HAM Country blog

Mapping Viking Migration with Y-DNA STR's

2011-09-19T21:26:00.001-04:00

Mapping Viking Migration with Y-DNA STR's

Y-DNA analysis of STR information can provide clues to Viking migration in recent time frames. The Y-DNA STR YMRCA estimates suggests that the Norse (Vikings) could have originated from seafaring peoples of the Mediterranean Sea.

Share on Facebook

In March, 2011, the results of grouping the DNA STR information by country for the I1 (M253) haplotype were studied.

These results suggested a migration along a sea-faring route in recent time frames. In order to visualize that, a possible migration route is presented here. As stated in the article in March, the method does have some problems. It may be worthwhile to visualization the difference in from currently posted maps of SNP's in order to contrast with what was found from the STR study.

Most SNP maps today show an overland route for M253 either through the mountains of Europe, or through the general vicinity of Germany. The STR map (below) suggests a sea-faring route, based upon TMRCA estimates for STR modal groups by country.

click on image to enlarge

Some of the resulting TMRCA estimates were stylized in order to represent the data in one graphic.

For reference, see "Y-DNA and Viking Migration"

http://hamcountry-blog.blogspot.com/2011/03/y-dna-and-viking-migration.html

To post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Revolutionary War Quick Studies

2011-09-18T00:10:00.000-04:00

Revolutionary War
Quick Studies

Drury Ham has to be my favorite HAM Revolutionary War Veteran. His account of his activities as an Indian Spy, combined with his recollection of the Battle of Cowpens is fairly colorful material. Mordecai Ham was a dragoon at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse. William Ham was at the Siege of Yorktown.

Share on Facebook

If you are looking for a quick study regarding the battles of the Revolutionary War, Jeff Weaver has a few small (and inexpensive) books listed on his Lulu web site. These brief books would be a good companion to our history. These books (below) generally have a good overview of the action, maps, graphics, and an index. These battles are considered to mark the point where the Americans began to win the Revolutionary War.

In our book "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC," we list some details about the Revolutionary War veterans that carried the HAM(M) surname. There were HAM(M) Revolutionary War Veterans that fought in each of the battles that are considered to have turned the tide of the war. Jeff Weaver's books should be of interest to those who want a brief overview (50+ pages) of these battles.

There were Ham(m)'s who were Revolutionary War Veterans from each of these battles:

Battle of Kings Mountain
Battle of Cowpens
Battle of Guilford Courthouse
Siege at Yorktown

Battle of Kings Mountain (October 7th, 1780 Near Blackburn, SC and King's Mountain, NC)

During the summer of 1780, British commander Patrick Ferguson travelled through South Carolina into North Carolina gathering loyalist support for the British. After a string of small battles (Wofford's Iron Works, Musgrove's Mill, Thicketty Fort, and Cedar Spring) the campaign culminated in August with the defeat of the Americans at the Battle of Camden. The American "Over Mountain Men" retired to their homes in North Carolina to rest.

In September, British General Cornwallis ordered commander Ferguson to the north, before joining the main British forces again at a later time. By October 7, Ferguson had camped at King's Mountain.

American Colonels McDowell, Sevier, Shelby and Campbell gathered in Tennessee and marched to (present day) Morganton, joining those serving under Cleveland and Winston. On October 6th, they joined forces with Colonel Williams at Cowpens.

The American soldiers marched through the night and arrived at King's Mountain on October 7th. They surrounded the mountain in a horshoe formation, taking cover in the heavily wooded area. The battle lasted about an hour and 225 Loyalists were killed, 716 were taken prisoner. 28 Patriots were killed.

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-battle-of-kings-mountain/106795?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_104866_

Battle of Cowpens (January 17, 1781 Cowpens, South Carolina)

Maj. General Nathanael Greene needed time to recover from the Battle of King's Mountain, and split his mobile force off to be under the command of Brig. General Daniel Morgan. The British Lt. General Charles Cornwallis recognized the strategy and sent his own mobile force under Lt. Colonel Banastre Tarleton after Morgan. After several weeks of maneuvering, General Morgan finally had to choose his ground before Lt. Colonel Tarleton overran him.

Morgan settled on Cowpens, South Carolina. Morgan's strategy was that the British would expect a retreat. Part of Morgan's plan was for Andrew Pickens' militia to feignt a withdraw by firing three times, and then falling back. When the battle took place, the British became undisciplined and broke ranks in pursuit. This loss of discipline allowed the planned actions of the Continentals to thoroughly rout the British and destroy General Cornwallis' light troops.

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-battle-of-cowpens/105905?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_104866_

Battle of Guilford Courthouse (March 15, 1781 Greensboro,NC)

After Cowpens, the British General Cornwallis pursued the American General Nathanael Greene to Guilford Courthouse, North Carolina. By this time Greene had built a substantial force (mostly farmers who were nonprofessional temporary soldiers of short duration).

On March 15, General Greene deployed his men in three lines of battle across the Great Salisbury Wagon Road that led off to the southwest toward the camp of the British army. The front line was deployed against a rail fence that surround farm fields and extended into the forest. The second line was located within the forest behind the first line.

The British Highland Regiment attacked, and suffered heavy losses before breaking through the center of Greene's front line. The second line fought for about an hour and was broken by the British, but only after the British again suffered heavy losses. The heaviest fighting was at the third line, where the British General Cornwallis found his men being attacked from the remaining two sides of American forces. The battle culminated when Cornwallis decided to fire his cannon into the center of the struggle, killing his own soldiers in the process. When the smoke cleared, the American General Greene ordered a retreat. Cornwallis had won the battle, but suffered heavy casualties.

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-battle-of-guilford-court-house-north-carolina/106960

From King's Mountain to Yorktown

(Siege at Yorktown October 09, 1781 Yorktown, Virginia)

By midsummer, 1781, the Continentals under General Nathaniel Greene had gained virtual control of South Carolina. By September, 1781 Greene had an apparent loss at the Battle of Eutaw Springs to British commanders Arbuthnot and Stewart. Nevertheless, Greene put an end to British conquests in the south.

Also that month, French commander deGrasse defeated a British Fleet that had come to relieve Cornwallis (Battle of the Chesapeake). As a result of this victory, de Grasse blocked any escape by sea for Cornwallis. British General Cornwallis was stationed in Yorktown, Virginia and was surrounded by land and by sea when George Washington arrives. Trees were cleared, trenches were dug, and redoubts were taken. By October 9th, Rochambeau's French cannons would begin the bombardment.

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/from-kings-mountain-to-yorktown/111379?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_104866_

The Revolution in Virginia

by H.J. Eckenrode

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-revolution-in-virginia/123625?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_104866_

Revolutionary War Soldiers from the Upper New River Valley

by Jeffery C. Weaver

http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/revolutionary-war-soldiers-from-the-upper-new-river-valley/126594?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_104866_

About the Publisher

Author Jeffrey C. Weaver holds degrees in American history from Appalachian State University, and after serving in the U.S. Army for several years, he worked as a contracting officer for the U.S. Department of Energy. Former manager of the Chilhowie Public Library, he founded the New River Notes web page in 1998.

http://www.newrivernotes.com/nrv.htm

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/newriver

to post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom

Ancient Migrations Using STR TMRCA

2011-08-15T00:33:00.019-04:00

Ancient Migrations

An analysis of time frames using Y-DNA STR TMRCA estimations

Share on Facebook

It may be useful for family historians to use Y-Search data in order to understand ancient migration patterns for their family line.

A number of folks disregard the results from Y-Search that do not provide a DNA match beyond a Genetic Distance of 6. That's because most are only interested in genealogical time frames. Deep ancestry is usually left to obscure SNP notations that may or may not make sense to the average genealogist. The general migration path for an SNP can trace out a migration path dating to tens of thousands of years ago.

However, a family historian might be just as interested in what happened within the last two thousand years, in the hope that some day, supporting documentation may be found, or at least put on their search list.

If you have an idea of where your line originated from within the last two thousand years, then you have an idea of whether or not you should be interested in, for example, Normans. Or Saxons. Or Romans.
I had not completed my migration study of HAM DNA Group #1 when I posted the article (about being in a line from England that also matches Y-DNA for Norway and France. http://hamcountry-blog.blogspot.com/2011/05/england-traces-in-france.html - see cluster #2). However, from the chart listed there, I could have just as easily listed out the data in chronological order, such as:

present............U.S.

1577 AD........Virginia
1288 AD........County Somerset, England
913 AD........Broennoeysund, Norway

855 AD........Gloucester or London, England

638 AD........Dirksland or Margraten, Netherlands

465 AD........France

335 AD........Devonshire, England

Which should represent a broad outline of the migration of my own line (HAM DNA Group #1). Not a whole lot of movement there, apparently a fairly stable group. And, my analysis was not really completed (not all of the data was analyzed). The curious entry there (for my group) would be to determine where the group from Devonshire was at 335 AD.

The basic idea is to create the phylogram from the Y-Search data such that you know where the other Y-Search kits may have branched off. Then use Dean McGee's Utility to find the TMRCA in order to estimate an approximate timeline for the migration of your family group.

Without getting into very much detail, I have done this for another I1 haplotype group (WIDEBURG surname). For this study, the Y-Search data was divided into small groups, then Dean McGee's utility was run to get the TMRCA's, and the phylograms were run on the groups in order to determine what was branching off and what was not.

The Wideburg results resembled a migration pattern such as this:

Wideburg............ now.........Sweden

England16........ 1505.........Harpole, Northampton, England; London, England; Thurlby, England

England15........ 1580.........Norwich, England

Ireland19........... 1430.........County Kerry, Ireland

Germany24....... 1305.........Cabell County, Germany

Netherlands07.. 1305.........Netherlands

Denmark03....... 1230.........Stadil, Denmark

Germany08....... 1155.........Germany

England01......... 1080.........Essex, England

England04......... 1030.........Benwick, Cambs, England; Moulton, Northampton, England; Essex, England;

...............................................Newbold Verdon, England; Liverpool, England; London, England;

...............................................Bristol, Gloucestershire, England
Scotland06.........1030.........Renfrew (Port Glasgow or Paisley), Scotland; Pike County, Georgia, Scotland

France01............1030.........Tonquédec, France; Oberroedern, Alsace/Elsass, France

Denmark05..........805.........Laurbjerg, Denmark

Germany38..........730.........Germany

Germany50..........730.........Oberstenfeld, Germany

France03..............655.........France

Germany45..........580.........Falkenhagen, Pomerania/Pommern, Germany

Slovenia02...........500.........Gradenc, Slovenia

Switzerland11......405.........Buettenhardt, Schaffhausen, Switzerland

Sweden05...........155..AD.........Lindesburg Parish, Sweden

Which suggests an I1 migration pattern perhaps originating from Slovenia, and perhaps migrating through Germany via the Danube, through Denmark, France, Scotland, and finally arriving in England, then Sweden. A lot of movement for this group, and the analysis was done by placing similar kits within each country into small groups. The curious point here being to try to understand where the Switzerland group actually was located in 405 AD, as well as the location of the Sweden group in 155 AD.

However, the interesting point for the Wideburg surname is that they are found in Denmark at about the time of the Danish Vikings, and are found in France and England at about the time of the Norman invasion.
However, dividing kits matched by country is no guarantee that you will see movement as clearly defined. When the study was run on the STANLEY surname, the results appeared to be unreliable for placement on the phylogenetic tree prior to 700 AD. The migration path for this R1b group traced out like this:

STANLEY..... ARJYZ .........Now

England046...........1360.....AD........GBWJC......Salkeld........Salkeld Parva, Cumberland, England
Scotlan033............1216.5..AD........GSMDW....Guthery.........Scotland
Germany017...........953.5..AD........4MRWP.......Harmon.......Woerttemberg/Wurttemberg, Germany
England096.............910.8..AD........83Y4V.........Curtis...........West Farmington, England
Sweden03...............836.0..AD........SKNTC.......Johansson...Jonsberg, Ostergotland, Sweden
Scotlan034..............727.4..AD........N9SQE.......Downie.........Lanarkshire, Scotland
Sweden07................684..AD........NHVM    Anderson   Goteborg, Goeteborg & Bohus, Sweden
France08..................598 ..AD........JQXXQ     Fousse     Alsace-Lorraine/Elsass-Lothringen, France
England075...............511..AD........England      (490 - 517 Battle of Mons Badonicus - Romano-British under Ambrosius Aurelianus decisively defeat the Anglo-Saxon invaders.)
Sicily01 ....................488..AD........Agira, Sicily
Scotlan032 ...............440..AD........Scotland
Sweden06 ...............408 ..AD........Nordmaling, V???sterbotten, Sweden (Visigoths under Alaric sack Rome in 410.)
Norway03 ................398 ..AD........Mandal, Norway
Germany019..............391..AD........Roethenbach an der Pegnitz, Bavaria/Bayern, Germany (Visigoths defeat the Romans at the Battle of Adrianople in 388)
England097..............346 ..AD........Hertfordshire, England
Germany021..............344..AD........Rheinland-Pfalz/Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany
Germany027..............316..AD........Wurzburg, Germany           (Wurzburg is, perhaps, 150 miles from Trier.)
Germany024..............306 ..AD........Germany   (307 Emperor Constantine is in Britain, and sends troops against Germanic tribes along the Rhine, begins a major expansion of Trier.)
England100..............303 ..AD........Plymouth, Devon or Devonshire, England
England103..............285..AD........Baldwin, Isle of Man, United Kingdom
England098..............285 ..AD........Chorley, England    (Roman Carausius, is put in charge of operations against Saxon and Frankish pirates on the Saxon Shore.)
Italy07 ......................196..AD........Mezzojuso, Italy      (Roman Battle of Lugdunum was fought in 197 AD)
Germany026..............180 ..AD........Schnait im Remstal, Wuerttemberg, Germany (Roman Praetorian Prefect Teratenius Paternus defeats the Quadi.)
England106 ..............168..AD........Corby, Northamptonshire, England      (The Marcomannic Wars ca 166 - 180)
Germany028..............151..AD........Friedrichroda, Germany
England108 ..............133 ..AD........England              (Antonine begins construction on his wall in 142 AD)
England110.................80..AD........England              (Hadrian begins construction on his wall in 122 AD)
Germany029...............59 ..AD........Hofheim, Bergstrasse, Hessen, Germany (Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo captures Tigranocerta)
Netherla05..................57..AD........Domburg, Zeeland, Netherlands
Australia3...................23 ..AD........Australia             (Australia isn't settled by Europeans until about 1600)
Germany031................8..AD........Wittenberg, Germany (Roman Battle of the Teutoburg Forest)
France09 ....................3 BC..........Bourges, France   [Caesar conquers Bourges (Avaricum) ca 50 BC]

Looks like the last 1,000 years have mostly been in England and Scotland. Prior to that they have a German element, with some indication of the possibility of some ties to Italy and Sicily. So, it looks like that STANLEY line may be Anglo Saxon, with something that looks "Romanesque."

The timeline for the period from 0 AD to 700 AD was updated on Nov 27. 2011, but the phylogeny did not appear to be stable. That is, it is likely that the timeline would may be correct (mostly due to the number of markers tested per kit for the period). The original article only listed the results back to 727 AD. Historical references for the date and location were taken from Wikipedia.

The oldest STR match found indicating possible origins in France.

For the Stanley surname, the Y-Search results had been divided into some 158 groups, mostly 67 markers with less than 20 kits that had been tested to 95 markers. Most of these beyond 67 markers were panel upgrades, which caused a little bit of manual effort to sort in correct order.

The dates do not really provide an explanation of the reasons for migration. It might be reasonable to expect that short periods of migration along coastal areas or waterways to be trading activity. But, it might be difficult to interpret the difference between trading activity and military operations. More information with regard to historical references may help in the interpretation of the activities during the time periods.

Wikipedia articles:

Roman Battles:     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_battles
Antonine Wall:      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Wall
Hadrian's Wall:      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian%27s_Wall
Marcomannic Wars:    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcomannic_Wars

If you would like me to do this for your surname, please see my Y-DNA services web page.

To post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Y-STR Mutation Wars

2011-05-15T05:02:00.008-04:00

Y-STR Mutation Wars

Dienekes' Anthroplogy blog has a note about the ongoing concern regarding dating Y-DNA.

You might recall my posting about using Y-DNA to date Viking migration to the last 2,000 years. (Rootsi et. al. had a much earlier dating for I1(a) origins in Europe.)

Well, the Viking migration article was not the first time Y-DNA dating techniques have been under scrutiny.

There is some disagreement on dating techniques when comparing SNP TMRCA estimates to STR TMRCA estimates. In this article, he is mostly talking about how to date Y-STR mutations.
Here, Dienekes talks about a new study by Busby and Capelli.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/let-y-str-mutation-wars-begin.html

The background information about his previous blog posts is also worthwhile reading:

How Old is Y-Chromosome Adam?

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-old-is-y-chromosome-adam.html

Dienekes previous posts on his Y-STR series:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/search/label/Y-STR%20Series

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

England Traces in France

2011-05-02T00:56:00.008-04:00

England Traces in France

Three clusters from Somerset show Norman ancestry

Clusters of Y-DNA participants in Somerset, England trace back to France During the Norman Conquest

Share on Facebook

Share on
Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore
info

In 2007, population density studies for the HAM DNA Project had shown that Group #1 had a distant genetic match to three areas in England; Yorkshire, London, and Crewkerne (County Somerset). Later that year, the project picked up a new participant, Tony Ham, who was a close genetic match to HAM DNA Group #1. Tony was a more recent immigrant to the U.S., and knew that his ancestors were from Brent Knoll, County Somerset. At that point, we knew that the home country of HAM DNA group #1 should be County Somerset, England.

Tony had suggested that perhaps we were of Saxon origin, or perhaps Roman origin, since Somerset is in the area of Ham Hill, known to have been used by the Romans. And, the hill carries the Ham name.

However, the population density studies by Rootsi, et. al., had shown high concentrations of I1 in Norway. Group #1 should have been of Norman descent. Somerset was an area of England that was not under the Danelaw, so in all likelihood, they would not be Danish. Yorkshire (also a distant match to Group #1), is famously known to have been under the control of Normans.

On the other hand, some have said that the Normans were little more than recycled Vikings. You can't really tell the difference between Saxons, Danes, and Vikings, it has been said.

