The primary goal of Reflections is to tell the history of our Price/Graham family as best as could be remembered. Besides telling the family history, another goal is to trace our two
families’ origins as far back as possible. In other words, who were our ancestors and where did they originate? Fortunately, there was some Price family data but very little Graham family information. While in Seattle, an on line Genealogy course was taken that provided a start to tracing our family’s history. After finishing the course, family tree software was purchase and known family data was entered. This was the beginning of the Price/Graham family tree. This original family tree was like a sapling with few branches. This first family tree was generated in about 2001 and lay idle until Reflections was initiated, and the first few essays were posted in the summer of 2013. Shortly after posting these first essays, I joined Ancestry.comand uploaded the Price/Graham tree that had been created in Seattle. Now it was possible to search Federal Census records, cemetery records, death records and marriage records. Using this information, family records and old family photos, it was possible to write the essay Family Background posted in late September 2013. This essay chronicled the history of the Price, Huckstadt, Graham and Clifford families of our grandparents. The Price family traced Great Grandfather Robert S. Price to his birth in Kentucky in 1845. Searching these records and other member trees established the Graham family arriving in Pennsylvania in 1800 from Ireland or possibly in the late 1700s. Using a high school essay of Dad’s cousin Louise, the history of the Huckstadtfamily history revealed emigration from Germany in 1866. Information from a very distant relative led to discovering Great Grandmother Clifford, nee Jones, was born in Wales and came to America about 1840 and married a Clifford from Ireland. Once establishing the basic family history of our four great grandparents, family research was once again set aside to concentrate on the Price family history of Beta and myself before resuming for an in-depth search of our two families’ origins.
Twelve essays and two years later, in-depth research was started to discover our family’s origins. Tracing the Huckstadt, Graham and Clifford families appeared to end with arrival in America. Unfortunately, no information has been found beyond that described in the essay Family Background. Tracing families in England, Ireland and Germany is difficult, because records are very difficult to search and have not been vigorously pursued. As such, the main focus was on tracing the Price family origins as far back as possible. With some interpretation of family trees of other Ancestry members, it was possible to discover our 13th Great Grandparents Price in Wales in the 16th Century! The succession of the Price family from these great grandparents to our Price family origin was document in the essay Price Family Genealogy Update. Based on the family research done at that time, it was strongly believed that our ethnicity would be primarily Welsh, or English, with some lesser amounts of Irish and German ancestry. Thus, I was somewhat reluctant to spend money ($99) for an Ancestry DNA test. Finally, in July 2015, the decision was made to take the test, and the test would confirm the suspected ethnicities. Well, in October 2015, the results were received and were a total shock! Irish was the dominant ethnicity, while English and German were almost non-existent. These DNA results were presented in the Genealogy Update essay, along with rationale explaining why these results were possible and perhaps reasonable. The essay was posted in January 2016. So, from 2016 to 2019, there was a good reason to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day until May 2019.
After settling into my California Condo in May 2019, Ancestry was checked and discovered that DNA results had been updated. Wow, there was an update with major changes in my ethnicity estimates. Besides the changes in ethnicity estimates, AncestryDNA has included migration data and maps from Europe to America, as well as migration within the United States. Since taking the DNA test, Ancestry has identified potential 3rd, 4th and higher cousins that are too distant to trace. Now the DNA section identifies potential close relatives that have submitted DNA samples. To my surprise the relatives identified were: Darryl Price (Son), Cousin (Once Removed) Bill Pappas (Cousin Carol’s son) and Cousin (Twice Removed) Samantha Rogers (Cousin Donn’s granddaughter). Cousin relationships, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., are confusing at best. Bill and Samantha are Cousins because Carol, Donna and I share the same Price Grandparents. Removed denotes the number of generations between us. Ethnicity estimates were also given for Darryl, Bill and Samantha, which were noted and temporarily set aside (While I sought new health providers). Checking the DNA results in the first week in October, it was noted that Genetic Communities had been identified. Genetic Communities represented a new feature added to the DNA section.
Genetic Communities are groups of AncestryDNA members who are MOST likely connected, because they share FAIRLY RECENT ancestors who came from the same region or culture—even though they may have had different ethnic backgrounds. AncestryDNA find Genetic Communities by analyzing genetic connections between groups of AncestryDNA members. These groups identify areas where your ancestors MAY HAVE lived MORE RECENTLY. Regions with a dotted circle are based on Genetic Communities. AncestryDNA uses Genetic Communities to help find places and populations that MIGHT BE part of your past. These show up as dotted areas in your regions of origin or regions of migration. Conditional statements regarding Genetic Communities have been highlighted because an identified Genetic Community does not coincide with the Price/Graham known history. Each Genetic Community identified will be reviewed with known family history in mind.
