers will not know which side they inherited the marker from unless both parents contributed the same marker. Since abnormal markers only need one variant to be positive for a marker, it is possible if they had tested at least one parent, identified the match to the parent with the variant, and then took the exhaustive step of computing the match on that chromosome was in that exact location that they could identify you had an abnormal SNP.

So let's get this straight. To even remotely identify that a genetic match carries an abnormal health gene you need to meet all of the following.
1. know the exact location of the SNP on the chromosome
2. Identify the genetic contributor from your sample (maternal or paternal) by testing a parent and comparing the raw data files for that location.
3. Successfully identify the match to a paternal or maternal match in the exact location.
4. the match has to be to the abnormal variant in that exact location, if it is normal it tells you nothing.

Yeah, I can just see that happens a lot. Most people who test don't even know the basics on autosomal DNA, much less the complex science behind genetics.

2. Test companies sell DNA to 3rd market researchers. TRUE, but...
they also remove any personal identifying information from the data, and require your consent when you test. What this means is that the genetic code, the G,T,A, or C is intact but your name isn't anywhere on it. So while it helps research genes, it does not identify you in anyway whatsoever.

3. Police can use your DNA to help find criminals TRUE, but..
Ancestry, 23andme, and FamilytreeDNA do not voluntarily contribute to police. If I am not mistaken, it specifically says they will only do so if they are given a subpoena or warrant for the information.

About the Gedmatch news story.

Gedmatch is voluntary, and it is free. What is so amazing about the recent news about the serial killer who was found based on DNA evidence using Gedmatch is the improbability of it working in the first place.

Read any message board or group dealing with DNA and genealogy and you will hear the same complaints. A significantly small percentage of tests have a gedcom or family tree attached. I think I have about 50 for gedmatch with over 3000 matches (I haven't looked in a while) for my father and my mother each. So roughly less than 5 % of users even have a tree, and my personal response rate for correspondence is around only 25 % across the board for 4 companies where I have DNA results. Add to that the folks who have tested with new chips have had difficulty because the data is incompatible with gedmatch, it is mind boggling that they took a DNA sample and gave it the right format to be of any use.

Personally, I don't mind if a serial killer is found because my DNA helped, but to each his own.

4. Your giving away your most private information. TRUE, but..
you retain ownership of your DNA and can remove it at any time. Other users (matches) cannot see your raw data, and even if they identify matches, they only know 1/2 of your DNA, they do not know all of it. AncestryDNA allows no comparisons, so if your worried about someone figuring something out that they shouldn't (which I hope I already proven is really, really time consuming and hard), you don't have to worry about it at all. Though to be honest, the biggest pitfall of ancestryDNA is that relying on matches and trees alone is  a disaster waiting to happen. Except for close matches, the capacity for errors and assumptions is really high leading to misinformation.

Comparing your DNA and seeing the results does give some information, but even among those who do test for health reasons, they may ask you if you carry a specific genetic marker, but most are not literate enough in DNA to even begin to do the exhaustive study I eluded to in my first point.

5. Insurers can use your DNA against you. TRUE, but..
they do not have access to your actual results. And if we are smart we will ensure legislation keeps that from happening. What they can ask is if you have taken a DNA test for genetic reasons and if you know you are a carrier for a specific problem. That is not all that different from preexisting conditions we are subject to now, except, for many markers, the increased likelihood of disease is only slightly increased. Which is why I am not necessarily a fan of the health DNA market in the first place. It is easy to scare people into believing they are at risk, and often when you read the actual research, the risk is not much higher. I believe before you test, you really need to understand the whole picture, and having a marker doesn't always mean you have the disease.

6. You may find out information you don't want to know TRUE
The biggest risk with DNA is you may find out your father isn't your father, or your were adopted, or one of your parents or grandparents had an affair and had a child. That is a big risk, and if you really don't want to know those answers, then you shouldn't test.

Personally I think the rewards of testing far outweigh the cons, and I hope that now you do too.