England has had many invaders up to the time of the Norman Conquest. Romans, Saxons, Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Normans, and other Scandinavians had invaded it's shores. Logic can provide a good indication of which group your ancestors might belong to. However, it isn't always a straightforward matter to prove which group brought your ancestors to England. Or, to any other country, for that matter.

The use of genetic genealogy was useful in telling us that HAM DNA Group #1 could be from County Somerset, England. Perhaps it could help determine if HAM DNA Group #1 would be Roman, Saxons, Danes, or Normans.

It might prove useful to run an ancient migration study on our DNA Group #1. An analysis of the modals from some 300 groups (or clans) from over 30 different European countries, could compare to the groups to the Group #1 haplotype. The results from such a study have shown a migration route for the last 2,000 years for the ancestors of HAM DNA Group #1. The migration study showed an arrival in Devonshire, Northumberland and Kent circa 500 AD. Or, at least, the lines with ancestors in these locations today have matched the same location as Group #1 from 500 AD. Which should mean that Group #1 shares a Common Ancestor from 500 AD with lines from Devonshire, Northumberland and Kent.

The ancient migration study (of the modals of clans in over 30 countries) showed that HAM DNA Group #1 had arrived in England from France, Germany, Italy, Sicily, and Austria. The phylogenetic tree generated was to close together in time that it looked like the same family, or at least, the phylogeny of the modals could not determine the difference between these countries.

Prior to 500 AD (according to the modals), there was a period of about 500 years showing very intense movement, almost obviously by sea, originating in Poland, launching from Slovenia and landing on what appears to be various European coastal areas. It looked very much like intense trading activity.

If HAM DNA Group #1 did in fact arrive in England in 500 AD, then it raises the question of whether or not they would really be of Norman descent. On the other hand, if they simply shared a common ancestor dating from 500 AD, then could the DNA be used to show if they would be Norman descent?

Another DNA study was devised, this time without using modal analysis. This second study was a detailed, kit by kit study of individuals from different countries. The goal was to compare the individuals in HAM Group #1 with individuals from other countries. Each participant in each country would be plotted out on a phylogram, in order to see where HAM Group #1 fits in the genetic tree.

This detailed study of France proved to provide some missing migration information.

First in the comparison procedure, three clusters in England that matched the phylogenetic tree to the Somerset group (HAM DNA Group #1) were obtained. Then, Y-Search participants with ancestors from France were sought for a match to these three "Somerset" clusters. The result was that a significant number of matches were found in France.

Following that, comparison of kits from various countries were analyzed for a phylogenetic tree match. In all, a match on individual kits was sought from the Netherlands, England, France, Norway, Denmark, Austria, Germany, and Poland. Each country was compared to HAM DNA Group #1, one at a time. Some countries had no match for the time frame in question. Basically, matches to these three "Somerset" clusters in England were retained, then another match would be sought from another country.

The results for each of the three clusters matching HAM DNA Group #1 are presented below. A map of the matching locations in France are given in the previous blog article on mapping M253 in France.

--------------------------------------

Somerset Cluster #1

--------------------------------------

The phylogenetic tree for the Somerset Cluster #1 has the characteristics of the HULL surname in the area of Crewkerne, County Somerset, England. In order to fill out the genetic tree for this cluster, TMRCA matches had to be searched for in a number of countries and plotted out in a phylogenetic tree.

It was found that prior to Somerset, this group is likely to be found in Norway. Cities that match in Norway include Lesja, Nordland, and Skaun. The group appears to have been in Norway some 600 to 700 years ago.

Prior to Norway, the group appears to have migrated from several countries, but mostly Denmark. For this time period, there are matches in Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc. Those in France appear to branch off from the main line. Matching locations in Denmark include Samso and Stadill.

Also branching off from this line are the samples from Woodchurch, County Kent, and Warwickshire in England.

The point of origin for this cluster appear to be (at least briefly) from Denmark in the areas of Augustenborg and Tjaereborg about 1200 years ago.

--------------------------------------

Somerset Cluster #2

--------------------------------------

The phylogenetic tree for the Somerset Cluster #2 has the characteristics of the HAM surname in the area of Virginia, in the United States. Again, to fill out the genetic tree for this cluster, TMRCA matches had to be searched for in a number of countries and plotted out in a phylogenetic tree.

This group matches to a HAM line in Brent Knoll, County Somerset, England. The length of the line between Norway and England is an indication of either some missing data or a long period of settlement.

It was found that prior to Somerset, this group is also likely to be found in Norway. The only city appearing to match in Norway is Broennoeysund, Norway. The group appears to have been in Norway some 900 to 1025 years ago.

Prior to Norway, the group appears to have migrated from two main areas, England and the Netherlands. Matching locations in England include Somerset, with branching to Gloucester and London.

The point of origin for this cluster appear to be from the Netherlands in the areas of Dirksland and Margraten about 1200 years ago.Prior to that, they join back into phylogram for France. The TMRCA for kit Z3T3D of Devonshire and the rest of HAM DNA Group #1 dates from 1350 to 1500 years ago.

In summary for this group, the phylogenetic tree suggests that this line does not appear to be of Saxon or Danish ancestry. There is certainly an influence from Norway and France. The surprise is the influence of the Netherlands upon the genetic tree.

--------------------------------------

Somerset Cluster #3

--------------------------------------

The phylogenetic tree for the Somerset Cluster #3 has the characteristics of the CHAMBERLAIN, HAMMOND, and NOLES surnames in England. To fill out the genetic tree for the cluster, TMRCA matches had to be searched for in a number of countries and plotted out in a phylogenetic tree.

For this cluster, the areas in France mapping to Norway are Ringsaker, Buskerud, Oeveroes, and Friedrikstad, (in Norway). This group matches to a CHAMBERLAIN line in Rutland, England and Warwickshire, England. It is also a match to several surnames in France including fitz Osbern, Clergeau, Shappee, Hitt, and Tippit. The locations in France are numerous, but to mention a few with more recent TMRCA estimates: Crepon, Mouzeil, and Lorraine Province, France. Crepon is near Bayeux, home of the famous Bayeux Tapestry.

It was found that prior to Rutland or Warwickshire, this group appears to tie back to both France and Norway. It would appear that prior to arrival in England, the group ties back to a brief period in Oeveroes, Norway. The TMRCA between the HAMMOND surname and ARNESON surname is estimated at 900 years ago. The TMRCA between the CHAMBERLAIN surname and ARNESON surname is estimated at 1025 years ago.

Prior to the migration from France to England, the group appears to have been in France with the HITT and TIPPIT surnames (PWFVE & Y9QEE), and carry an estimated TMRCA of some 900 to 1025 years ago (to AUXXS, N74PC, and AEDRQ).

The point of origin for this cluster appear to be from France, with typical TMRCA estimates ranging from 1200 to about 1500 years ago.

References:

Mapping Y-DNA M253 in France: http://hamcountry-blog.blogspot.com/2011/04/mapping-y-dna-m253-in-france.html

Historical Map of the Dominions of William the Conqueror about 1087, University of Texas at Austin. Historical Atlas by William Shepherd (1923-26):

http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/william_conqueror_1087.htm

Norman Conquest of England http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Conquest_of_England.htm

The Bayeux Tapestry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayeux_Tapestry

Y-Search: http://www.ysearch.org/

Dean McGee's Y-DNA Comparison Utility: http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility.html

The PHYLIP software package http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip.html

The HAM DNA Project: http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAMCountry.html

Rootsi et al, Phylogeography of Y-Chromosome Haplogroup I Reveals Distinct Domains of Prehistoric Gene Flow In Europe. American Journal of Human Genetics, 75:128-137, 2004. http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Rootsi2004.pdf

'How to Read HAM DNA Phylograms' You Tube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-49T2p-SyQ

If you have a similar project in mind that you would like me to analyze, then please see the HAM Country DNA services page.

To post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom

Mapping Y-DNA M253 in France

2011-04-27T04:44:00.014-04:00

Mapping Y-DNA M253 (I1) in France
In search of Norman ancestors in France

Share on Facebook

Share on
Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore
info

The use of Y-DNA in family history studies has helped to provide clues for reconstructing the family tree. It is instructive to map out known M253 samples in France from the Y-Search database in order to see if their is any correlation of the mapping to what is known about the Normans in the historical record.

Population density studies can provide information about country of origin, such as that from Rootsi et. al., in 2004. This paper had shown a high density of the M253 (I1a, or now I1 haplotype group) to be located in Norway, providing a clear clue that M253 could be of Norman Viking descent.

The area of Normandy itself was conquered by the Romans in 98 AD, and with the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century, became dominated by the Franks. Cave paintings and megaliths in Normandy prove that humans have been present in Normandy since prehistoric times.

A review of Viking history shows that the Normans originated from the northern Scandinavian areas, known as "Norsemen," or men from the north. This particular branch of Vikings raided the coast of Normandy in the 8th century, and established the area of Normandy, France in 911 AD. The Normans later invaded England with the Norman Conquest in 1066, and generally shared territories in England and Normandy until Normandy was integrated into the Kingdom of France in 1204.

Knowing that M253 has a high population density in Norway, and knowing that the Normans settled the area of Normandy and England, it is helpful to examine the Y-DNA in order to determine of we can identify who may be of Norman descent. This particular study concentrates on mapping the known M253 (I1) Y-DNA participants in the Y-Search database.

In general, I1 is found in northern France, not just in the area of Normandy, but also along the east and west borders. Of the 32 samples found in Y-Search, 20 of them provide a specific city location in France, and about 12 provide only "France" as the location of their ancestry. Only three specifically indicated the area of Normandy as the location of their ancestry.

Which is to say, population densityof M253 in France today suggests that the greatest concentration is in the region of Alsace Lorraine. However, it is not the mapping, but the phylogeny of the Y-DNA participants in France that tells us that most M253 in France today is of Norman descent. That is, the Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor suggests that nearly two thirds of the Y-Search samples in France are of Norman descent.

M253 Y-DNA map in France
( click on image to enlarge)

The Y-Search samples are marked by numbering in red in the map (above). The details of the Y-Search mapping of the individual M253 samples is given below:

========================================================================== France

Y-Search Surname Location
ID

1) U7MDP........Barron................Normandy, France
2) XDPFV........Blanchard...........Martaize, Loudun, Dept. of Vienne, France
3) TSCUH........Brochard............Longeville-lès-Metz, Moselle, Lorraine, France
....H9UNV.........Cauchebrais......France
4) EEWM3.......Clergeau............Mouzeil, France
....QEQU3........Coslow...............France
5) Q8SAX........Croteau..............Rouen, France
6) RD4SF.........Dendinger..........Oberroedern, Alsace/Elsass, France
7) 9Z4EE.........Desjardin............Joigny, France
....JXPRP.........Desrochers..........France
....U3BH9.........de Umfraville (modal)..........France
....FHEVP.........Embry...................France
8) HWN57........fitz Osbern..........Crepon, France
9) 9E6CR........Habant.................Remiremont, France
....PWFVE........Hitt .......................France
....MWKD3........JULIAN................France
....2DRWF.........JULIAN................France
....4DYN5..........JULIAN.................France
10) Y7GVD........Le Cun.................Tonquédec, France
11) KVYFG.........Leindecker..........Vescheim, Lorraine/Lothringen, France
12) Q6TPY..........Leindecker..........Bas Rhin, France
......3D749..........Mallett..................France
13) 65X9Z..........Pallette.................Le Pallet, France
14) 5GJAW........Schumacher........Alsace-Lorraine/Elsass-Lothringen, France
15) SYU9K........Shappee...............Lorraine Province, France
......CMJ3D.......Shiflett ..................France
16) NJ57E.........Souviney...............Rennes, France
17) NNSGK.......Tessier.................Angoumais, France
......Y9QEE........Tippit.................... France
18) QAZCS........Turlin....................Saint-Germain-sous-Doue, France, France
19) B83EG........Vermette..............Arras Pas-De-Calais, France
20) GJVK6........Vilmur....................Paris, France

==========================================================================

When these samples are analyzed for TMRCA, the Common Ancestor typically dates from 700 to 1600 years ago. The minimum TMRCA was 150 years, and the maximum TMRCA was given as 3350 years ago (TSCUH and either KVYFG or Q6TPY). Which is to say, even within the area of Lorraine, the age estimate on the TMRCA has a large variation.

A significant portion of the samples (most individuals on the phylogenetic tree from the JULIAN surname and above) share a common ancestor from 700 to 1500 years ago. In general, the Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor does correspond to the Viking activity in France, and the distribution today appears to be most dense in the area of Alsace-Lorraine.

The relatively small sample of markers for M253 distribution in France suggests that not many of this haplotype remained in France.

The phylogenetic tree of the Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of these individuals is given below:

M253 in France phylogenetic tree
(click on image to enlarge)

For France, the number of markers tested per individual varied from 25 markers to 76 markers. Kits with 25 marker results may not present reliable information for the time frame studied. For this study, kits with 25 marker results were B83EG, NNSGK, XDPFV, 5GJAW, TSCUH, and U7MDP.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

History of Normandy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Normandy.htm

Norman Conquest of England http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Conquest_of_England.htm

The Bayeux Tapestry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayeux_Tapestry

Y-Search: http://www.ysearch.org/

Dean McGee's Y-DNA Comparison Utility: http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility.html

The HAM DNA Project: http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAMCountry.html

Rootsi et al, Phylogeography of Y-Chromosome Haplogroup I Reveals Distinct Domains of Prehistoric Gene Flow In Europe. American Journal of Human Genetics, 75:128-137, 2004. http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Rootsi2004.pdf

Cristian Capelli et. al., A Y Chromosome Census of the British Isles, 2003 Cell Press. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982203003737 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Viking Origins and Y-DNA

2011-03-28T02:39:00.014-04:00

On Viking Origins

and Y-DNA

Share on Facebook

Share on
Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore
info

The previous blog article posed a possible migration path for the Vikings, specifically using the Normans as an example. The study used Y-DNA STR modals by country, and dating the phylogram timeline by scaling to the time of the Norman Conquest (1066 AD).

A current (tentative) timeline looks something on the order of:

(...from more recent locations to more ancient.)

Spain...................... 324 AD
Poland.................... 156 AD
Wales....................... 92 AD
Russia...................... 41 AD
Belgium.................... 16 AD
Portugal................... 10 AD
Netherlands.............. 10 AD
Croatia.................. 214 BC
Romania................ 287 BC
Turkey................... 537 BC
Sicily..................... 654 BC
Ukraine................. 793 BC
Slovenia............... 1022 BC
Czech Republic..... 1231 BC

Which is to say, the Y-DNA genetic distance from the time of the Norman Conquest suggests a timeline for migration per country. At least, given the modals per country for what should be the Normans.

The DNA evidence to support the above is by no means complete, nor conclusive. The modals appear to support migration of the Normans from the Mediterranean Sea, but the specific area for origin (of Croatia) is still speculative. The timeline for origins from Croatia is only minimally supported by very few Y-DNA STR samples in Slovenia and the Czech Republic. However, it is interesting to examine the history of the Croatian people during this time period.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Beginning
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proof for the point of departure for the Viking (I1-M253) migration from Croatia is extremely tenuous at best. The timeline shows an apparent settlement in Croatia by 214 BC, and arrival in Netherlands in 10 AD with arrival in Portugal in 10 AD. This is fairly speculative, based upon very scant DNA evidence for these areas.

In order to determine if this timeline is plausible, more data is needed for I1 in the areas of the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea. However, it is interesting to examine any historical (or archeological) evidence for this DNA timeline.

For this article, some brief clips from Wikipedia has been used provide some insight for further study. Wikipedia is not the best source for research, but it does give a quick overview of the history of Croatia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liburnians were an ancient people inhabiting the district called Liburnia, in what is now Croatia. Liburnians were allied to the Illyrians, who were from the area just south of Liburnia (the former Yugoslavia and current Albania).

Greek history records that Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse (now Sicily) implemented some aggressive tactics towards the Liburnians in the 4th century BC. These actions eventually resulted in the Romans becoming permanent enemies with the Liburnians. Dionysius eventually caused the Liburnians to adopt piracy tactics, and to seek alliances with the Illyrians and Macedonians. After Alexander the Great dies in 323 BC, the Romans wage wars on the Illyrians and Macedonians, which begins the decline of the Liburnian strength. In the end, Roman efforts against the Liburnians would be successful, ending in about 20 AD. It is not clear if the Liburnians participated in the uprisings in the following centuries (Pannonian revolt).

The combination of the Illyrian Wars and the Pannonian revolt appears to have been concluded when Illyricum was dissolved some time around the year 200 AD.

Which implies at least two motives for possible Liburnian migration that are immediately obvious:

a) The peoples of the area could have migrated in order to escape Roman (or in more ancient times Greek) dominance. This theory would be supported by Roman aggression and the Pannonian revolt.

b) As the people of Liburnia became part of the Roman Empire, and any migration could have been due to trade or commerce. If this is the case (and if the Liburnians were I1), then ample I1 DNA evidence in the area of origin would be evident (from peaceful activities). If DNA evidence in the area (dating to a migration) is not ample, then trading would apply only if it was more successful for the people to leave.

The obvious shared traits among the Vikings and Liburnians would include their seamanship and the practice of piracy. However, piracy can be practiced by any seafaring peoples. Although the Vikings used raiding practices (much later), this is not conclusive evidence that they would be the same people. It would appear that if archeological evidence is to support this timeline, it would be in the comparison of ship building architecture. Wood can be carbon dated. Weapons, jewelry, and fibulae (brooches) might provide some comparison. Finally, linguistics might provide some clues (as in stone carvings).

On the blind side, no Native American I1 DNA was studied. The I1 haplotype is thought to have originated in the area of the Black sea with the 170 SNP, so Native American I1 haplotype group is not expected to have originated earlier than in Europe.

Liburnia in the Age of Roman Conquest
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liburnians

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ancient Croatia
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The archeology of the Liburnian culture (ancient Croatia) has been divided into three main time periods:

1) 11th and 10th century BC. Between two waves of Balkan-Pannonian migrations. The Balkans are generally thought of as stretching from the Adriatic Sea to the Black Sea. Pannonia was located over the territory of the present-day western half of Hungary with parts in Austria, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Pannonia was a first century province of the Roman Empire.