While preparing to initiate this essay in early November 2019, Ancestry had updated the DNA ethnicities estimates again! It had been only one month since the last update and six months when these estimates were first noted as being updated. This latest DNA update retains ethnicity estimates similar to those in October. In fact, the update contains elements of the first ethnicity estimates from October 2015. In addition to the ethnicity update, a new Second Cousin, Sarah Jean Byers, was identified. Her name could not be readily recognized, and information provided was insufficient to discover how we were related. After reviewing the family tree, it was discovered that Sarah is Granddad Graham’s Grand Niece. Sarah is the Granddaughter of Grandad’s sister Evalena. Details will be addressed later.
Needless to say, the major changes in ethnicity estimate, and being placed in some unusual Genetic Communities, has been overwhelming and difficult to fully comprehend. While this new information tended to confirm the previous family research, there were questions with no obvious answers. Attempting to understand the situation, there are some facts about DNA that were not known about DNA heredity, its impact on ethnicity and other factors over several generations of family history. These DNA updates raise a basic question, why does your ethnicity estimate change? The simple answer is “no it does not change.” Answering this question is complex, requires a basic knowledge of DNA inheritance and understanding AncestryDNA’s process for determining your ethnicity estimate.
To arrive at your ethnicity estimate, AncestryDNA compares your DNA against their Reference Panel. The Reference Panel consists of numerous DNA samples taken from people living in geographical regions all over the world. The samples from each region are from people with documentary evidence that show a historic tie to the region. This documentation requires birth, death, and marriage records through the Grandparents. Your DNA is run against this Reference Panel 40 times to arrive at your ethnicity estimate. In reality, the ethnicity estimate covers a range, with the average noted as your ethnicity. Initially, the Reference Panel was for 22 worldwide regions and now consists of 60 worldwide regions. These 60 regions have been subdivided into smaller regions reaching well over 500 total regions. The Genetic Communities are represented by these smaller regions. Here is a world map that shows the 60 regions used for the Reference Panel. There are 40,017 DNA samples from these 60 regions for the Reference Panel.
Reference Panel DNA Region, Current
DNA samples have been acquired from nearly every region in the world. The largest area with no samples covers most of Russia. Obviously, Putin did not want to assist AncestryDNA obtaining Russian DNA samples! I’m sure samples from Russia would show lots of Mongol DNA. Other notable regions not providing samples are Chile, India and parts of Africa, plus of course Greenland. A few sub-regions will be shown in my ethnicity estimates at the appropriate time. It should be noted, these regions are geographical areas and do not represent countries. Countries are geopolitical entities, and any country can be represented by any number of ethnicities. The United Sates is an excellent example. In reality, migration over the eons brings diversity to all regions. Migration and the manner of DNA inheritance have a major impact on your ethnicity.
You inherit your DNA from your Mom and Dad. Actually, you inherit half from your Mom and half from your Dad. The same is true for your brother and/or sister. Nevertheless, none of you inherited the same 50% from Mom or Dad. The 50% inherited from each is random for every child. As a consequence, your ethnicity will not be identical to that of your siblings. Only identical twins inherit the same DNA traits from their parents. There is another aspect to DNA heredity that needs to be recognized. Since your DNA consists of random parts of your parents’ DNA, it is possible some trait, or part of their DNA, may not be transmitted to their children. AncestryDNA provides a simple example that illustrates this aspect of DNA inheritance. This example is shown in the following chart.
DNA Inheritance Example
The example shows there are four Grandparents: ANDREW, SANDRA, GRHAHAM and ELAINE. Imagine the letters in their names represent a DNA trait. ANDREW and SANDRA have a son named EDWARD. GRAHAM and ELAINE have a daughter named ANGELA. EDWARD and ANGELA each inherit 50% of their DNA from each of their parents, as seen in their names. EDWARD and ANGELA marry and have three children, a son GERALD and two daughters named GLENDA and REAGAN. First, notice that each child received a different 50% of EDWARD’s and ANGELA’s DNA. Second, consider the W in the Grandfather ANDREW’s DNA was passed to his son EDWARD, but notice none of ANDREW’s children received the W trait! Since you inherit a random 50% of DNA from each parent, it does not follow that you will inherit all of their traits. As a consequence, DNA traits can be “lost” from previous generations. “Losing” DNA traits becomes more prevalent as the number of your ancestors increase in number. The number of ancestors in your family tree doubles with each generation. Imagine you as the top branch in your family tree, and the branches increase as you descend the tree.
