Y-DNA

Before we take a look at my DNA, I would like to add two books to the reading list. Both are recently published, and although they relate to UK families the principles explained are universal. In order of publication: "Surnames, DNA & Family History by Redmonds, King and Hey"; publisher: Oxford University Press, and "DNA and Social Networking" by Debbie Kennett; publisher: The History Press.

I would read the second first since it does not presume that you have some previous knowledge of  DNA. They approach the use of genealogy DNA in different ways. Redmonds, King and Hey demonstrate its use in helping to determine the origin of surnames and whether they may have a common source. Kennett is more concerned with the testing procedures and the interpretation of the results, so they complement each other very well indeed.

I'm afraid that FT-DNA is the only testing company with which I am familiar, so my observations will continue to relate to their projects. Hopefully, before taking the Y-DNA test you joined/created your surname group - if only to get the discount - but now is the time to use it! Your results will be forwarded to your group administrator who will usually display them in comparative tables with others of the same surname and haplogroup. That for part of the R1a1a Ferguson group is shown below:

Here you can see the results for the first six markers for 4 persons, out of the 10 Fergusons who share the R1a1a haplogroup. Obviously, they are all the same, as indeed they are at 12 markers. But, at 37 markers only 3 are exactly the same, and at 67 none of us (although one member has not tested after 37 markers). Whether it can be said that people are related depends on the difference in the number of markers, the greater the difference then the further back in history you have to go to find a match. Of these 4, only 3 are likely to have a common ancestor within 8 or 9 generations, when determined at 37 markers.

From the results of the above FT-DNA will determine the probable haplogroup to which you belong, as I said, they calculate mine to be R1a1a which is called "Norse". I found extending my test from 37 to 67 markers made little difference to the comparative results at 37, in fact I had a change of only 1 marker when compared with the others. Chris Pomery recommends that 37 markers is sufficient in the vast majority of cases.

I am currently having some of my SNPs tested and will go into details of what they are next time.

© Ron Ferguson 2012

Location, Location, Location and the UK

I am British, it is difficult to describe myself otherwise as my father is descended from Scottish ancestors, my mother from Welsh and I was born in England. It may be because of this hybrid background that I am sensitive to the way in which UK locations are entered in genealogy reports.

Let us start with the meaning of the UK; it is (now) the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but prior to the establishment of the Republic of Ireland in 1922 it included the whole of Ireland. This, of course, leads to the question as to what is Great Britain; put simply, it is the largest island within the British Isles the latter being merely a geographical description which also includes, the whole of Ireland and the Isle of Man. Often the Channel Isles are included as well but this is not strictly accurate. Great Britain comprises the countries of Scotland, England and Wales. The first two are Kingdoms and the latter a principality - but never suggest to the Welsh that Wales is not a country, it is :-).

Northern Ireland is a province of the UK, created from 6 counties in 1922, and is not the same as Ulster which contains two additional counties, now in the Republic. The Isle of Man and the Channel Isles are not, and never have been, part of the UK, but are Crown Dependencies. The former having the oldest parliament in the world, The Tynwald. The Channel Isles has two separate states, Jersey and Guernsey with their own governments, and the other islands are dependencies of Guernsey.

For further information please refer to The British Isles and all That.

After only a short time studying genealogy one meets the "four field convention" for naming locations. Let us be perfectly clear - this does not work for UK locations. To start with we do not have states, and England, Scotland and Wales are countries not states of the UK or GB. The correct description of location in these three countries would basically be: Parish/County/Country or Parish/Town/County/Country. There are variations, but these are the basic formats.

Thus, the correct location of Southampton is "Southampton, Hampshire, England", and not as I have recently seen "Southampton, ,Hampshire, Engand". There is not another tier between Southampton and Hampshire. We never add "UK" or "GB" to the end of a location, in particular, the latter is simply wrong and the former unacceptable. Arguably it could be said that "Northern Ireland, UK" is correct, although I would not include "UK".

Ouch! I hear, the Geolocation finders no longer work, well they don't, they were designed to fit the four field system, which doesn't work for us (and much of the world outside of America for that matter). I would suggest that accuracy should come before convenience and where I need to use the locator (rarely) I first enter the data incorrectly so that it fits the four field system, get the latitude and longitude, and then correct the location fields. A little more trouble, yes, but at least the output is accurate.

For further information on the history of English locations you are referred to English Counties, Parish, etc. for Genealogists.

In conclusion, for me, to expect a system of naming which has developed over nearly 2000 years to fit a convention developed only in the 20c is beyond my comprehension, and I look forward to the day when we will see our locations accurately reported.

© Ron Ferguson