2) 9th to the 5th century BC. Liburnian domination in the Adriatic Sea; its first phase (9th century BC), did not generally continue development of the Late Bronze Age. It was beginning of the Liburnian Iron Age marked by their expansion and colonization of Picenum (east coast of Italy), Daunia (southern Italy), and Apulia (southeast Italy) at the Italic shores, which resulted in rich and high level of their cultural development in the 8th and 7th century BC, based on sea trade. Rich material exchange with the other Adriatic coasts was continued in the 6th century BC and connection to Picenum was still strong, but also links to Iapodes (to the north) and Dalmatae (in what is now Croatia, usually classified as Illyrian) has been attested. However, in the 5th century BC, the Greeks undertook leadership of trade in the Adriatic Sea and considerable changes occurred, like widening of the import of Greek products.

3) 5th to the 1st century BC. Decline of their power, typically coinciding with Roman dominance.

In more recent history, the western Empire organized the provinces of Pannonia and Dalmatia, which after its downfall passed to the Huns, the Ostrogoths and then to the Byzantine Empire. At the end of the 8th century Charlemagne conquered Pannonia and Dacia, then Istria, Liburnia and Dalmatia, but the main littoral Liburnian and Dalmatian cites, however, remained under Byzantine control. The Croats settled there in the early 7th century.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ancient Liburnia
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first account of the Liburni comes from Periplus or Coastal passage, an ancient Greek text.

The beginning of the fall of Liburnian domination in the Adriatic Sea and their final retreat to their ethnic region (Liburnia) has been attributed to military and political activities of Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse (406 – 367 BC). (Syracuse was what is now Sicily.) He finished Carthaginian authority, diminished concurrence in Sicily, and turned against the Etruscans. By 385 BC, he focused on the Adriatic Sea, which the Liburnians still dominated.

Over the next 300 years, the Liburnians would see their allies fall to the Roman Empire.

By 33 BC, Liburnia becomes the Roman province of Illyricum. One of the last accounts of the era comes from 35 BC where Octavian destroyed Illyrian pirate communities in the islands and wiped out the Liburnian naval forces.

In AD 6, the Pannonians, with the Dalmatians and other Illyrian tribes, revolted, and were overcome by Tiberius and Germanicus, after a hard-fought campaign which lasted for three years. After the rebellion was crushed in AD 9, the province of Illyricum was dissolved, and its lands were divided between the new provinces of Pannonia in the north and Dalmatia in the south. The date of the division is unknown, most certainly after AD 20 but before AD 50. The proximity of dangerous barbarian tribes (Quadi, Marcomanni) necessitated the presence of a large number of troops (seven legions in later times), and numerous fortresses were built on the bank of the Danube.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settlements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The principal forms of settlements in Liburnia were forts for defense, usually built on elevations and fortified with dry walls. In the Liburnian territory, about 400 have been identified so far, but they were considerably more numerous. About a hundred of names of these hill-forts have kept their roots from prehistory, especially places that had been inhabited permanently. The dwellings were square dry-wall ground-floor buildings of one room. Similar stone houses are saved in Croatian tradition in all Dalmatia and Kvarner, mostly of rounded form.

Haughey's Fort, County Antrim (Ireland) radiocarbon dating points to 1170-770BC, which suggests that hill forts were not uncommon for any area from the iron age. see: http://mitchtempparch.blogspot.com/2009/01/viking-settlements-in-orkney-and.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burial tradition
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Liburnians buried their dead in graves near or beneath settlements. They laid their dead on a side in contracted position, mostly in chests of stone slabs. Most of graves were used from the time of the Iron Age. Tumuli are numerous on all Liburnian territory and especially in the narrowest region of Classical Liburnia (Nin, Zaton, etc.).

There were many different manners of performing a Viking funeral. Norsemen often cremated their dead in ship burials, known from archaeology, sagas, Old Norse poetry, and notably from the account of Ahmad ibn Fadlan.

The Viking dead were often laid in a boat, or a stone ship, and they were given grave offerings in accordance with the earthly status and profession of the deceased, and these offerings could include sacrificed slaves. Afterward, piles of stone and soil were usually laid on top of the remains in order to create a tumulus. The excavation of several Viking burial mounds have yielded complete intact maritime craft, large open boats propelled by oars and sails, several of which are now exhibited in various Scandinavian museums.

Throughout Scandinavia, there are many remaining tumuli in honor of Viking kings and chieftains, in addition to runestones and other memorials. Some of the most notable of them are at the Borre mound cemetery, in Norway, and Lindholm Høje and Jelling in Denmark.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social customs
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Liburnian Ships

The Liburnians were renowned seafarers, notorious for their raids in the Adriatic Sea, which they conducted in their swift galleys. The Greeks and Romans knew them as pirates.

Battle between Liburnian and Picenian ships from the Novilara tablets (6th/5th century BC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liburnians

Danish Viking ship replica from The Viking Ship Museum, Roskilde, Denmark
http://vikingeskibsmuseet.dk/index.php

Liburnian stone engravings show long ships with square sails, containing men rowing with swords and round shields. The obvious structural difference between these ships and the Viking ships is the projectile point in the front of the Liburnian ship at the water line. The obvious similarities include the square Latin sail, shallow bottoms, men rowing, the circular shields and swords.

Remains of a 10 meters long ship from the 1st century BC, were found in Zaton near Nin (Aenona in Classical Liburnia), a ship keel with bottom planking made of 6 rows of the wooden boards on each side, specifically joined together, sewn with resin cords and wooden wedges, testifying the Liburnian shipbuilding tradition style, therefore named "Serilia Liburnica". Deciduous trees (oak and beech) were used, while some climber was used for the cords.

A 10th century AD ship of identical form and size, made with wooden fittings instead of sewn planking joints, was found in the same place, "Condura Croatica" used by the Medieval Croats. Condura could be the closest known vessel to the original "liburna" galley in form, only of much smaller size, with the same features of a quick and agile galley having shallow bottom, very straightened but long, with one large Latin sail and one row of oaks on each side.

By its original form, the liburna was the most similar to the Greek penteconter. It had one bench with 25 oars on each side, while in the late ages of the Roman Republic, it became a smaller version of a trireme, but with two banks of oars (a bireme), faster, lighter, and more agile than biremes and triremes. The liburnian design was adopted by the Romans and became a key part of Ancient Rome's navy, most possibly by mediation of Macedonian navy in the 2nd half of the 1st century BC.

It is interesting to note that Viking battle tactics (i.e., speed, agility) and piracy practices were also part of the Liburnian cultural history.

Apparently, there is sufficient historical evidence to suggest that the Liburnians were driven out of the area by sustained Roman aggression. However, the DNA timeline is only supported by a few Y-DNA STR samples from Croatia, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine, Slovenia, and the Czech Republic. More DNA samples from the region may enable us to determine whether or not Croatia was a site of Viking origins.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liburnian Timeline
and the personalities that affected their history (snippets from Wikipedia)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Liburnians were first allied to the region of Illyria, and the Macedonian empire. These two alliances resulted from conflicts with Greek and Roman forces and caused the eventual demise of the Liburnians.

406 – 367 BC

Fall of Liburnian domination in the Adriatic Sea and their final retreat to their ethnic region (Liburnia) were caused by military and political activities of Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse (406 – 367 BC). (Syracuse was what is now Sicily.)

384 – 383 BC

A great naval battle was recorded a year after the establishment of Pharos colony, by a Greek inscription in Pharos (384 – 383 BC) and by Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (80 – 29 BC), initiated by conflicts between the Greek colonizers and the indigenous islanders of Hvar island, who asked their compatriots for a support.

According to Diodorus, The Greeks killed more than 5,000 and captured 2,000 prisoners, ran down or captured their ships and burnt down their weapons in dedication their god.

This battle meant the loss of the most important strategic Liburnian positions in the centre of the Adriatic Sea, resulting in their final retreat to their main ethnic region, Liburnia, and their complete departure from the Italic coast, except from Trentum. Greek colonization, however, did not penetrate into the Liburnian area, which remained strongly held, while Syracusan dominance suddenly diminished, very soon, after death of Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse. The Liburnians recovered and developed piracy to secure navigable routes in the Adriatic, as recorded by Livius in year 302 BC.

323 BC

Alexander the Great dies in Babylon. Alexander III of Macedon (20/21 July 356 – 10/11 June 323 BC), commonly known as Alexander the Great, was a king of Macedon or Macedonia, a state in the north eastern region of Greece, and by the age of thirty was the creator of one of the largest empires in ancient history, stretching from the Ionian sea to the Himalaya.

He was undefeated in battle and is considered one of the most successful commanders of all time.
Born in Pella in 356 BC, Alexander was tutored by the famed philosopher Aristotle. In 336 BC he succeeded his father Philip II of Macedon to the throne after he was assassinated. Philip had brought most of the city-states of mainland Greece under Macedonian hegemony, using both military and diplomatic means.

In the years following Alexander's death a series of civil wars tore his empire apart which resulted in the formation of a number of states ruled by the Diadochi - Alexander's surviving generals.

200 - 300 BC

The middle of the 3rd century BC was marked by the rise of an Illyrian kingdom in the south of the Adriatic Sea, led by king Agron of the Ardiaei. Its piratical activities imperiled Greek and Roman interests in the Adriatic Sea and caused the first Roman intervention at the eastern coast in 229 BC Illyrian Wars were a set of conflicts of 229 BC, 219 BC and 168 BC when Rome overran the Illyrian settlements and suppressed the piracy that had made the Adriatic unsafe for Italian commerce. There were three campaigns, the first against Teuta, the second against Demetrius of Pharos and the third against Gentius. The initial campaign in 229 BC marks the first time that the Roman Navy crossed the Adriatic Sea to launch an invasion.

231 BC

Demetrius II, king of Macedon, hired Agron (king of the Illyrian tribe of the Ardiaei) for military aid against the advancing Greek Aetolians. The Illyrian soldiers routed the Aetolians and returned home as victors. Agron, overjoyed with his success, imbibed a large quantity of wine, which, along with other indulgences caused him a pleurisy. Agron died in 230 BC, just within a few days later after the battle.

230 BC

Agron, king of the Illyrian tribe of the Ardiaei dies a few days after successfully defeating the Greek Aetolians.

229 BC

To protect against piracy upon Greek and Roman interests, Rome launches the First Illyrian War against Teuta in 299 BC. (Queen Teuta was the second wife Agron and acting regent of Illyria after Agron's death.) The Illyrian tribe of the Ardiaei is subdued by the Romans.

220 BC

The Second Illyrian War lasted from 220 BC to 219 BC. In 219 BC the Roman Republic was at war with the Celts of Cisalpine Gaul, and the Second Punic War with Carthage was beginning. Leading this fleet of 90 ships, Demetrius sailed south of Lissus, violating his earlier treaty and starting the war.

Demetrius' fleet first attacked Pylos where he captured 50 ships after several attempts. From Pylos the fleet sailed to the Cyclades, quelling resistance they found on the way. Demetrius foolishly sent a fleet across the Adriatic, and, with the Illyrian forces divided, the fortified city of Dimale was captured by the Roman fleet under Lucius Aemilius Paulus.

From Dimale the navy went towards Pharos. The forces of Rome routed the Illyrians and Demetrius fled to Macedon where he became a trusted councilor at the court of Philip V of Macedon, and remained until his death at Messene in 214 BC.

217 BC

First Macedonian War. Philip V had tried to replace Roman influence along the eastern shore of the Adriatic, forming alliances or lending patronage to certain island and coastal provinces such as Lato on Crete. He first tried to invade Illyria from the sea, but with limited success. His first expedition in 216 BC had to be aborted, while he suffered the loss of his whole fleet in a second expedition in 214 BC. A later expedition by land met with greater success when he captured Lissus in 212 BC.

216 BC

Philip V first tried to invade Illyria from the sea (during the First Macedonian War), but with limited success. His first expedition in 216 BC had to be aborted, while he suffered the loss of his whole fleet in a second expedition in 214 BC. A later expedition by land met with greater success when he captured Lissus in 212 BC.

215 BC

Philip V, King of Macedon enters into a treaty with Hannibal, the Carthaginian general then in the middle of an invasion of Roman Italy.

214 BC

Demetrius of Pharos dies. Demetrius of Pharos (also Pharus) was a ruler of Pharos involved in the First Illyrian War, after which he ruled a portion of the Illyrian Adriatic coast on behalf of the Romans, as a Client king. He was expelled from Illyria by Rome after the Second Illyrian War and became a trusted councilor at the court of Philip V of Macedon, where he remained until his death at Messene in 214 BC.

202 BC

Hannibal's defeat at the Battle of Zama in 202 BC.

200 BC

Second Macedonian War. In 200 BC, with Carthage no longer a threat, the Romans declared war on Macedonia.

179 BC

Philip V, King of Macedon dies. Philip V (238 BC – 179 BC) was King of Macedon from 221 BC to 179 BC. Philip's reign was principally marked by an unsuccessful struggle with the emerging power of Rome.

However, his efforts were undermined by the pro-Roman policy of his younger son Demetrius, who was encouraged by Rome to consider the possibility of succession ahead of his older brother, Perseus. This eventually led to a quarrel between Perseus and Demetrius which forced Philip to reluctantly decide to execute Demetrius for treason in 180 BC. This decision had a severe impact on Philip's health and he died a year later at Amphipolis.

He was succeeded by his eldest son Perseus, who ruled as the last king of Macedon.

168 BC

Third Illyrian War

In 168 BC the Illyrian king Gentius allied himself with the Macedonians. First in 171 BC, he was allied with the Romans against the Macedonians, but in 169 he changed sides and allied himself with Perseus of Macedon. He arrested two Roman legati and destroyed the cities of Apollonia and Dyrrhachium, which were allied with Rome. In 168 he was defeated at Scodra by a Roman force under L. Anicius Gallus, and in 167 brought to Rome as a captive to participate in Gallus' triumph, after which he was interned in Iguvium.

166 BC

The last king of Macedon dies. Perseus (ca. 212 BC - 166 BC) was the last king (Basileus) of the Antigonid dynasty, who ruled the successor state in Macedon created upon the death of Alexander the Great. He also has the distinction of being the last of the line, after losing the Battle of Pydna on 22 June 168 BC; subsequently Macedon came under Roman rule.

146 BC

After the Third Punic War, the city of Carthage was destroyed by the Romans.

It seems that the Liburna warship was used by the Romans during the Punic Wars and in the Second Macedonian War.

84 BC In 84 BC, the Roman consuls, enemies of Sulla, mobilized an army in Italy and tried to use Liburnia, probably some outer island, to organize military campaign back to Italy, against Sulla, which failed due to bad weather conditions and low morality of the soldiers, who massively escaped to their homes in Italy or refused to cross over the sea to Liburnia. The Roman legions once again passed through the Liburnian territory, probably by sea along the coast, in their next expedition against Dalmatae in 78 – 76 BC, started from the north, from Aquilea and Istria, to stabilize control of Dalmatian city Salona.

87 BC

First Mithridatic War (southeastern border of the Black Sea) Asia Minor just before the First Mithridatic War

In the spring of 87 BC Sulla landed at Dyrrachium, Greece. Asia was occupied by the forces of Mithridates under the command of Archelaus. Sulla’s first target was Athens, ruled by a Mithridatic puppet; the tyrant Aristion. Sulla moved southeast, picking up supplies and reinforcements as he went. Sulla’s chief of staff was Lucullus, who went ahead of him to scout the way and negotiate with Bruttius Sura, the existing Roman commander in Greece. After speaking with Lucullus, Sura handed over the command of his troops to Sulla. At Chaeronea, ambassadors from all the major cities of Greece (except Athens) met with Sulla, who impressed on them Rome's determination to drive Mithridates from Greece and Asia Province. Sulla then advanced on Athens.

78 BC

Sulla dies. Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix (c. 138 BC – 78 BC), known commonly as Sulla, was a Roman general and statesman. He had the rare distinction of holding the office of consul twice, as well as that of dictator. He was one of the canonical great men of Roman history; included in the biographical collections of leading generals and politicians, originating in the biographical compendium of famous Romans, published by Marcus Terentius Varro. In Plutarch's Sulla, in the famous series - Parallel Lives, Sulla is paired with the Spartan general and strategist Lysander.

Sulla's dictatorship came during a high point in the struggle between optimates and populares, the former seeking to maintain the power of the oligarchy in the form of the Senate while the latter resorted in many cases to naked populism, culminating in Caesar's dictatorship. Sulla was a highly original, gifted and skillful general, never losing a battle; he remains the only man in history to have attacked and occupied both Athens and Rome. His rival, Gnaeus Papirius Carbo, described Sulla as having the cunning of a fox and the courage of a lion - but that it was the former attribute that was by far the most dangerous. This mixture was later referred to by Machiavelli in his description of the ideal characteristics of a ruler.

Sulla used his armies to march on Rome twice, and after the second he revived the office of dictator, which had not been used since the Second Punic War over a century before. He used his powers to enact a series of reforms to the Roman constitution, meant to restore the balance of power between the Senate and the Tribunes; he then stunned the Roman World (and posterity) by resigning the dictatorship, restoring normal constitutional government, and after his second Consulship, retiring to private life.

Succeeded by Gaius Julius Caesar in 49 BC

59 BC

In 59 BC Illyricum was assigned as a provincia (zone of responsibility) to Julius Caesar and Liburnian Iadera was nominally proclaimed a Roman municipium, but real establishment of the Roman province occurred not earlier than in 33 BC. Dalmatae soon recovered and stepped into conflict with the Liburnians in 51 BC, probably because of possession of the pasture grounds around Krka river, taking their city Promona.

49 BC

Civil war between Caesar and Pompey in 49 BC affected all of the Roman Empire as well as Liburnia. In the same year, near island of Krk, there was an important naval battle between armies of Caesar and Pompey, probably due to the local Liburnian support to one or another side. Caesar was supported by the urban Liburnian centres, like Iader, Aenona and Curicum, while the rest of Liburnians supported Pompey, including city of Issa which citizens were in conflicts with Caesar supporting Dalmatae from Salona. "Navy of Iader" (Zadar) probably equipped by mixed Liburnian
and Roman ships confronted "Liburnian navy" in service to Pompey, equipped only with Liburnians in their liburna galleys.