Now, let’s consider the generational effects on DNA inheritance. You have two parents and four Grandparents. Thus, each subsequent generation doubles the number of ancestors that contribute some of their traits to your DNA. It does not require many generations to arrive at a large number of ancestors passing on their DNA traits to following generations. The following table illustrates how quickly the ancestor numbers grow with each generation. The
Chart shows that in just ten generations there are 1,022 people that have possibly contributed some of their traits to your DNA. Since a child receives only 50% of each parent’s DNA, traits from the 7th generation ancestors probably do not contribute significantly to your DNA, especially when considering DNA traits can be lost somewhere between generations.
Generations
|
Relationships
|
DNA Contributors
|
1
|
You
| |
2
|
Parents
|
2
|
3
|
Grandparents
|
4
|
4
|
Great Grandparents
|
8
|
5
|
2nd Great Grandparents
|
16
|
6
|
3rd Great Grandparents
|
32
|
7
|
4th Great Grandparents
|
64
|
8
|
5th Great Grandparents
|
128
|
9
|
6th Great Grandparents
|
256
|
10
|
7th Great Grandparents
|
512
|
Total Ancestors Sources
|
1,022
|
Possible DNA Contributors by Generation
After reviewing AncestryDNA’s upgraded process for determining ethnicity from your DNA sample, a better understanding was gained as to why my ethnicity changed so significantly. In addition, the basics of DNA inheritance adds another element to consider in determining your ethnicity when the effects of migration and family generations are taken into account. However, let’s consider the changes in ethnicity before considering these other factors. Before presenting the latest ethnicity results, it is instructive to review the October 2015 DNA test results and note the changes in the process for determining ethnicity. Examining the essay Price Family Genealogy Update, changes to the Reference Panel has changed dramatically, thereby affecting ethnicities significantly. The 2015 Reference Panel contained only 26 regions with only 3,000 DNA samples. The current Reference Panel represents a quantum leap to 60 Worldwide regions with over 40,000 DNA samples. It is no wonder ethnicities have changed so much. These upgrades to my ethnicity were significant but more closely aligned with what I expected based on my family’s history. To show how these latest updates modified my ethnicity, let’s begin with the first DNA ethnicity percentages initially obtained in 2015. Only the percentages will be shown without any original maps. To view those earlier maps, review the essay noted above. New maps for the current ethnicities will follow after listing all ethnicity results since October 2015. Ethniciy results for the close relatives noted earlier will be discussed later.
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Range
|
Europe
|
96%
| |
Ireland
|
50%
|
38% - 64%
|
Scandinavia
|
19%
|
3% - 34%
|
Europe West
|
14%
|
0% - 34%
|
Iberian Peninsula
|
6%
|
0% - 15%
|
Europe East
|
3%
|
0% - 10%
|
Great Britain
|
3%
|
0& - 12%
|
European Jewish
|
<1%
|
0% - 3%
|
West Asia
|
2%
| |
Caucasus
|
2%
|
0% - 5%
|
Africa
|
2%
| |
Africa North
|
<1%
|
0% - 2%
|
Senegal
|
<1%
|
0% - 2%
|
Ethnicity Results, October 2015
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Range
|
Europe
|
99%
| |
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
61%
|
57% - 70%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
33%
|
0% - 33%
|
Germanic Europe
|
5%
|
0% - 24%
|
Africa
|
1%
| |
Cameroon, Congo & Southwestern Bantu People
|
1%
|
0% - 1%
|
Ethnicity Results, May & October 2019
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Range
|
Europe
|
99%
| |
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
50%
|
47% - 63%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
30%
|
0% - 33%
|
Germanic Europe
|
15%
|
0% - 25%
|
Norway
|
2%
|
0% - 8%
|
France
|
2%
|
0% - 2%
|
Africa
|
1%
| |
Cameroon, Congo & Southwestern Bantu People
|
1%
|
0% - 1%
|
Ethnicity Results, November 2019
Ethnicity changes from October 2015 to May and October 2019 are significant. This drastic change shows the results of increasing the Reference Panel from 26 to 60 Regions and the increased DNA samples from 3,000 to over 40,000. Changes from May to November 2019 are not dramatic, but align well with what we know about the Price, Huckstadt, Graham and Clifford family origins. Plus, the Norway addition matches the Scandinavian ethnicity segment in the October 2015 results, just not as dominant. Now let’s show the maps for these current ethnicity estimates.