Thus, the Liburnian naval force was dragged into the Roman civil war, partially by force, partially because of local interests of the participants. Caesar rewarded his supporters in Liburnian Iader and Dalmatian Salona, by giving status of the Roman colonies to their communities, but battle was won by the Liburnian navy, which prolonged the civil war and ensured control of the Adriatic Sea to side aligned with Pompey in next 2 years, until his final defeat in 48 BC. In the same year, Caesar sent his legions to take control of rebelled Illyricum province, and took the fortress of Promona from Dalmatian hands, making them submit.

35 BC

In all that period the Roman rule in only nominally established Illyricum province was concentrated only to a few cities at the eastern Adriatic coast, such as Iader, Salona and Narona. Renewed Illyrian and Liburnian pirate activities motivated Octavian to organize great military operation in Illyricum province in 35 BC, to finally stabilize Roman control of it.

Action was first concentrated on the coastal Illyrian tribes to the east of Narona, then it prolonged to the depth of the Illyrian territory, where continental tribes gave much stronger resistance. After return from inland of Illyricum, Octavian destroyed Illyrian pirate communities in the islands of Melita (Mljet) and Korkyra Nigra (Korcula) and continued to Liburnia, where he wiped out the last remains of the Liburnian naval forces, resolving problems of their renewed piratical activities in the bay of Kvarner (sinus Flanaticus) and attempt to secede from Rome. Octavian commandeered all the Liburnian ships. Very soon these galleys would play a decisive role in the battle near Actium.

Octavian went for another expedition to the inland, against the Iapodes, from the Liburnian port of Senia (Senj) and conquered their most important positions in 34 BC. In the next 2 years the Roman army, led by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa fought hard battles with the Dalmatae. Liburnians were not recorded the participants in this war but their most southern territories were surely involved.

It is not certain whether Liburnians joined the last Great Illyrian Revolt, this remains controversial, as the only evidence is a damaged inscription found in Verona, mentioning Iapodes and Liburnians under an unknown leader.

6 AD

In AD 6, the Pannonians, with the Dalmatians and other Illyrian tribes, revolted, and were overcome by Tiberius and Germanicus, after a hard-fought campaign which lasted for three years. After the rebellion was crushed in AD 9, the province of Illyricum was dissolved, and its lands were divided between the new provinces of Pannonia in the north and Dalmatia in the south. The date of the division is unknown, most certainly after AD 20 but before AD 50. The proximity of dangerous barbarian tribes (Quadi, Marcomanni) necessitated the presence of a large number of troops
(seven legions in later times), and numerous fortresses were built on the bank of the Danube.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
notes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liburnians

mid 4th century BC The first account of the Liburni comes from Periplus or Coastal passage, an ancient Greek text.

Fall of Liburnian domination in the Adriatic Sea and their final retreat to their ethnic region (Liburnia) were caused by military and political activities of Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse (406 – 367 BC, now Sicily). The imperial power base of this Syracusan tyrant stemmed from a huge naval fleet of 300 tetreras and penteras. When he finished Carthaginian authority and diminished concurrence in Sicily, Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse turned against the Etruscans.

The middle of the 3rd century BC was marked by the rise of an Illyrian kingdom in the south of the Adriatic Sea, led by king Agron of the Ardiaei. Its piratical activities imperiled Greek and Roman interests in the Adriatic Sea and caused the first Roman intervention at the eastern coast in 229 BC; Florus (II,5) noted the Liburnians as the Roman enemies in this expedition, while Appian (Bell. Civ., II, 39) noted liburnae as swift galleys the Romans first fought with when they entered to the Adriatic Sea.

Roman wars followed in conflicts with Pyrrhus, Carthage, Macedonia and southern Illyrian state. However, although their territory was not involved in these confrontations, it seems that the Liburna warship was used by the Romans during the Punic Wars and in the Second Macedonian War.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problems with this DNA analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any given country can have a variable amount of genetic distance per location (per individual). The values used here were mostly modals, and the migration sequence can vary depending upon what is considered to be the modal. For example, Scotland appears to have numerous groups of I1 individuals that migrated (into Scotland), but only one group is actually represented by the modal.

Further delineation might be obtained by division of each country into separate migrating "groups." Theoretically, the best resolution would be obtained by including all individuals and scaling to the Norman Conquest. However, there isn't enough DNA data available to apply this properly for the very early time periods in the area of the Mediterranean. At the current time, there are only scant samples from Croatia, Slovenia, and the Czech Republic to support an approximate time frame for an exodus from Croatia.

Y-DNA studies have been underway for nearly a decade now, but the science is still fairly new.

A possible problem with the Time to Most Recent Ancestor (TMRCA) has recently been suggested to be indicated by interclade ages (i.e., Nordvedt). It has been suggested that interclade ages might be younger than previously published material suggests. For any given Y-search study, there is typically a maximum genetic distance reached per search. Theoretically, this might be an indication of other things, such as maximum TMRCA returned from a certain number of STR markers tested, or perhaps could also indicate if any bottlenecks may have occurred in recent history.

If the SNP classification is not restricted from the search criteria, then other haplotype group classifications can be returned from a genetic distance based search. It might be instructive to view a scientific study on what the expected genetic distance limits might be (returned) between the various haplotype group (SNP) classifications for a given number of STR markers tested. Such a study might provide some information regarding the value of scaling modals to a known event, such as the Norman Conquest.

In effect, what is needed are more robust modal values from the region surrounding the Black Sea, but particularly from the Balkan peninsula. Basically, there are few results from the Balkan peninsula, and a greater genetic distance would be expected from that area if this timeline is to be confirmed or denied.

If the current thinking on interclade ages is not correct, then Y-Search might include other classifications than I1 individuals, but should retain the M170 SNP. For example, the previously I1b category (now I) is thought to have originated near Croatia, according to population density studies (Rootsi, et. al.). (I1b is not a significant portion of the Nowegian population.) This suggests that I1b could have been a significant portion of the Liburnian population. A younger interclade age could mean that I1b results might be a valid comparison to I1 (in terms of using Y-DNA to date samples from the Balkan area, etc).

Finally, there were no known Native American I1 samples used in the study. (Currently, there is no way to distinguish Native American Y-DNA samples from the rest of the U.S. population.) Since it is expected that I1 would follow the M170 SNP tree back to the Black Sea area, this should not be a problem. If, however the age of Native American I1 samples pre-date the the arrival on the east coast of Europe, then this could be significant in terms of I1 origins.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To post a comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Y-DNA and Viking Migration

2011-03-14T23:38:00.033-04:00

Y-DNA and Viking Migration

Y-DNA analysis of STR information can provide clues to Viking migration in recent time frames. The Y-DNA STR Genetic Distance suggests that the Norse (Vikings) could have originated from seafaring peoples of the Mediterranean Sea.

Share on Facebook

Introduction

Ever since the National Genographic Project began, DNA has been a useful tool to analyze migration patterns of various indigenous peoples. The National Genographic Project typically uses a combination of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) and a limited number of Short Tandem Repeats (STR). The analysis of a larger number of STR's can be used to provide clues to Viking migration in recent times.

The technique has been used successfully in the past by the HAM DNA Project in order to provide clues to the ancestral origins of the participants. An extension of the technique can be used to help understand the migration patterns of the Norse peoples, often referred to as Vikings.

It would appear, however, that nobody has attempted to analyze the the migration patterns of the Norse groups up to this time. In this study, Y-Search data for the HAM DNA Group #1 was used. This group has been previously shown to have an ancestral haplotype that corresponds to the modal for the I1 (M253) haplotype group. Therefore, the results may apply to a number of I1 groups. For example, HAM DNA Group #7 has German origins, and the findings of this analysis can also be applied to this separate I1 group.

Further, HAM DNA Group #1 contains an individual with known ancestors from County Somerset, England. The HAM surname for this area has been documented back to Taunton circa 1250 A.D. There is an ancient Norman castle in Taunton, and other Norman strongholds in that area of County Somerset. Additionally, County Somerset was not settled by the Danes, providing further support that the arrival of haplotype group I1 in County Somerset, England was with the Norman invasion of 1066. It is important to note this, as the time scale (below) has been dated to the time of the Norman Conquest.

Previous Background: Scientific Studies

Siiri Rootsi, et. al., (2004) was perhaps one of the first to suggest haplotype I1 origins in Norway. More recently, Alexander Shtrunov has written about the I1 (M253) origins in Eastern Europe. They did use a limited number of STR values in order to infer population frequencies. Regarding haplotype I1a (now reclassified as 'I1'), Siiri Rootsi, et. al. noted:

"Subclade I1a accounts for most of Hg I in Scandinavia, with a rapidly decreasing frequency toward both the East European Plain and the Atlantic fringe, but microsatellite diversity reveals that France could be the source region of the early spread of both I1a and the less common I1c. Also, I1b*, which extends from the eastern Adriatic to eastern Europe and declines noticeably toward the southern Balkans and abruptly toward the periphery of northern Italy, probably diffused after the Last Glacial Maximum from a homeland in eastern Europe or the Balkans. In contrast, I1b2 most likely arose in southern France/Iberia. Similarly to the other subclades, it underwent a postglacial expansion and marked the human colonization of Sardinia ∼9,000 years ago...."

"Previous studies revealed that Hg I reached a frequency of ∼40%–50% in two distinct regions—in Nordic populations of Scandinavia and, in southern Europe, around the Dinaric Alps—each showing different background STR modal haplotypes (Semino et al. 2000; Passarino et al. 2002; Barac´ et al. 2003)."

I1 density map, Rootsi et. al., 2004

Rootsi et. al. had recognized that I1 was observed in high frequencies among Norse (or Scandinavian) populations. Here, they speculate early origins in France, and mentions the locations of I1 in France, Scandinavia, and the Dinaric Alps. They also mention I1b in the Balkans and northern Italy.

Ken Nordvedt is a widely known researcher of the Norse populations. He has categorized the various DNA patterns into a number of different Norse groups, largely based upon STR patterns. It should be noted that Ken has recently commented on the Genealogy-DNA email list (Dec 26, 2010) that after examination of I1 interclade ages:

      "TMRCA for AS1 is 70 generations; TMRCA for AS2 is 64 generations, and the interclade node age between them is 180 generations estimated.
   So perhaps you can see why I conclude that the overall I1 TMRCA lived 4000 to 4500 years ago?"

For the purposes of this study, it is useful to be aware that dating Y-DNA samples using STR values is still under development, and that Y-DNA SNP dating is, at least, arguable.
David Faux has written separately on the Cimbri people, an element of the Danish Vikings who lived between the 9th to 11th centuries (2007).

Alexander Shtrunov has written (2010) about the Vikings in Eastern Europe and Russia, and has some discussion of various tribes, such as the Goths, the Varangians, the Sami people, the Arensburgian people, Swiderian, etc. He appears to have analyzed the DNA for SNP population frequencies, combining genetics, archeology, linguistics, anthropology. For I1 in Eastern Europe, he suggests:

"Roots of haplogroup I1 evidently came from such Paleolithic cultures as Ahrensburgian and Swiderian; its carriers represented were the part of autochthonous population of Northern and Eastern Europe."

The National Genographic Project has current information about I1 (M253) migration paths online, and should be publishing the final results of the Project in the future. Past migration maps of the I1 haplotype had shown an overland route through the mountains of Europe, north of the Mediterranean Sea upwards to Norway, then back down the western coast of Europe to France and England. This has traditionally been displayed as an overland route to Norway.

The current National Genographic web page for M253 is out of date, as the web page for M253 is still using the old "I1a" nomenclature (Family Tree DNA reclassified this as "I1" in May, 2008):

National Genographic map

This (Viking Migration Y-DNA STR) study suggests that the I1 haplotype possibly took a sea route from the Mediterranean Sea (perhaps Sicily), first landing in the Netherlands.

Regarding the HAM DNA Project, the National Genographic Project shows

For I1, the SNP's are:

"Adam" -> M168 -> M89 -> M170 -> M258 ( -> M253 -> M307) Migrated from the middle east along the northern coast of the Mediterranean Sea, then finally migrating north along the east coast of Europe. (Entered the area of Norway)

For I1b, the SNP's are:

"Adam" -> M168 -> M89 -> M170 -> M258 (Negative for M253 and M307 ) Migrated from the middle east along the northern coast of the Mediterranean Sea, then finally migrating north along the east coast of Europe. (did not enter Norway)

The focus of the data was on the Genetic Distance for the I1 haplotype STR values. Other haplotypes that may have been included in the data would be the I1d haplotype group.

There is an I1 Project at Family Tree DNA that summarizes a number of the Nordvedt and various I haploype group (SNP) categories. This web site presents the raw data from FTDNA participants.

The Procedure

Using the I1 ancestral haplotype of the HAM DNA Project (Group #1, the ancestral haplotype previously determined), the Y-Search database was utilized to obtain matches on 35 to 42 markers. This returned about 1,000 kits that matched the haplotype given.

The number of STR markers used typically numbered 67, with a maximum at about 96 STR markers.
Genetic Distance typically ranged from 15 to 25
There are about 39 mutating markers for the I1 haplotype in this study.

The output was then sorted by Country of origin, ignoring the results from the United States and Canada. For each Country of origin, the STR marker values were provided as input into Dean McGee's Y-DNA Utility. A modal value was obtained for each country of origin. These modal values (of countries of origin) were then provided as input into Dean McGee's Utility again, this time without computing the modal. The output was then run through the "Kitsch" program of the PHYLIP software package for proper rooting of the resulting tree. The phylogenetic tree was then examined graphically for time scale. The Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor of these modals (as given by McGee's Utility) was suspect, having known the time of the Norman Conquest (i.e., 1066). Therefore, the resulting phylogenetic tree was then scaled, using the Norman Conquest as a basis for the time frames on display.

I1 geographic modal values by country of origin
[ click on image to enlarge ]

The modal table (above) shows some 39 mutating markers by country of origin. Generated by Dean McGee's Y-DNA Utility, it color codes some of the markers by Genetic Distance from the reference (row #1).

The mutating markers that appear to be useful for geographic identification include DYS464d, DYS576, CDYb, DYS413a, DYS635, DYS494, DYS522, and DYS549.

Findings

The resulting tree shows a common entry into England. This resulted from using the I1 modals for the participants that indicated separate origins from England and Scotland. At the time of the Conquest, England and Scotland were united into one country, so the DNA results appear to reflect that properly.

Phylogenetic Tree of modals for various countries

[ click on image to enlarge ]

What the Y-DNA modals (per region) revealed was that each country typically displayed separate times of origin. That is, the genetic distance was found to correspond to region.

An overland route through Switzerland might be suspected if the Genetic Distance had reflected that. However, the Y-DNA suggests that Switzerland was a migration point much later than that of that of Scandinavia. That is to say, the Genetic Distance to the Netherlands suggests that the Netherlands as one of the first (if not the first) point of entry into northern Europe. An alternative overland route would be through Austria. Austria does appear to have early origins. However, it ia hard to explain an overland route to Austria with the data available for this study. The Y-DNA STR values suggest that Austria began to be settled at about the same time as Finland, Spain, and France. During this period (roughly the 4th century), it is apparent that the countries were being settled by I1 via sea routes. Settlement of the I1 haplotype in Austria is perhaps, better explained by a sea route as well.

Also, it is well known that the Norse (Vikings) were very skilled with ships. This is reinforced by the Genetic Distance from the Y-DNA. It makes sense that that a path of migration could have been by sea, with a departure from the Mediterranean Sea and arrival in the Netherlands.

Problem discussion

There are some basic problems with the analysis:

a) The data was limited to less than 100 STR markers per individual.

b) There is limited data available from the Y-Search database, notably limited information from I1 participants in Sicilly. The early arrival in Portugal may support the theory of seafaring people from the Mediterranean. This data could be questioned given the scope of the Roman Empire, and not knowing how long the participants have actually lived in Sicily. On the other hand, Norse settlement in Sicily has been dated by some to the 11th century. The Norman Conquest timeline is supported by the Tune Runestone in Oestfold, Norway, which has been dated to the 5th century. More archeological evidence should show whether or not the theory is valid.

c) This study presumes previous SNP testing for I1, and does no real analysis of SNP data.

d) The timeline reported from these utilities can change, depending upon the data in use. Proper scaling of Y-DNA phylogenetic trees along a timeline is not currently reliable, due to the relatively low number of markers currently being tested. Carbon dating is typically used instead.

e) This study makes no attempt to include other Norse haplotype, such as R1b or R1a.

f) Finally, this study ignored DNA results for I1 in North America. Which is to say, no attempt was made to locate Native American I1 modal values. Following the M170 migration route would suggest that Viking migration was not from the Americas, but no attempt was made to confirm this with haplotype group I1 STR values from Native Americans.

Summary

When the Y-DNA STR marker data is separated by location, a modal can be derived for each location. Each modal for each country then appear to indicate marker differences that may reflect the location. When the modals are then examined for Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor, a continuous migration trail is implied.

The data suggests that the Norse Vikings perhaps originated as seafaring peoples from the area of the Mediterranean Sea (perhaps from Sicily). These people appear to date from the very early Roman period. (The city of Rome is believed to have been founded in 753 B.C., but archeological evidence suggests a slightly earlier date.) The DNA suggests that the initial point of entry of the I1 haplotype into Scandinavia appears to be from the Netherlands.

The phylogenetic tree suggests a possible Norse migration in this order:

Sicily --> Netherlands --> Finland -> France -> Denmark -> Norway -> England, Scotland & Germany

2500 <--- 2010 <--- 1700 <--- 1500 <--- 1300 <--- 1300 <--- 1000 <--- (rough est. of years ago)

It is important to note that the entrance of the I1 haplotype into France is indicated to have happened much earlier than the settlement of Normandy (in the 9th century). The phylogenetic tree suggests that the Vikings should have entered France some 400 years earlier (circa 375 A.D.). The Y-DNA STR data regarding France suggests a correlation to the quote from Rootsi (2004) that the early spread of I1 could have been through France. Here, we find France and Denmark to be one of the early locations, but the entrance into Eastern Europe appears to have been earlier than through France. This study shows that the I1 entrance into Europe began in the Netherlands, Russia, and Belgium circa 100 A.D.

The Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor roughly estimated by using McGee's Utility on the modals for STR markers, then scaling to the time of the Norman Conquest. Carbon dating of the archeological evidence from these locations may provide a more robust timeline. In particular, better evidence may require more Y-DNA STR markers, or a better study of M170 in the area of the Black Sea. More Y-DNA testing in the area of the Mediterranean may provide better evidence for an earlier point of origin. Alternatively, Y-Search could be used with a greater Genetic Distance to search to search for M170 matches near the Black Sea.

note: edits added 03/16/2011

------------------------------------------------------

update 03/21/2011:

I have been able to use Y-Search to find a minimal amount of (I1) Y-DNA samples for 9 additional countries. Of interest to this study is the timeline for Sicily appears to hold using minimal data from Romania, Turkey, and the Ukraine. Using the data for the area around the Black Sea, the sequence appears to be more like this:

232 B.C. Croatia
324 B.C. Romania
624 B.C. Turkey
662 B.C. Sicily
887 B.C. Ukraine
1075 B.C. Slovenia
1300 B.C. Czech Republic

The DNA information from Croatia suggests that Croatia may have been the departure point to Portugal and the Netherlands.

Which suggests that the time line for Sicily is supported by data from Romania, Turkey, and the Ukraine. What is interesting is the data from Slovenia and the Czech Republic. This suggests a period of migration of this I1 group in and around the Black Sea prior to the beginning of the (more bold) Mediterranean adventures.
------------------------------------------------------

update September, 2011:

The results of the STR modal TMRCA estimates have been graphically mapped here:

http://hamcountry-blog.blogspot.com/2011/09/mapping-viking-migration-with-y-dna.html

------------------------------------------------------

References:

Siiri Rootsi, et. al., "Phylogeography of Y-Chromosome Haplogroup I Reveals Distinct Domains of Prehistoric Gene Flow in Europe" Am. J. Hum. Genet. 75:128–137, 2004

Alexander Shtrunov, "The origin of haplogroup I1-M253 in Eastern Europe" The Russian Journal of Genetic Genealogy: Vol 1, No. 2, 2010 http://ru.rjgg.org

Ken Nordvedt http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/

Ken Nordvedt: Genealogy-DNA email list at rootsweb ( GENEALOGY-DNA-L@rootsweb.com ),
Subject: "[DNA] I1 L22- interclade ages," Sun, 26 Dec 2010.

David Faux "The Cimbri Nation of Jutland, Denmark and the Danelaw, England: A Chronological Approach Based on Diverse Data Sources" Sep., 2007 http://www.davidkfaux.org/Cimbri-Chronology.pdf

The National Genographic Project https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

The I1 Project at FTDNA http://www.familytreedna.com/public/yDNA_I1/default.aspx?section=ycolorized

Y-Search http://www.ysearch.org/

Dean McGee's Y-DNA Utility http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility.html?mode=ftdna_mode

The PHYLIP software package http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip.html

HAM DNA I1 (Group #1) Ancestral haplotype: http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/Groups/HAM_DNA_Group001_ANCESTRAL.html

Wikipedia page on Ancient Rome: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Rome

Wikipedia page on the Tune Runestone from Oestfold, Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_funeral

'How to Read HAM DNA Phylograms' You Tube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-49T2p-SyQ

to comment, click on the title and scroll to the bottom

Devon Family Historian and the Devon DNA Project

2010-08-27T02:31:00.010-04:00

The Devon Family Historian
and the Devon DNA Project

August, 2010

Debbie Kennett has just published an article entitled "DNA Testing And The Devon DNA Project" in the August, 2010 issue of the Devon Family Historian. In the article, she mentions that partial sponsorship is available for the HAM DNA Project, among others.

Debbie tells me that the Devon Family Historian is circulated to all members of the Devon Family History Society. They are one of the largest family history societies in the UK with around 5000 members. She believes that only the Cornish Family History Society is larger. Debbie says that she hopes the article will at least raise awareness of the possibilities of DNA testing and perhaps encourage a few more people to test.

I've already had a new inquiry about the DNA testing as a result of the article. She descends from Walter Ham, who married Margery Minkings on 26/03/1758 in Maker, County Devon.

In the article, Debbie provides a review of the development of DNA testing over the past 10 years. She gives a good description of the Y-chromosome tests, the Mitochondrial DNA tests, and the Autosomal DNA tests. She then follows with general information about the surname DNA Projects and the (geographical) Devon DNA Project.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a little perspective on what I have for Devon, I will include here a summary of occurrences in our book. County Devon (HAM surname) FREQUENCIES from "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC"

----------------------------------------------
Devon in the 1500's total references: 29

Devon in the 1600's total references: 34

Devon in the 1700's total references: 23
----------------------------------------------

The 1700's saw the most significant migration of the HAM surname moving from Colyton, but it would appear that there were also evacuations in lesser quantities from Ashwater, Halberton, Hemyock, Oakford, Plymouth, Shute, Tiverton, and Uplowman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marvin Hamm (of the HAM DNA Project) has written me with Census information that has:

Devon with 161 Ham's listed for the 1861 Census.

For reference, Marvin found about 18 HAM's in Plymouth in 1861. And, indeed, Marvin tells me that the 1861 Census shows no HAM families in the towns of Ashwater, Halberton, Hemyock, Oakford, Shute, Tiverton, and Uplowman. This agrees with the differences in our book, and may be an indication of migration, although the destination is not yet clear. We have not yet determined if these HAM families could have moved to Cornwall, or whether or not they could have migrated to America.

The best evidence we have to date for migration is for one of the first progenitors of the HAM surname in the U.S., William HAM of Maine. Originally contracted to fish, he was part of the Trelawney expedition. The Trelawney expedition originated from Plymouth. The Maine HAM lines have done some research in the area of Devon, but to date, neither the Maine HAM lines nor the Devon HAM lines have tested for Y-DNA.

There is a little town called "Ham" (now called Ham Ward) near the city of Plymouth. There have been several Mayors of Plymouth named Trelawny, but near the time frame of 1635 there were Mayors:

1626-27 Thomas Sherwill 1627-28 Robert Trelawney
1628-29 Nicholas Sherwill and Abraham Colmer 1629-30 William Hele
1630-31 John Bownd
1631-32 John Waddon Jnr 1632-33 Philip Andrews
1633-34 Rob Trelawney Jnr 1634-35 John Martyn Jnr
1635-36 Thomas Crampporn 1636-37 John Cawse

Having a small town named Ham near Plymouth, and associated with the Trelawney Expedition does provide a clue that this HAM line may have originated from this small town of Ham, near Plymouth in County Devon.

Copies of some of the Trelawney documents can be ordered from the UK National Archives.

Hopefully, the article in this month's Devon Family Historian will encourage a few more people to test for DNA.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some internet links that might be useful:
---------------------------------------------
Searching the UK National Archives at:

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archon/searches/locresult_details.asp?LR=28
---------------------------------------------
Plymouth City Council
List of Mayors from 1600 to 1700

http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/homepage/councilanddemocracy/lordmayoralty/mayors/mayors1600-1700.htm
---------------------------------------------
A map of the area shows the area known as Ham, near Plymouth:
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=248899&y=54192&z=5&sv=248899,54192&st=4&ar=Y&mapp=newmap.srf&searchp=newsearch.srf&dn=795&ax=248899&ay=54192
---------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are a member of the Devon Family History Society, you can download the Devon Family Historian article in Adobe PDF format.

Devon Family History Society
PO Box 9
Exeter, EX2 6YP, UNITED KINGDOM

http://www.devonfhs.org.uk/index.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Devon DNA Project: www.familytreedna/public/Devon

A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Lost Gold of the Dark Ages - Staffordshire Hoard

2010-04-09T02:30:00.008-04:00

Lost Gold of the Dark Ages

The Staffordshire Hoard

Largest stash of Anglo-Saxon gold ever found

April, 2010

The "Lost Gold of the Dark Ages" will premier on the National Geographic channel Sunday April 18th at 9 PM.

From the National Geographic Channel web site:

"Lost Gold of the Dark Ages chronicles the amazing story of how an amateur metal-detecting enthusiast discovered a gold hoard of more than 1,500 artifacts dating back a millenium, and valued at over $5 million.... To solve the mystery of where the gold came from, to whom it belonged and why it was buried, historians take us on a journey back into the Dark Ages."

The Staffordshire Hoard is the largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon gold ever found.

Discovered near Watling Street, Staffordshire. (One of the major thoroughfares of Roman Britain. The thoroughfare ran from for about 250 miles from Dover past Wroxeter.) The first pieces of the Staffordshire Hoard were found in early July 2009 by Mr Terry Herbert while he was metal detecting in a field in southern Staffordshire.

Finds included sword fittings, part of a helmet and three gold Christian crosses. Most of the complete objects are made of gold. Some are decorated with pieces of garnet, a deep red semi-precious stone, others with fine filigree work or patterns made up of animals with interlaced bodies. The red garnet gems are thought to be from as far away as India or Sri Lanka.

Current thinking dates the hoard to the later 600s or earlier 700s AD.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
There's nothing like seeing some news about possible ancestors of a HAM DNA Project participant. I ran a Y-Search in 2007, and found some evidence of a match for DNA participant Josh Ham to Staffordshire, England.

There is probably more data collected from Y-Search today, but this is what I found for HAM DNA Group #7 from the Y-Search of 2007:
-----------------------------------------------------------
ENGLAND:

From the totals that I have for England, and without going to very much trouble of attempting to determine the name of the County for the cities, I get a rough account of the results that look something like this:

Staffordshire (3)
Kingstone, Staffordshire 1
Stoke on Trent, Staffordshire 1
Bedfordshire (2)
Stanbridge, Bedfordshire 1
Middlesex 2

others (less than 4 each): 18

I might want to repeat here that this haplotype is also known as "I1b2a," but here the search is for "I1c."
It is apparent that from the locations in England, the most likely locations of origin should be closely matched by Staffordshire, followed next by Bedfordshire and Middlesex.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Josh is actually haplotype I2b, renamed by FTDNA in 2007 from haplotype I1c. This Y-Search is now out of date, and there should be more DNA data available today. Josh descends from Stephen HAM of Culpeper County, Virginia. This Stephen is believed to be the son of Edward HAM, and possibly descends from Samuel HAM of Orange County, Virginia. This is still to be confirmed, as we are still waiting for more direct descendants of the Orange County or Culpeper County Ham line to participate in the DNA Project. I believe some descendants of Samuel Ham may still be living in Orange County today.

The HAM DNA Y-Search that I did gives an indication that Josh may be from County Stafford. As we know, the Ham surname is a place name, taken from local towns of the name when surnames were adopted. Staffordshire is located in Western England, between Lancashire and Worcestershire. I am not currently aware of a town called "Ham" in Staffordshire. However, research for our book does indicate the HAM surname to be in use in Middlesex.

From the Y-Search (above), Kingstone is about 15 miles from Stoke upon Trent.

From that Y-Search, Stanbridge, Bedfordshire would be about 100 miles away from the locations in Staffordshire. In County Stafford, parishes in the vicinity would include St. Chad and St. Mary.

In County Middlesex, parishes would include Clerkenwell (or Clarkenwell) and would be about 135 miles (or 217 km) away from Staffordshire. London would be about 135 miles away from Staffordshire, but London is only about 35 miles away from Bedfordshire.

The only mention in our book of County Bedford is in the will of Adam FRIDAY, dated 1412 (mentions Richard HALM'). That would be in the vicinity of Weston, Multon, and Holbech.

I don't have much about this haplotype group "I2b," but the Y-Search also showed matches in Northern Ireland and Scotland. If not a variant of the Vikings or Danes, then I would suspect "I2b" could be either Saxon or Roman. (It would appear that most native peoples of England were R1b.)

Although I am overdue on updating the Y-Search, participants in the DNA Project are helping us to recognize the possible origins of the HAM surname.

further information:
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Staffordshire Hoard web site, images, & Information page:

(has village reconstruction, news, pictures of artifacts, etc.)

http://www.staffordshirehoard.org.uk/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Lost Gold of the Dark Ages (the Staffordshire hoard video)

from the National Geographic channel:

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/lost-gold-of-the-dark-ages-5121/Overview
---------------------------------------------------------------------

The British Museum exhibit (the hoard on display November 3, 2009 through Apr 17, 2010 )

http://www.britishmuseum.org/whats_on/all_current_exhibitions/the_staffordshire_hoard.aspx

British Museum press release:

http://www.britishmuseum.org/the_museum/news_and_press_releases/press_releases/2009/staffordshire_hoard_valuation.aspx

Book on sale at the British Museum:

http://www.britishmuseumshoponline.org/invt/cmc23288
---------------------------------------------------------------------

HAM DNA Project Group # 7 Y-Search

GENUKI County map of Britain

Share on Facebook

Share on
Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore
info

Ancestry of Mary OLIVER

2010-03-29T23:51:00.008-04:00

Ancestry of Mary OLIVER

Great Granddaughter-in-Law of Jerome HAM from Bristol

Last month on the HAM Country blog, we found a record of the date that Elizabeth married to Jerome HAM (1599). We can try to gather what is known about Jerome HAM of Bristol by examination of another book, this time published in 1867 on Mary OLIVER.

Following last month's article on the Will of Elizabeth OLYVER, I wanted to pass along a bit more information about the wife of Jerome HAM of Bristol. In the previous NEHGS article, it suggested that we also view the document "Ancestry of Mary OLIVER," by William S. Appleton, privately published by John Wilson and Son in Cambridge in 1867.

Mary OLIVER was born in Massachusetts in 1640 and is listed as the great granddaughter to John OLIVER and wife Elizabeth ROWLAND. This is the Elizabeth OLIVER that married 2nd) Jerome HAM in 1599.
(see the 1867 book, page 45 of this PDF, listed as page 6 of the chapter on "Pedigrees" - about page 30 of the document).

The work was an attempt by William Appleton to track some documentation of the line of his ancestor John OLIVER of Newbury, MA. The document begins in this country with John OLIVER, born in Bristol in 1613. John was apprenticed to his uncle in 1629, when his father James OLIVER died. James OLIVER was the son of John OLIVER and wife Elizabeth ROWLAND. This John OLIVER (b. 1613) of Newbury, MA was the grandson of Elizabeth OLIVER and father to Mary OLIVER born in 1640. Pedigree of Mary OLIVER

[ click on image to enlarge ]

That should mean Mary OLIVER (born 1640) was the great granddaughter-in-law to Jerome HAM of Bristol.

This document also includes other information, such as the pertinent material copied from the Apprentice Book of Bristol and from the Registry of Deeds in Boston (pages 22-23 of the document, or pages 34-35 of the PDF file).

Marriage of Jerome HAM and Elizabeth OLIVER is given on page 7 of the document, or page 19 of the PDF file.

From the chapter entitled "Documents" and subtitled:

"Extracts From Parish Registers of Bristol, England"

it has (OLIVER surname marriages and baptisms) for St. Stephen's Parish: St. Stephen's Parish records

[ click on image to enlarge ]

"1577. John OLIVER and Elizabeth ROWLAND were married the 28th of August."
"1599. Mr. Jerome HAM and Elizabeth OLIVER widow the 18th of February."

births:

1578. Robert sonne to John OLIVER was Ba. the 28th of June.
1579. Margret dtr to John OLIVER was Ba. the 26th of September.
1580-81. Marie dtr to John OLIVER was Ba. the 2nd ("iith") of Marche.
1582. Thomas sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 14th of April.
1584. Edward sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 24th of October.
1585. John sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 11th of November.
1586. James sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 3rd of December.
1587-88. Tobie sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 26 of January.
1589. William sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 5th of April.
1591. William sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 3rd of May.
1592. Henry sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 23rd of April.
1593. Frauncis sonne of John OLIVER was Ba. the 22nd of August.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Will of John OLIVER is given on pages 12-15 of the document, or pages 24-27 of the PDF file.

Will of Elizabeth OLIVER is given on pages 15-18 of the document, or pages 27-30 of the PDF file.

Other wills also included are those of Thomas OLIVER, James OLIVER, Francis OLIVER.

When searching for more documentation on Jerome HAM, it might be useful to note the Parishes mentioned here (St. Peter, St. Thomas, St. Stephen, St. Werburgh, and others mentioned in the wills).

If you are doing research in Bristol, it might be useful note that you might want to look for the burial of Jerome HAM in the records of St. Stephen's parish some time after 1628.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further reading:

The book "Ancestry of Mary OLIVER," by William S. Appleton, privately published by John Wilson and Son in Cambridge in 1867.
(from the State Historical Society of Wisconsin)

on Google Books:

http://books.google.com/books/download/Ancestry_of_Mary_Oliver__who_lived_1640_.pdf?id=j1BBAAAAMAAJ&output=pdf&sig=ACfU3U3h2gUTdDSSN_QvObHtsiWsIsl9lg

The State Historical Society of Wisconsin

The New England Historical and Genealogical Register

The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, 1893 volume XLVII on Google Books:

http://books.google.com/books/pdf/The_New_England_Historical_and_Genealogi.pdf?id=2rkEg7BFm3YC&output=pdf&sig=8zHZpXgm1y6nAMeFKYwYScJl1-s

The HAM Branches by Donna Ham

A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Will of Elizabeth OLYVER

2010-02-15T06:17:00.015-05:00

The Will of Elizabeth OLYVER

Wife of Jerome HAM, Bristol

Perhaps no other immigrant captures the imagination of HAM researchers than that of Jerome HAM. For over 40 years, genealogists have written about him in books, posted numerous messages to the internet, and have added Jerome HAM to their genealogy charts for numerous HAM lines.

For over a decade, I have received numerous emails and inquiries regarding Jerome HAM. Some claim that he was born in Bristol, England. Some say he was born in Germany. Some say he was born or married in 1577. Some say he was born in 1580. Others have that he was born in 1650. Many say that he died in York County, Virginia.

Many believe that he was the single immigrant ancestor to all of the HAM lines in Virginia.

Nearly all of the inquiries that I get do not have him listed correctly.

In April, 2008 I posted a Poll about him for genealogists on the HAM Country Blog in April, 2008, just to see how well Jerome HAM was understood. That poll included a quick survey of information from Ancestry.com, Rootsweb WorldConnect, and the FamilySearch web site.

[ click on image to enlarge ]

That survey returned over 700 family trees for Jerome HAM. About 97% of the Jerome HAM family trees on the internet have bad information about Jerome HAM.

This past month I was asked to respond to an Ancestry message board post about him.

The 40 year old myth persists.

Today, I would like to examine the will of Elizabeth OLYVER, wife of Jerome HAM of Bristol. Her will was published in 1893 in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register (NEHGS), volume XLVII. (You will want to examine pages 126, 127, and 128.)