England, Wales & Northwest Europe, 50%, 47% - 63%
My DNA sample was compared with the Reference Panel 40 times in an attempt to discern the ethnicities of my ancestors, thereby providing evidence of their origin. Each of the 40 comparisons have a different result, shown as a range for each ethnicity identified. The average of these results is listed for each ethnicity. Each ethnicity map encompasses those regions to that ethnicity. The bright yellow map area represents the majority ethnicity region, while the entire map represents the range of this ethnicity. That is to say, these other regions also have contributed to my ethnicity. It is no surprise that this map stretches from Scotland all the way to Switzerland and includes portions of Denmark. England’s history is one of migration and invasion, which the map depicts well. The second highest percentage ethnicity was for Ireland and Scotland. This map does not encompass nearly as much area as the original map.
Ireland and Scotland, 30%. 0% - 33%
While the Irish Isle is bright green representing the majority of the Irish ethnicity, Scotland, Wales and islands off Normandy are duplicated from the previous map. Germanic Europe represents the next highest percentage ethnicity.
Germanic Europe, 15%, 0% - 25%
The Germanic Europe ethnicity region encompasses a large portion of Western Europe. In fact, it includes some of the same regions as the England map. It is believed that the bright green “teardrop” represents the majority Germanic ethnicity. The remaining two green regions would represent the other regions that compose the ethnicity range. It should be noted that the “teardrop” would be located in the Bavarian region and represent the birthplace of 2nd Great Grandfather Haid. In addition, 2nd Great Grandfather Huckstadt was from a region located about in the center of the map. It is entirely possible that my Germanic ethnicity is through these two ancestors. The two final European ethnicities are Norway and France.
These two ethnicities are listed at two percent, with Norway possessing a larger range. Norway and France ethnicities both average 2%; Norway has a greater ranger than France. My first DNA result included a large Scandinavian ethnicity percentage. It is possible that since AncestryDNA has increased the number of regions and DNA samples, my Scandinavian ethnicity has returned as Norway. This contribution to my DNA is probably due to those marauding Vikings. France represents the last European ethnicity and encompasses quite a large section of Southwest Europe. A map for the African contribution is not shown because it’s very minor percentage overall.
Norway, 2%, 0% - 8%
France, 2%, 0% - 2%
There is a dotted region within the ethnicity map of England, Wales & Northwest Europe that designates a Genetic Community. This region encompasses the Scottish Lowlands, Northern England and North Ireland. Results of my DNA placed me in this Genetic Community. A map of this Genetic Community provides greater detail.
Scottish Lowlands, Northern England and North Ireland
My first reaction to being placed in this Genetic Community was shock, followed by a “this cannot be true” reaction. For starters, the Price family had been traced to our 13th Great Grandparents in Wales; plus, Great Grandmother Clifford and her parents were all born in Wales. Why wasn’t a Wales Genetic Community identified or at least one somewhere in Central England? It seemed the Genetic Community identified was most likely from the Graham family. If this fact was true, why was that family so dominate in the origins of our family? To aid in answering this question, further research revealed that England, Scotland and Ireland had been subdivided into 28 sub-regions, shown in the following map.
England, Scotland and Ireland Sub-regions
When reviewing this map in detail, all sub-regions, except the Scottish Lowlands, Northern England and North Ireland, have no DNA connections. Based on an AncestryDNA articles, when a person’s DNA is run against the Reference Panel there are “connections” with some portion of the millions of Ancestry members’ DNA results. Then using a statistical analysis groups these connections into Genetic Communities. This is my understanding how Genetic Communities are derived, and these communities are represented by the sub-regions shown in the map. If all AncestryDNA information is combined with historical knowledge of major migrations from England to Colonial America, it is possible to understand being placed into the Scottish Lowlands, Northern England and North Ireland Genetic Community.