On page 126, the will of John OLYVER, merchant of the City of Bristol is listed. To be buried at St. Stephens parish. The will was proven in London on Feb 6, 1597. Mentions wife Elizabeth and children:

Robert OLYVER, lands in the County of Gloucester, and in the parishes of Wickwarr, Cromholde, and Yate.
Henry OLYVER, the youngest son, 20 pounds yearly.
Thomas OLYER
John OLYVER
James OLYVER
Thoby OLYVER
Mary OLYVER the profits and commodities from his part of the "presage" lease for three years.

Also mentioned is his father Thomas OLYVER and his mother Margaret COXE, widow.

To his wife Elizabeth OLYVER, he gives his land in long Ashton, in the County of Somerset. However, it would appear that wife Elizabeth does not afterwards live in Ashton, as we see in the will of Richard COLE (from NEHGS, vol XLVII, page 127):

Locations mentioned in the will of Richard COLE:

Richard COLE, of Bristol, alderman, files will on Jun 16, 1599 (will proven Jul 17, 1599).

A store house on the Key in Bristol, one “in the late tenure of Elizabeth HAM, late wife of John
OLYVER, merchant, in the parish of St. Stephens; all during her natural life.”

---------------------------

The will of Elizabeth HAM is given in NEHGS vol XLVII, pages 127 and 128:

"Elizabeth HAM, wife of Hierom Ham of the City of Bristol, gentleman, late wife and executrix of John Olyver of the said city merchant."

Elizabeth files her will Dec 24, 1619, and was proven Oct 30, 1628. In it, we find husband Hierom Ham (or Jerom Ham - it is spelled both ways in the will). She mentions her children from her first husband John OLYVER, but no children are mentioned by Jerome HAM.

From the notes on the top of page 127, we find that John OLYVER had married Elizabeth ROWLAND in Aug, 1577. John OLYVER dies in Jan 1597-98 and his widow Elizabeth marries Jerome HAM on Feb 18, 1599-1600. Elizabeth HAM files her will in 1619.

In review, Jerome HAM was merchant and Town Clerk of Bristol from 1581 to 1621. Elizabeth ROWLAND married John OLYVER in 1577. Elizabeth OLYVER marries Jerome HAM in 1599/1600 and is apparently too old to have children after that time.

So, it should be obvious that the HAM Country survey detected a number of errors from the survey for the Poll of April, 2008. For example, if you look at the web page from the Ancestry search, you will find among the genealogies listed is a Jerome HAM being married in 1577. Obviously, not correct when checked against the records.

Further reading:

The New England Historical and Genealogical Register

The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, 1893 volume XLVII on Google Books:

http://books.google.com/books/pdf/The_New_England_Historical_and_Genealogi.pdf?id=2rkEg7BFm3YC&output=pdf&sig=8zHZpXgm1y6nAMeFKYwYScJl1-s

The HAM Branches by Donna Ham

A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore

info

Faces of America

2010-02-12T06:47:00.047-05:00

Faces of America

with
Henry Louis Gates, Jr.

Henry Louis Gates, Jr. is now running the series Faces of America on PBS. The Harvard scholar turns to the latest tools of genealogy and genetics to explore the family histories of 12 renowned Americans. Family histories range from Meryl Streep's eighth great-grandfather, who fought in Metacom's War (an English-American Indian conflict in 1675-76) to today's figure skater Kristi Yamaguchi.

The Promise of America

Feb 10th - Feb 16th

Utilizing genealogical and genetic tools, Henry Louis Gates Jr. unearths the family histories of 12 prominent Americans in this series, beginning with cellist Yo-Yo Ma, director Mike Nichols and figure skater Kristi Yamaguchi.

The first episode is also now available on line:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/video/episode-1-our-american-stories/190/

Becoming American

Feb 17th - Feb 23rd

The many pathways to America are explored via the ancestral stories of Stephen Colbert, chef Mario Batali, Jordan's Queen Noor and figure skater Kristi Yamaguchi.

Making America

Wednesday, February 24 — Mar 2nd

The peopling of the New World is recalled via the ancestral stories of Meryl Streep and Eva Longoria. Included: Streep's eighth great-grandfather, who fought in Metacom's War (an English-American Indian conflict in 1675-76).

The Record Within

Mar 3rd - Mar 9th

Combining the documented stories of some of the guests' last known ancestors with DNA evidence, the series travels backward through time to reveal both distant relatives and surprising shared ancestral connections.

PBS website: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/

Local Listings: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/schedule/

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Charles Darwin Y-DNA

2010-02-06T02:41:00.006-05:00

The Y-DNA of Charles Darwin

Deep Ancestry Analyzed

The Genographic Project analyzed the DNA of Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Darwin wrote "On the Origin of Species," the first authoritative work on evolution, following Jean Baptiste de Lamarck (1774-1829).

According to the project director Spencer Wells, Darwin's great-great-grandson tested for deep ancestry at the Genographic Project. G-G-Grandson Chris Darwin migrated from England to Australia in 1986, and now lives near Sydney. (Charles Darwin was from Shropshire in southern England.)

A panel of Genographic scientists gave a public presentation on the results at the Australian Museum in Sydney which included Dr. Spencer Wells, Dr. Ajay Royyuru, Dr. John Mitchell, and Dr. Simon Longstaff.

You can find the complete article at the Genographic Project "news" area:

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/darwin.html

More on Darwin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
http://bioweb.cs.earlham.edu/9-12/evolution/HTML/theory.html

Tourist Guide to Darwin's home:

http://www.enjoyengland.com/ideas/heritage-and-culture/history-makers/englands-genius/charles-darwin.aspx

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Somerset and Dorset Family History Society

2010-02-06T02:28:00.010-05:00

Somerset and Dorset Family History Society
A Decade of DNA Testing

The Greenwood Tree, the journal of the Somerset and Dorset Family History Society, has published their February issue. In it, Debbie Kennett wrote a brief article on DNA testing, which mentioned the HAM DNA Project. ("A Decade of DNA Testing," published in "Greenwood Tree.")

The journal is distributed to those who are researching family history in the counties of Somerset and Dorset.

In "A Decade of DNA Testing," Debbie explains that Y-DNA has been used as a tool to confirm documentary research about a surname. She wrote on the subject of DNA testing, and notes that the editor only wanted a short article.

Quote from the article:

"The HAM(M) project will provide 50% of the cost of a test. Other projects will no doubt have similar offers."

O.K., not quite clear there. The editors probably kept the article too brief. The HAM DNA Project can provide 50% of the cost of the test for individuals with financial difficulties, and only if the funds are available within the HAM DNA General Fund. A number of Y-DNA Projects have similar offers.

Thanks Debbie, it is good to seen the HAM DNA Project mentioned in a local journal.

Debbie writes:

"Circulation of the journal is quite small (probably just a few thousand) so there is no guarantee that anyone with your surname will actually read the article."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you would like to subscribe to the journal, more information can be found below.

Somerset & Dorset Family History Society
PO Box 4502
Sherborne DT9 6YL, England

The Greenwood Tree web site is located at:

http://www.sdfhs.org/Index.htm

Magazine can be purchased at:

http://www.sdfhs.org/Journal.htm

More information participating in the HAM DNA Project can be found at:

http://www.familytreedna.com
http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/HAM_DNA_Project.html

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Revolutionary War Veteran, Lieutenant William HAM

2010-01-21T04:29:00.017-05:00

Revolutionary War Veteran, Lieutenant William HAM

of Elizabeth City County, Virginia

In 1780, British General Cornwallis had the Americans on the run. But soon, the American forces were to deliver some surprising defeats to Cornwallis. If you have read the Revolutionary Pension papers for Drury HAM, you will find him at about this time marching along the New River on his way to Cowpens. American Generals Morgan and Greene were converging upon the forces of Cornwallis.

The British General Cornwallis chases American Generals Morgan and Greene to Cowpens (SC), Guilford Courthouse (NC), and finally ends up in Yorktown, Virginia in 1781. The Americans had mustered some serious blows to the British forces at Cowpens and Guilford. Unknown to Cornwallis, General Washington had travelled by ship toward Yorktown. Cornwallis woke up in Yorktown one morning to find George Washington at his doorstep. Cornwallis was about to be defeated.

I'd like to share a couple of pages of research from Geneva. Included here are Revolutionary DAR Application papers for Revolutionary War veteran, William HAM. This William HAM was a Lieutentant in the Navy, and fought during the Siege at Yorktown. Evelyn Calvert Barron, a descendant, had filed this application in 1940.

Geneva had sent this to me while we were doing research for the book. She thought it might help with what I was finding in the Elizabeth City Parish Vestry Books and Elizabeth City Will books. Unfortunately, I received this in about May of 2003, shortly before the book was due to be sent to the publisher. No time to dig deeper. I did have time to put some resemblance of a summary of the DAR pages into the book.

(In the book, I do not try to explain the document. What I tried to do is keep the book small. However, I do try to point out what is in the document, and indicate where you might find the document by citing our sources. The original DAR application has additional sources.)

The DAR application was filed by Evelyn Calvert Barron in 1940, Evelyn age 45 at the time. ("A Short History of the HAM Surname..." vol. #2, pages 120, 135)

[ click on image to enlarge ]

Evelyn was born in 1895 in Elizabeth City County to Frederick Barron (b. 1859) and wife Mary Sue HAM (b. 1869, m. 1891). Mary Sue HAM was the daughter of Col. Joseph Huchison HAM (b. 1838) and wife Anna GAMBAL. Joseph Huchison HAM was the son of William HAM, Jr. (b. 1805).

And this is where you have to examine the document carefully, as it can be confusing to follow:

Lieutenant William HAM, Sr. was born in 1762 and married Susan COOPER in 1799.

William HAM, Jr (b. 1805) appears to have married Louisa HUCHISON in 1826.

This William HAM was involved in the Revolutionary War during the siege of Yorktown (near the end of the war). Because of the defeat of Cornwallis, Yorktown marked the point when the United States begun to be recognized as an independent nation. Lieutenant William HAM held duties on board the ship Nicholson, mainly shipping supplies on the James River during the siege of Yorktown. He was a favorite Lieutenant to Commander James Barron.

William was born March 16, 1762 and died in 1825 in Elizabeth City County, VA. It would appear that he was about 19 years old during the siege at Yorktown. You may want to note that this is a DAR Application, and not a Pension Application. No Revolutionary Pension Application was ever filed for this William HAM. He died in 1825, and Congress didn't pass the Pension law until about 1838. William HAM had passed away by the time Pension Applications became available.

This Revolutionary War DAR Application can be very confusing to read. When you write down what is listed on page 2, and then compare to what is written on page 3, the line of descent is not immediately clear. That is, if taken separately, each page could cause a lot of confusion.

For example:

Page 2 has Rev War Veteran Lieut. William HAM, Sr. b. 1762 d. 1825 married Susan COOPER, and wife Susan dies in 1840. It also lists his first wife (at the top of the page 3) as "Mary."

Page 3 has son William HAM, Jr. b. 1805 who married Louisa HUTCHINSON. (Louisa HUTCHINSON was born in 1803 on page 2....)

Page 3 has Lieutenant William HAM, Sr. married 1) Mary ____ and 2) in 1799 Susan COOPER in Elizabeth City County, VA. Further down page 3 lists the "Children of the Revolutionary Ancestor."

The children of William Sr. then married:

Benjamin HAM b. 1788 married Susan JENNINGS
William HAM, Jr. b. 1803 married Louisa HUTCHINSON

These children are born 1788 to 1816.

This implies that the "Children of the Revolutionary Ancestor" Lt. William HAM, Sr. were four sons, Benjamin, William Jr., Jacob, and John. However, the date of birth for son Benjamin (b. 1788) only makes sense if William HAM, Jr. was also previously married (to Mary ___).

Very confusing read. Probably also very confusing to fill out.

The form for the DAR Application itself can be confusing. Whomever filled it out was trying to put in the dates for parents within the blank spots for children's dates. That is, putting the birth date of the parents in the blanks that should have been for the birth date of the children.

To further complicate the matter, I have had Kentucky HAM lines contact me and claim descent from this William HAM. However, the more experienced genealogists clearly know a different line of descent. Folks are grabbing this William HAM and just placing him onto their family tree for some silly reason. The William HAM of Madison County, Kentucky appears to have fought in the Revolutionary War, but he died prior to the issue of Revolutionary War Pension applications. His war records have never been located.

I was hoping some descendants of this HAM line would come along to help clear this up, but thus far, none have been located. It would be great to have them test for Y-DNA.

The DAR Application lists some source records that I was not able to retrieve, as it cites the HAM Bible, Captain William HAM's Will, and Elizabeth City County Tax Lists. So, I haven't exactly cleared any confusion independently. If you check volume #2 (Virginia), you can see that I have a Benjamin HAM and a William HAM in Elizabeth City County as early as 1760 (see vol #2, pages 96, 97, & 98). At the time that Benjamin HAM files his will (1767), he had wife Mary, sons Joseph and William and daughters Mary and Anne (see Will Book 1763 - 1771 or see "A Short History of the HAM Surname," vol #2, page 109-110).

I would gather that the names Benjamin and William were carried in this line. From the 1760 Elizabeth City Vestry book entry, it is hard to tell if Benjamin or William would be the father of the Revolutionary War Veteran. The Parish Registry has not survived, but there is this mention in the Vestry book. It is at least known from the Will books that Benjamin HAM did have a son named William in 1767 (see vol #2, "A Short History of the HAM Surname," pages 109, 110).

In our book (vol 2, page 210), the children are listed out this way:

Lieutenant William HAM, Sr. b. Mar 16, 1762
and married

1) Mary ____
2) in 1799 Susan COOPER in Elizabeth City County, VA.

Lieutenant William HAM, Sr. died in May, 1825. Wife Susan COOPER died in 1840.

William HAM, Jr. and wife Susan COOPER had sons:

1) Benjamin HAM b. Jun 18, 1788 (m. Susan JENNINGS)

2) William HAM, Jr. b. Jul, 29, 1805 (m. Oct 5, 1826 Louisa HUTCHINSON and he died May 28, 1886 in Boydton, VA.)

3) Jacob HAM b. Oct 1813

4) John HAM b. Dec 1816

When in fact, Benjamin should have been a son by wife Mary.

The William HAM, Jr. appears to have been married on Oct 5, 1826 Louisa HUTCHINSON (from page 2). Wife Louisa HUTCHINSON was b. May 18, 1803 in Accomack Co., VA and d. Jan 7, 1879 in Boydton, VA.

And again, William HAM, Jr. and wife Louisa HUTCHINSON had son:

1) Col. Joseph Hutchinson HAM (from DAR application page 2)

Joseph starts the line of the DAR applicant by his daughter Mary Sue HAM.

Lieutenant William HAM will spend his career in the Navy, and later there would be a Captain William HAM at the time of the War of 1812. (It's not yet clear to me if the Captain would be the son of Lt. William HAM.)

I will always be wondering when the confusion about this line will end. Nevertheless, an interesting line to follow. Thanks Geneva, I can't wait to see the Y-DNA for this line.

Further reading:

Biography - Captain James Barron
Inventory of the James Barron Papers 1776-1899
Daughters of the American Revolution
Virginia Daughters of the American Revolution
A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC
The Library of Virginia for a digital image of William HAM's 1783 record as a seaman
Elizabeth City Parish Vestry Book, at the Library of Virginia
Elizabeth City County Wills, 1733-1799 by Joan Charles, Heritage Books, 1995.

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Indentured Servants: Early Immigrants

2010-01-14T02:28:00.013-05:00

Indentured Servants: Early Immigrants

Jan 14, 2010

ISOGG (International Society of Genetic Genealogists) recently had quite a discussion going on about the subject of indentured servants.

It would seem that the idea of indentured servants is not very well understood. At least one individual thought indentured servants were criminals. Another thought there was that indentured servants would never own their own land upon gaining their freedom.

Carol McGinnis writes in "Viginia Genealogy Sources & Resources" that the first African colonists from the West Indies are sold into indentured service in 1619.

Does that mean an indentured servant was a slave? Was an indentured servant a criminal? Would an indentured servant own land when they gained their freedom?

Finally, why should we even care if we know what an indentured servant is?

For me, the answer is simple. The first HAM to arrive on this continent was an indentured servant.

Joseph HAM arrived in 1621 as an indentured servant to Lt. Albiano Lupo. Transported by the ship Warwick. The Warwick probably set sail from Middlesex or London, England. He arrived in Elizabeth City, Virginia (now the city of Hampton, Virginia).

Joseph was 16 years old at the time. Joseph HAM would gain his freedom, live in York County, and marry Mary PEAD, the widow of John PEAD. Mary had two children by John PEAD, John PEAD and Catharine PEAD.

Joseph files his will on March 3, 1638 which is subsequently probated on July 10, 1638. Among his most valuable possessions are 2,000 pounds of tobacco, 20 young goats, what appears to be a maid servant, and a part of a plantation.

Nora Probasco has sent an email to notify folks that an excellent article about indentured servants is now available on line. An article by Nathan W. Murphy “Origins of Colonial Chesapeake Indentured Servants: American And English Sources.” National Genealogical Society Quarterly, 93, no.1 (March, 2005), 5–24 is now on line:

http://pricegen.com/immigrantservants/origins.htm

If you know a little about researching early documents, then it helps to understand exactly what an indentured servant was. Or conversely, if you know how to research an indentured servant, then it could possibly help you to understand more about the times of your immigrant ancestor.

An interesting article. For folks that have not researched early documents, it gives a visual of an old printed document, so you can compare with today's writing to see how the handwriting has changed over time. Also, there is an extensive list of reference sources for help in researching early immigrants.

Further reading about Joseph HAM:

Peter W. Coldham, "The Complete Book of Immigrants 1607-1660"
Carol McGinnis, "Virginia Genealogy Sources & Resources."
P. William Filby, "Passenger and Immigration Lists Index"
John Camden Hotten, "Original Lists of Persons of Quality 1600-1700"
R. F. Walker article entitled "Lists of the Living and the Dead in Virginia Feb 16, 1623" from the "Colonial Records of Virginia," Richmond, 1874
Library of Virginia, York County microfilm "Deeds, Orders, Wills, etc.," page 11, Richmond, VA
"A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC"

FB Shares

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

UK Family Name Origins Project Launched

2009-12-18T02:50:00.014-05:00

Largest Ever UK Family Name Origins Project Launched

December 18, 2009

The University of the West of England is preparing to launch the largest ever study of family surname origins from the British Isles. Funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, headed up by Linguistics Professor Richard Coates, with lead researcher Dr. Patrick Hanks (lexicographer).

The goal of the project is to gather reliable information on up to 150,000 UK surnames, and enter them into a database available on a public website. They hope to use published and unpublished resources dating back to the 11th century. The goal is to obtain more reliable information than found in current epytomological dictionaries on the subject.

For the purpose of comparison, I am obligated to say that the "Origins" volume of "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC" dates the use of the word "Ham" back to the third century in Europe, and the HAM DNA Project is helping to pinpoint the exact location of origin of the HAM Surname in England. Those of you that follow this blog probably already know that the "Ham" is a place name meaning a homestead, or a variation thereof.

For example, in the "Origins" volume, you will find the use of the HAM surname dating from the 11th century in about two dozen towns in County Somerset alone. And aside from County Somerset, the book also mentions more than a dozen other Counties in England. (Information regarding the names of the Lords of Ham in France dates from about the 9th century.)

Additionally, the HAM DNA Project has helped to pinpoint the most likely areas of origin in England. The DNA Project has provided Y-Search studies on the origins of four HAM family DNA groups and actually have a DNA match for HAM(M/E) families who would otherwise not have information about locating surname origins. So, I suspect that the study will be missing both the information from our book, but also missing information gathered from the HAM DNA Project.

However, it is reassuring to know that somebody has launched a project to gather more widespread information on the origins of UK family names. Those of you who do not have out book should have access to this database by about 2014. The project appears to be lead by experts in their field, and the meaning and location of origins of a name is a subject of intense interest to genealogists, both amateur and professional.

For more information on the project, see:

Article in the UK Independent by Sarah Cassidy:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/so-where-does-your-name-come-from-1843088.html

Press release from the University of West England:

http://info.uwe.ac.uk/news/UWENews/article.asp?item=1651

Formal description of the project from the Arts & Humanities Research Council:
http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/FundedResearch/Pages/ResearchDetail.aspx?id=147098

For more information specific to the HAM surname, see also: Article on surname origins at HAM Country:
http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/HAM_DNA_Origins.html

Videos on HAM surname origins:

http://www.youtube.com/user/odoniv

For DNA evidence about HAM surname origins:

http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/HAM_DNA_Project.html

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Free W W II Records from Footnote

2009-12-11T00:54:00.011-05:00

Free Access to WWII records from Footnote

In honor of Pearl Harbor Day, Footnote is offering free access to World War II records during the month of December.

The site offers basic service record information, plus images and military studies.

For example, a number of my uncles enlisted for WWII, so I did a search on my uncles Wiley and Marvin. I was able to find their service record by a mouse click on their name. Typical example gives enlistment information, such as year of birth, branch of service, date of enlistment and location. What I liked most was the serial number and source information (microfilm reel number and box number of the Army Enlistment records).

However, having spent some time on genealogy, I already had most of that information for my uncles, if not more. Footnote does have an option to enable you to add notes and images to their records. Using this feature, I was able to add some notes on Wiley's death in 1944.

What I was really interested in was tracking his Company information. I know that in August, 1941, Wiley was stationed in Iceland and part of Company C, 10th Infantry. I thought it might be interesting to try to follow his troop movements during WWII.

So, I started browsing Footnote's "WWII Allied Military Conference" to see if I could get an idea of his whereabouts after D-Day.

I suppose I should mention that the most annoying feature of the site is it's Java interface, which makes browsing very slow going for dial-up users.

Other than that, perhaps it might help you find some WWII information on your ancestors this holiday season.

http://www.footnote.com/

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Journal of Genetic Genealogy - Fall, 2009

2009-11-24T04:38:00.007-05:00

The Journal of Genetic Genealogy (JoGG)
Fall Issue, 2009

The Fall issue of the Journal of Genetic Genealogy (JoGG) has just been released. The largest issue in their five year history, packed with a lot of material of interest to Genetic Genealogists. With over 220 pages, you should find about 10 articles and three reports in this issue.

Among the items of interest include an announcement from Whit Athey that he will retire as editor, being replaced by Blaine Bettinger. Many of you should recognize Whit as the creator of the Haplotype Predictor utility. Whit mentions that he has observed genetic genealogists move from dependence upon the scientific community for information, to the use of DNA now being led by "amateurs."

One article is from Roberta Estes, regarding the use of DNA with Native American dispersal and the Lost Colony of Roanoke. "Where Have All the Indians Gone? Native American Eastern Seaboard Dispersal, Genealogy and DNA in Relation to Sir Walter Raleigh's Lost Colony of Roanoke"

Another article is from Chris Pomery, "The Advantages of a Dual DNA/Documentary Approach to Reconstruct the Famiiy Trees of a Surname." Chris outlines a method for combining Y-DNA results with documentary evidence in order to reveal the origins of a surname.

There is also a "Special Section" here, regarding "Cluster Analysis and the TMRCA Problem." This includes about seven articles on:

Introduction by Whit Athey

An overview of the pitfalls and cutting edge views on topics related to calculating Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (TMRCA). Whit looks at the use of mutation rates, transmissions, over-counting, rho, "genealogical structure factor," an "effective mutation rate" procedure, and more. Nice overview, if you want to take a deep dive into the following articles.

Y-STR Mountains in Haplospace, Part I: Methods by Peter Gwozdz

Y-STR Mountains in Haplospace, Part II: Application to Common Polish Clades by Peter Gwozdz

DNA Genealogy, Mutation Rates, and Some Historical Evidence Written in Y-Chromosome, Part I: Basic Principles and the Method by Anatole A. Klyosov

DNA Genealogy, Mutation Rates, and Some Historical Evidence Written in Y-Chromosome, Part II: Walking the Map

by Anatole A. Klyosov

The Use of Correlation Techniques for the Analysis of Pairs of Y-Chromosome DNA Haplotypes, Part I: Rationale, Methodology and Genealogy Time Scale

by William E. Howard

The Use of Correlation Techniques for the Analysis of Pairs of Y-Chromosome DNA Haplotypes, Part II: Application to Surname and Other Haplotype Clusters

by William E. Howard

You will find the fall isuue of JoGG at:

http://www.jogg.info/

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

CNN DNA Genealogy Article

2009-11-10T02:54:00.005-05:00

CNN is running an article today about the use of DNA for family research. Written by Steve Mollman, it's a story of how DNA research surprised two genealogists on different continents.

About three months ago, Kevin Shepherdson in Singapore discovered a DNA match to Thomas Kurowski of Rhode Island (Thomas Kurwoski is of Polish descent). The two never knew each other.

Shepherdson is a seasoned genealogist, and has since found that they connect from a pair of English brothers who served as Captains in the British East India Company during the 1700's.

The article also includes a few graphics (such as pictured above) about the fundamentals of DNA testing.

You can read the full article here:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/09/dna.families/

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Family Tree DNA Sale

2009-11-05T03:36:00.014-05:00

Family Tree DNA Sale

November-December, 2009

Family Tree DNA is offering a Holiday Season promotion on the price of their y-DNA37 and y-DNA67 products, among other tests that are available. The sale is good from now until December 31, 2009.

The HAM DNA Project is still waiting for DNA participants from Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. We are also waiting for more participants from other countries, such as England, Ireland, France, and Germany. Just as the DNA has shown possible links to the Norman invasion for Group #1, we have other groups that are waiting for more DNA matches for clues to their ancestry.

Thanks to the DNA, I am now wondering how my group came to England with the Conqueror.

Without participants from the areas mentioned above, we remain a tiny project. I would estimate that we are still missing about 40 DNA "Groups" for the HAM DNA Project. HAM(M)(N)(E) lines of Native American or African American descent have yet to be tested, among others.

This past week I've gotten emails about the Project, curious to know if we have a match to the Lords of Ham, or asking about what to do with the DNA information. But we haven't had a new DNA participant since February.

Well, now is your chance to sign up at discount prices. Here are some of the specials from Family Tree DNA:

	Y-DNA37 – promotional price $119 (reg. price $149)
	Y-DNA67 – promotional price $209 (reg. price $239)
	mtDNAPlus – promotional price $139 (reg. price $149)
	SuperDNA – promotional price $488 (reg. price $665)

This promotion will run through the end of December, so now is a good time to participate if your HAM line is not yet participating.

More information regarding "How To" participate is given on the HAM Country web pages, but U.S. participants can go directly to the order form at FTDNA here:

HAM DNA Project order form at FTDNA

and European residents can visit the European web site for ordering information at Family Tree DNA:

http://europe.familytreedna.com/

(Indicate that you want to "Join" the HAM DNA Project for the Holiday discount on group prices.)

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Book Price Change History

2009-08-25T00:28:00.008-04:00

Used HAM Book Triples in Price

I couldn't help but notice that the ISBN Price History on used copies of "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC" has gone up during the month of August.

ISBN is tracking online vendor prices for our book, and apparently the average price is now $216.31.

Let me see, the copy from Abebooks apparently sold for $134.97, as I could not follow their link to the seller. According to ISBN: 0966547101

There is a used volume #2 (only) available on Amazon from ACCBold (claims to be located in MN) for $95.00 plus $3.99 for shipping.

And finally, a used copy of all three volumes is also available on Amazon from Internationalbooks (claims to ship from Maryland) for $297.65, plus $3.99 shipping (or $12.49 for shipping international). Let me see, that's about $100.00 for each volume.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0966547101/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

Of course, you can buy a new copy of volume #2 from us for $36.00. That is, a used copy is selling for nearly three times as much as a new one. I suppose it's nice to know that the book has tripled in value if you own a used copy.

And, of course, a new three volume set is still available from HAM Country for $110.50, compared to the $297.65 price for a used copy from Internationalbooks.

It just gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling to know that the value of a used copy has gone up on the ISBN price survey. After all, I've always thought the set was a good investment.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Family History Monthly

2009-08-23T04:44:00.011-04:00

I must say that the new issue of Family History Monthly magazine (for the UK) caught my eye. Issue 174 of the magazine has two articles on the use of DNA for genealogy:

"Was Crippen Innocent?" by Chris Pomery investigates an old family history crime scene, this time using DNA evidence.

"A Practical Guide to DNA Testing" by Debbie Kennett, which explains how DNA testing is used for genealogy.

In her article, Debbie explains that DNA has been in use for genealogy for nearly 10 years now, with estimates of nearly a million people now using DNA for genealogy. She explains how Y-DNA and mtDNA tests are used for genealogy projects, and goes into some detail about how each works. Debbie includes an evaluation of testing companies available in the UK, providing a guide on available choices.

She includes a table of number of vendors, including features that you should expect to find with each vendor. Included is a section on understanding your results, Geographical Projects, and Deep Ancestry. Also included is an introduction to ISOGG (the International Society of Genetic Genealogy).

A nice touch to the article is a side column featuring Spencer Wells with the National Genographic Project, explaining the the Genographic Project now has 100,000 samples from indigenous people, and nearly 300,000 paid participants from 130 countries.

The Deep Ancestry section includes a section on SNP testing (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms) and gives an overview of migration patterns from the National Genographic Project.

She includes a summary about further information on DNA testing, testing companies, DNA databases, and books.

You probably won't find the article on newsstands here in the U.S., but you can subscribe or purchase this issue individually from the Family History Monthly web site:

http://www.familyhistorymonthly.com/

A very good article on how DNA testing can contribute to the legacy or knowledge about the origins and evolution of your surname.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

National Genographic News

2009-08-20T03:07:00.012-04:00

A lot of activity during the month of August at the National Genographic blog page "Genographica."

Briefly, they are hi-liting three items:

1) The new High Definition version of their Human Family Tree video airs Sunday, Aug 30th at 9 PM. This has been advertised all month on the National Geographic channel, more information is available on their web site.

with the TV schedule here:

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/

The new HD video is also available for purchase at the National Genographic online store.

2) National Genographic DNA test kits are available for a 10 % discount now through September 15th.

3) The National Genographic web site is taking migration stories for posting to their web site.

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Free 1930 Census Images

2009-08-08T02:06:00.004-04:00

I have a note from Jeff Weaver of the New River email list that Footnote is granting free access to their 1930 Census images during the month of August:

http://go.footnote.com/1930census/

They appear to be experiencing some performance problems due to the high traffic, tho.

So, if you're looking for something from the 1930 Census, here's the opportunity.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

HAM Country Updates

2009-07-08T03:40:00.008-04:00

Links to research in West Virginia have been added to the HAM Country "Links" area. This was suggested by Thomas Hamm of Charlotte, NC.

If you haven't visited the indexes for the HAM Country "Wills & Estates," I have updated the index for England. Additions are from the Gloucestershire Record Office.

For a more complete list of changes see the HAM Country Revisions page.

- Enjoy

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Family Tree DNA Sale

2009-07-05T00:53:00.007-04:00

Family Tree DNA Sale

July, 2009

The HAM DNA Project has been underway since 2005, but we are still struggling to get participants from a number of areas that would be helpful to the Project. We are currently looking for confirmation on a number of Counties in Virginia and North Carolina, as well as South Carolina and Kentucky. Current participants are also looking for matches in Britain, Ireland, Scotland, and Germany.

The folks awaiting confirmation usually only have one participant from their line, and need a second participant from another branch of their line to confirm any out of wedlock issues. The folks seeking matches overseas need participants overseas to confirm locations of origin.

In Virginia, there are a number of HAM lines in Counties that have not yet participated: Orange, Caroline, Culpeper, and Elizabeth City (now Hampton). Participants who are known to descend from these Counties would be very helpful to the Project. In North Carolina, we are still waiting for known descendants from the Counties of Iredell, Surry, Guilford, Montgomery, and of course Rowan County.

Not yet participating are the HAM lines from Pennsylvania, several from New York, Maine, New Hampshire, and various lines on the east coast, which should include Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, etc. If known descendants of these lines would participate, it would be of help for targeting future research. We have yet to see our first participant who would be a current resident of and would have ancestors from Britain, Scotland, France, or Germany.

At any rate, now is a good time to sign up for the DNA testing. I have received an announcement from Bennett Greenspan of Family Tree DNA that prices have dropped for the month of July. He quotes these prices:

Y-DNA37 – promotional price $119 (reg. price $149)

Y-DNA67 – promotional price $199 (reg. price $238)

mtDNAPlus – promotional price $119 (reg. price $149)

These are the best prices, marker for marker, of any company in the market.

This promotion will run through the month of July, so now is a good time to participate if your HAM line is not yet participating.

More information regarding "How To" participate is given on the HAM Country web pages, but U.S. participants can go directly to the order form at FTDNA here:

HAM DNA Project order form at FTDNA

and European residents can visit the European web site for ordering information at Family Tree DNA:

http://europe.familytreedna.com/

(Indicate that you want to "Join" the HAM DNA Project for the July group discount prices.)

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Devon DNA Project

2009-07-02T04:19:00.009-04:00

Debbie Kennett is writing an article for the October issue of the Devon Family Historian, which is the journal of the Devon Family History Society. I have requested that the HAM DNA Project be among the Projects that can offer partially funded DNA tests, which I hope to provide through the HAM DNA General Fund.

Debbie is also the Administrator of the Devon DNA Project at family Tree DNA. She has a brief overview of the long history of settlement in Devon, the meaning of the Celtic word "Devon" ("the people of the land"), artifacts, hill forts, and archeology findings from the area. She also has some helpful links at the bottom of the web page:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Devon

In our book, "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC," the main records we have are from Collyton Parish, which also mentions the parishes of Ashwater, Cheriton Fitzpyn, Halberton, Halwill, Hartland, Hemyock, Honiton, Luppitt, Milton Abbot, Oakford, St. Andrew's Parish in Plymouth, Shepewash, Shute, Tiverton, Uplowman, Upottery, West Budleigh, and Wilhayes. We also have in volume #1 (Origins) Wills from Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC) for HAM residents of Devon.

Collyton Parish is located near Plymouth. And, of course, there is a small town called "Ham" (or Ham Ward) near Plymouth as well. As many of you already know, the surname "HAM" is a place name, and locating the town of origin is a good indication of where the name was adopted after about 1200 AD.

A map of the area shows the area known as Ham, near Plymouth:
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=248899&y=54192&z=5&sv=248899,54192&st=4&ar=Y&mapp=newmap.srf&searchp=newsearch.srf&dn=795&ax=248899&ay=54192

The primary HAM lines that are researching the area of Plymouth are the HAM lines of Maine and New Hampshire. They have an interest there because the first HAM progenitor on this continent was William HAM of Maine, a member of the Trelawney expedition. William HAM of Maine arrived on the Speedwell in 1635 and was originally contracted to fish. Several of the Mayors of Plymouth (England) were named Trelawny:

---------------------------------------------

Plymouth City Council
List of Mayors from 1600 to 1700

http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/homepage/councilanddemocracy/lordmayoralty/mayors/mayors1600-1700.htm

--------------------------------------------

Some descendants of William HAM of Maine were mentioned in the book "The HAM Family Kith and Kin" by Rev. Ervin Charles Tipton (1977). L. Winston Hamm was a contributor to Tipton's book, and had listed his own line back to the William HAM who arrived in Maine in 1635.I have mentioned a short biography of Winston Hamm in the Appendix of our volume #1 (Origins).

The exciting thing about Debbie Kennett's October article for the Devon Family Historian and the Devon DNA Project is that I am hoping to see DNA participants from Devon. If they are native to Devon, we should expect haplotype "R1b." If their is a Norman influence to the HAM lines in Devon, then of course they should be haplotype "I." The problem is that we have no DNA participants here in the U.S. for the Maine HAM lines.

So, I am pushing for participants from Britain, and am hoping for some DNA participants from the Maine and New Hampshire HAM lines as well.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Facebook Albums on line

2009-07-01T03:44:00.006-04:00

For those who are interested in the HAM surname, I have uploaded a few small albums to Facebook. I have a few picture handy, so I put them on Facebook.

David Hamm, a descendant of the Wayne County, NC HAM lines prodded me to join Facebook so that he could browse the web with his iPhone. I don't have one of those new fangled gadgets, so I just use my web browser.

Some of these pictures appeared in the "HAM Book Trailer" video, and some are from my video on "The Descendants of Eli HAM."

The public links to the albums are:

Some of my pictures from Ashe County, NC:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=9549&id=1603220466&l=640a274549

A few pictures from Grayson County, VA:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=8642&id=1603220466&l=253c393bcc

Some pictures from my research trips for the book "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC":

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=7770&id=1603220466&l=45c45dfc82

My main Facebook page is at:

http://www.facebook.com/HAMCountry

but the main page is only open to Facebook "Friends" (folks registered at Facebook who claim to be my "friend"). The main page simply has my "Wall" of general comments.

I intentionally kept the images small so that they will load quickly via dial-up or iPhone.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

HAM Origins in Grayson County, Virginia

2009-06-14T01:40:00.010-04:00

HAM Origins in Grayson County, Virginia

I have seen more speculation than I care to review about HAM origins in the Ashe County, North Carolina and origins in Grayson County, Virginia. However, I cannot address all of the various forms of speculation in one short article. Most speculation that I have seen can be cleared up by careful study of our book, “A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC.” It is my hope that this article will help clear up where we are with the current research of the Grayson County HAM lines.

Migration to Ashe County

Geneva located the following Grayson County record from 1826, which I think is key to showing the relationship of the Ashe County and Grayson County HAM lines. That's because the 1826 land grants in Ashe County don't tell where Thomas and William are from. However, this 1826 Grayson County deed does.

It states that in Oct 1826, William HAM, Jr. "of Ashe County NC" sells 100 acres on Brushy Creek, Grayson County VA to Joseph LYNCH. That is, the Grayson County deed shows that the Ashe County HAM lines and the Grayson County HAM lines are the same line. There is an abstract of the record in the Virginia volume of our book (volume #2, page 212).

The year 1826 marks the migration of Thomas and William HAM, Jr. to Ashe County, NC from Grayson County, VA.

The time period prior to 1783 has been the subject of much speculation. In 1782, there is a William HAM who is taxed on 200 acres in Botetourt County, VA. After 1790, this land becomes Montgomery County. The problem is that there are several William HAM's in the area at the time. The Revolutionary War was on until 1783, and many of the records of the period reflect troop movements. From 1782 to 1787, 60 % of the people in Montgomery County had been living in Montgomery County for less than 5 years.

Prior to 1798, it is difficult to determine the differences between the William HAM of Grayson County, the William HAM of Wythe County, and the William HAM of Montgomery County. And, it is not clear that the William HAM in these three Counties would be the same man.

Drury HAM - The Journey Home:

Drury HAM is the only HAM to be listed on the 1787 Tax Lists for Montgomery County. There is a William HAM who enters 100 acres on Little Brush Creek in 1783, but does not appear on the Tax Lists for Montgomery County until 1788, 1789, and 1790. In 1787 and 1788, Drury is also found in Greenbrier County along with a Samuel HAM and a Joseph HAM. Drury HAM is no longer found on the Montgomery County Tax lists after 1788. By 1789, Drury HAM is found in Greenbrier County, in what is now West Virginia. By 1791, he migrates to Madison County, Kentucky.

The curious part of the Montgomery County records during the 1780's is that both Drury HAM and William HAM eventually end up in Madison County, Kentucky. Yet, this 1783 Treasury Warrant for 100 acres in Montgomery County is eventually found in the Grayson County Plat Book. Therefore it becomes important for Grayson County descendants to understand the difference between the William HAM of Madison County and the William HAM of Grayson County. How were they different? Were they related?

We know from the Revolutionary Pension files that Drury was born in Orange County, Virginia. Later, Drury and one of the William HAM's migrate to Madison County, Kentucky (William arrived in Madison County circa 1787 and Drury circa 1791). and Drury eventually settles in Lincoln County, Kentucky. The Madison County William HAM is found in Madison County in 1787, 1788, 1789, 1790, and 1792. This William HAM dies in Madison County, KY in 1812, with his estate settled in 1814 and leaving a widow named Elizabeth. By an intriguing coincidence, this William HAM also has three sons also named John, William Jr. and Thomas, but this Madison County family remained in Kentucky. It was a completely different family from the family of Grayson County, Virginia.

By following Drury HAM from Botetourt County to Montgomery County, we can obtain some clues about which William is the Grayson County William HAM, and which is the Madison County William HAM:

Drury HAM:

- in Botetourt County 1780, 1783 (Capt. John Gallaway’s Company)

- in Greenbrier County 1785, 1787, 1788, 1789, 1791

- in Montgomery County 1787, 1788

- in Madison County, KY 1791, etc.

Botetourt County William HAM:

- in Botetourt County 1774, 1782 (this land becomes Montgomery Co. in 1790),
1783 (Capt. John Gallaway’s Company)

Greenbrier County William HAM:

- in Greenbrier County 1778, 1780, 1782, 1783, 1786, 1787?, 1798

Madison County William HAM:

- in Madison County in 1787, 1788, 1789, 1790, and 1792, etc.

Montgomery County William HAM:

- in Montgomery County 1783 (this land becomes Grayson County in 1793),
1788, 1789, 1790

- in Wythe County 1793

- in Grayson County, VA 1798, 1800

The pairing of Drury HAM and the William HAM of Madison County, KY makes sense for several reasons.

A) “Drury” is a fairly unique name. There was only one Drury HAM for the time period.

B) Drury and William share the last name “HAM”

C) Drury and William are both in Capt. John Gallaway’s Company in Botetourt County in 1783

D) Drury and William both appear in Greenbrier County and end up in Madison County, KY

E) There is some record of Drury’s migration from the Revolutionary War Pension papers.

F) In 1787 to 1788, the Greenbrier County William HAM migrates to Madison County, KY.

Which means that by 1788, we have a different William HAM in Montgomery County, VA.

The timeline should illustrate that we have two or three William HAM’s.

In 1783, we have William HAM in Botetourt County, in Greenbrier County, and in Montgomery County. That is, the Botetourt County William and the Greenbrier County William appear to be different men. Except that the Revolutionary War had just ended and Drury and William could be returning home in that year.

In about 1787 it appears that the Greenbrier County William HAM migrates to Madison County, KY and is followed in 1791 by Drury HAM (from Greenbrier County to Madison County). It would appear the the Greenbrier County / Madison County William HAM could be related to Drury HAM.

In 1788, we have a William HAM in Madison County, KY and a William HAM in Montgomery County, VA.

If I could summarize what we can say about the origins of the William HAM of Grayson County, it would appear that he is first in Montgomery County in 1783, in an area that would later become Grayson County. However, we cannot confirm his presence in Grayson County again until 1798 when he enters land in the Grayson County Plat book. He has not been found on Grayson County Tax Lists until 1800. From examination of the records for Drury and the William HAM of Madison County, Kentucky, we can see that we have a separate William HAM in Montgomery County by1788.

For full source citations and more, see “A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC.”

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Journal of Genetic Genealogy - Spring, 2009

2009-06-04T00:38:00.006-04:00

Journal Of Genetic Genealogy (JOGG)
Spring Issue now available

The spring issue of the Journal of Genetic Genealogy is now available. There may be a few items of interest to those who are keeping track of the DNA Project:

1) A commentary about the DAR vs. the use of DNA by Whit Athey.
The DAR is avoiding the use of DNA as evidence of descent from a Revolutionary War Veteran.

2) An article regarding Y-DNA traits of lines originating in Ireland.
Pointing to R1b types, there are certain DYS values that help determine Irish Origins.
Here, Dennis Wright expands on some work originally discovered by Ken Nordtvedt.

3) There are also three mtDNA articles.

You should find the Journal of Genetic Genealogy at:

http://www.jogg.info/

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

Facebook Research Trip Photo Album

2009-05-28T06:12:00.003-04:00

I've started a Facebook Photo Album of pictures from my research trips for our book "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC." Some of these you may have seen in the book, but I will probably upload a number of them that did not get into the book.

To view the caption, either mouse over or click on the picture for a larger view.

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=7770&id=1603220466&l=45c45dfc82

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

KallOut - New Search Tool

2009-05-07T00:38:00.004-04:00

Now here's a nifty little tool I just installed on my FireFox web browser - KallOut.

http://kallout.com/ff/welcome.html

Genealogists are always trying to find good reference material on the web, be it a primary source document, a news article, or even a You Tube video. A Google search doesn't always return everything that is available on the internet.

You can now search any of your favorite web sites in seconds, and no typing required. (Sweet!)

If you find an article on a web page that doesn't have an associated link, now you can just hi-lite a word on the page, then select the type of search you want from a menu of options.

I'd say this has to be an improvement over a plain vanilla Google search.
Currently, it can search Google, Yahoo, Ebay, flickr, Twitter, IMDb, FaceBook, etc.

(For example, I can hi-lite Tyler Ham, and select a search on IMDb... interesting!)

It should help with genealogy work, I should think.

- Enjoy

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

ft2phy: Y-DNA STR to ATGC conversion

2009-04-23T23:28:00.008-04:00

ft2phy

Y-DNA Short Tandem Repeats to ATGC conversion

The software program "ft2phy" has been posted to the HAM Country Tools area. If you've ever thought it daunting using "ft2dna" to run LAMARC, or draw trees with DNAPARS or PHYML, or if you'd like to see the "alpha" or transversion ratios for your Group, then "ft2phy" can make life a bit easier for you.

"ft2phy" can read several lines of STR data from Family Tree DNA, and use the same input format that Dean McGee's Utility does. So, if you have saved your Dean McGee Utility data into a file, then "ft2phy" can read your data file in order to produce the ATGC conversion.

ft2phy can read multiple lines of data (up to 600 lines), and it sends the output to separate data files for each marker. These files can be used in genetics programs that are compatible with the Phylip format. This version can handle up to 37 markers.

http://home.earthlink.net/%7Eodoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/Tools/FT2PHY.html

- Enjoy

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore

info

Y-DNA Project Grouping with Genetic Distance

2009-04-16T01:18:00.015-04:00

"How To" create Y-DNA Project Groups

by using Genetic Distance

Or, How To Group Y-DNA by Genetic Distance using Dean McGee's Y-DNA Comparison Utility

There has been some discussion about "How To" create Y-DNA Project Groups, which does not appear to be a standard yet for Project Administrators. Nor is there any existing software that will do this for you automatically.

Family Tree DNA has an option to permit the Project Administrator to sort their Project into "Groups," but provides little or no guidance on "How To" do this, nor do they offer software to do this for you.

The PHYLIP package "Kitsch" program will sort the kits for you, but it would be up to you to the Project Administrator to do the "Grouping" by hand.

Grouping your DNA Project properly can add value to the DNA evidence by showing who is more closely related, and who is not. And, you can base this upon the DNA information. A valuable concept because sorting into groups can become more of a scientific procedure, as well as enhancing the analysis of that data.

DNA Grouping enables the use of DNA evidence as a tool which is independent of the usual genealogy methods. What that delivers is either a clear joining or clear separation of families that are either related or not related genetically.

That means that you should be able to use Genetic Distance to verify whether or not lines are related when normal genealogy records have been destroyed, or are otherwise not yet discovered.

You may have noticed that some Project Administrators don't appear to know what to do with Genetic Distance. That is usually obvious if they post a Genetic Distance table which looks "jumbled." Here's an example of a poorly structured Genetic Distance table, using a few selected kits from the HAM DNA Project:

[ click on image to enlarge ]

Notice that the colored cells are jumbled all over the place. You can look up your own ID and match it with other kits, but it makes little to no sense for the entire Project. A table that looks like this does not tell you how the DNA Project should be sorted into groups. In fact, it doesn't resemble anything like grouping at all.

There's a simple way to remedy this, which should give an overview of the entire Project at a glance. The remedy would be to sort the Genetic Distance table. Once you know how to sort the Genetic Distance table, an overview of the table starts to make sense.

Here's an example of the same kits that were used above, but this time they are sorted:

[ click on image to enlarge ]

Notice that the colors are now grouped together. Similar groups are now be found along the diagonal. The table is more symmetrical, and the "colored" cells now follow a recognizable pattern.

Then, the question becomes, what is the easiest way to sort the Genetic Distance table?

The answer is, that there are several ways to do sort by Genetic Distance, but the simplest method is to sort on one of the Genetic Distance columns, then sort on the sums.

The easiest way to do that is by using Dean McGee's Y-DNA Utility to create the table, then sort on the first column.

Notice that column #1 of the "jumbled" Genetic Distance table is given in no particular order:

[ click on image to enlarge ]

The Genetic Distance values vary widely, and distances that are similar are certainly not on the table next to each other.

Here's column #1 of the "sorted" Genetic Distance table:

[ click on image to enlarge]

Notice that the Genetic Distance shows a similar increase, and the kits that are similar are next to each other on the table. You can check your work by creating a new Genetic Distance table with Dean McGee's Utility, and taking a second look at the grouping.

You might have noticed the flaw by doing this simple sort (from the "sorted" Genetic Distance table above). That would be the grouping of kits #44176 and 47412. It doesn't sort correctly because they tested with a different number of markers. A simple "spot check" of the sort can usually show which kits did not sort correctly.

So, sorting your DNA Project by Genetic Distance (on one column) may leave a few unresolved groupings. That's because this example is a rough example only. You can get a better grouping by sorting a second time on sums for each row on either side of the diagonal. (It is possible to do some basic math in order to compensate for the varying number of markers tested.)

The trickiest part of using diagonal sums is that these sums could change with each re-arrangement. So, it may take a few iterations to get a better sorted table.

Or, if you are familiar with using the PHYLIP software package, a tree created with the "Kitsch" program will do the sorting for you. You can then use the MEGA software program to "Arrange Data for Balanced Shape." Arrange your data in the order suggested by the phylogram, and use that sorted data in your next run of Dean McGee's Utility.

The next run of Dean McGee's Utility should deliver a Genetic Distance table which shows the grouping for the DNA Project with colored cells along the diagonal.

Dean McGee's Y-DNA Comparison Utility can be found at:

http://www.mymcgee.com

If you are interested in the mathematics behind the Fitch-Margoliash method, a good starting point would be Professor Felsenstein's documentation on the software program "Kitsch" regarding the Fitch-Margoliash method with Evolutionary Clock:

http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip.html

The Genetic Distance table for the HAM DNA Project can be found with the output from Dean McGee's Utility at:

http://home.earthlink.net/%7Eodoniv/HamCountry/HAM_DNA_Project/HAM_DNA_McGee_output.html

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebookgreat free widgetsWidgetboxMore info

Keeping Y-Search Up to Date

2009-04-06T06:06:00.008-04:00

To the HAM DNA Project Participants:

I had been looking at mapped locations of (existing) towns called "Ham" in England tonight, and noticed that there are some possibilities of matching the FTDNA numbers with the locations of these towns. (There are more than two dozen towns in Britain called "Ham," about six "Ham Hill" locations, about seven "Ham Green" locations, etc.)

The best way to match DNA locations is with Y-Search.

Now, FTDNA hopes for a push in Britain in the upcoming year, so it is becoming more important to keep our Y-Search information up to date.

I say that because there is one town called "Ham" about 10 miles from Crewkerne (near Illminster), and another town called "Ham" near London. As you may recall from the 2007 DNA video, our Group #1 roughly matches these two areas in Y-Search. Our Franklin County line may have some parallels to the town called "Ham" near Frome (or Wells), if you recall the blog article about Glastonbury ties, for example. Tony, of course, has ancestors that come from a town called "Ham" near Brent Knoll (not too far from Wedmore).

Other possible examples could be the town of Ham near Plymouth, which the HAM lines from Maine are researching. (It would help if the HAM lines from Maine were participating in the DNA Project.)

Or possibility, since our Group #2 is matching Worchestershire, that puts them closest to the town called "Ham" (north of Bristol). Or, if our Group #4 is matching County Kent, there is a small town in County Kent called "Ham" near Sandwich (no pun intended).

You can check these maps out at Streetmap: http://www.streetmap.co.uk/

When we start getting participants in Britain, we should be getting some interesting information.

So, it is important to keep your Y-Search information up to date so that we have accurate information about our matches. Please enter your information on your oldest known ancestor correctly. In my case, that would be William HAM from Virginia, since any further ancestor has not yet been positively identified to date.

It was in May, 2008 that FTDNA changed the Haplotype Groupings:

This affected the following existing groups:

R1b1c became R1b1b2

I1a became I1

I1b became I

I1c became I2b

E3b1a became E1b1b1

Back then, I understood that FTDNA would be changing the Y-Search haplotype groups for us. But when I checked my Y-Search ID tonight, my haplotype group had been changed from "I1a" to "Unknown."

I had to manually set my haplotype group at the Y-Search database. So, I would guess everybody will need to check their haplotype group out there. This should help us to identify matches from other vendors as well.

You can change it by logging into Y-Search at:

http://www.ysearch.org/

- select "Edit An Existing User" (that would be your ID)

and the "Haplogroup" is just below the area with the DYS values, under your "Last name"

If you have not yet submitted your information to Y-Search, then you can do that by visiting your personal web page at FTDNA.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.

2009 April Free DVD Special

2009-04-01T01:57:00.002-04:00

Book Order Special - Free DVD with any order in April

For the month of April, 2009 we will be running a DVD special. Anybody that buys a book will also receive a free DVD of the "HAM Counties of Origin" videos.

A graphical overview of HAM surname counties of origin in England, Virginia, and North Carolina. Hi-lites the name and date of the first person with the HAM surname to appear in each county. These are DVD versions of the videos posted to You Tube on HAM Surname County Origins in England, Virginia, and North Carolina (with the exception that the video on Virginia has been updated).

The DVD version of the Virginia origins video now also includes HAM surname origins in an additional 9 counties in Virginia (but are not included in the You Tube version). These are counties mentioned in the book "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC."

VA Counties on DVD that are not in the You Tube version:

Albemarle County
Elizabeth City County
Frederick County
Fluvanna County
Isle of Wight County
King & Queen County
Pittsylvania County
Rockingham County
Shenandoah County

Which brings to total video coverage of HAM surname origins to about 35 counties in Virginia, based upon information from our book, "A Short History of the HAM Surname in Virginia & NC."

This DVD also includes and "Extras" area, which includes the video on "How To Read HAM DNA Phylograms" as well as the "HAM Book Trailer" video.

So, order a book during the month of April and receive a free DVD.

To post comments, click on the title and scroll to the bottom.