It is believed that there are at least three factors that can explain why being placed in this Genetic Community above may be realistic. Two of these factors have already been discussed: DNA heredity and DNA trait transfer over several generations. DNA traits can be lost over many generations. My family research has been able to discover birth dates and places for all but two of our 2nd Great Grandparents (14 of 16 ancestors). Birth dates and places of 3rd Great Grandparents could be identified for only 10 of 32 ancestors, and the number becomes less for each previous generation. With the exception of the Price family ancestors, no 3rd and higher Great Grandparent was born in Colonial America, at least based on research to date. Migration to America began early in the 17th Century with the English settlements of Jamestown in today’s Virginia in 1607 and the Pilgrims 1620 landing at Plymouth Rock in today’s Massachusetts. Following these settlements, there were four major migrations in the 17th and 18th Centuries from England to Colonial America. The First Migration (1629 - 1640) were the Puritans settling in today’s New England region. TheSecond Migration (1642 – 1675) were the Royalists and Servants settling in the tidewater region, today’s Virginia and Maryland. The Third Migration (1675-1725) were the Quakers settling in today’s Pennsylvania, New Jersey and the Delaware River Valley. The Fourth Migration (1718 – 1775) consisted primarily of folks from Northern England, Scotland and North Ireland settling West of the Appalachian Mountains from Pennsylvania to Georgia. The essay Price Family Genealogy Update has maps that show where in England these migrants originated. All of these Migrations, except the Puritans, had migrants from the Genetic Community region that my DNA placed me into. The Fourth Migration map shows where this migrant groups originated; basically this map is a near replication of the Scottish Lowland, Northern England and North Ireland Genetic Community. Based on maps of the Second, Third and Fourth migrations, being placed in this Genetic Community seems to make sense. AncestryDNA has extended the concept of Genetic Communities to America and placed our family into two different Genetic Communities.
AncestryDNA has used its members’ DNA results to show our family’s ancestors’ migration from Europe to Colonial America. Our family’s ancestors have been placed into two different Genetic Communities and identified as Lower Midwest and Virginia Settlers and Ohio River Valley, Indiana, Illinois and Iowa Settlers. For brevity’s sake, these two communities will be referred to as the Virginia Settlers and the Ohio River Settlers. The following maps show migration from Europe to Colonial America for the Virginia Settlers and Oho River Settlers communities in 1700. The Virginia Settlers are Blue and the Ohio River Settlers are Orange. Each round dot, Blue or Orange, represents some Ancestry member’s ancestor’s birthplace. Sometimes, within the dots, there will be a “tear drop” with a number included. Since the Price/Graham Tres has been associated with my DNA results, these tear drops represent an ancestor in the tree, with the number indicating the number of ancestors. Based on family research to date, these tear drops are for a Price Great Grandparent several generations removed. It is believed these tear drops represent the same ancestors, since it looks as though they are in the same location. These maps have time scale that progresses from 1700 to the early 20thCentury, with a different time scale on each map. Selecting any of the dates provides another migration map either from Europe or within the United States. Grasping the meaning of these maps requires combing family research and migration history. These factors and others will be considered in an attempt to understand these and subsequent maps.
Lower Midwest & Virginia Settlers, 1700
Ohio River Valley, Indiana, Illinois and Iowa Settlers, 1700
While it is difficult to see in both maps, there are Blue and Orange dots in England, Scotland, North Ireland, Germany and France. For the Virginia Settlers map, there are Blue dots from Massachusetts continuing down the East Coast to the Virginia/Maryland area. The Ohio River Settlers map has Orange dots also from Massachusetts down to the Virginia/Maryland area. Closer examination of these maps show that the Virginia Settlers dots concentrate in the Virginia/Maryland area. The Ohio River Settlers dots appear to concentrate in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and the Delaware River Valley. Overview maps for these two communities confirms this observation. It is interesting that these two communities occupy the same geographical areas, at least in 1700. At first glance, I thought the Virginia Settlers represented the Price ancestors and the Ohio River Settlers represented the Graham ancestors. While this first impression is ultimately correct, family research finds only Price ancestors arriving in Colonial America by 1700. If this is true, why are there Ohio River Settlers in 1700 Colonial America? This question cannot be answered with certainty and requires consideration a number of interrelated topics. Although our family is placed into two unique Genetic Communities, it must be remembered that our family is only one family among many. Each time period selected has a map of many Blue or Orange dots that have been identified as having a DNA connection to our family. Yes, these dots are probably the 3rd, 4th or higher order Cousins. Remember, the tear drops represent ancestors directly related to our family. In the big picture, these other dots may or may not be closely related to our family. At least this is my interpretations of the communities shown on the maps. Progressing through time with these maps, you will find the two communities share some of the same geographical area, as shown in this overview map for these two communities in the United Sates
Virginia Settlers & Ohio River Settlers Overview Map
The overlap of these communities certainly is the greatest in the Midwest region from about Ohio on through Iowa. This map also shows the overlap of the communities on the East Coast in Colonial America in 1700. While the two 1700 maps had both communities stretching from New England down through Virginia and Maryland, a reasonable question might be: Did they all arrive in 1700? The simple answer is “no”, they did not arrive at one time. Remember there was Jamestown (Virginia) in 1607 and the Pilgrims (Massachusetts) in 1620. The Puritans’ major migration into New England from1629 to1640. The Royalists and Servants migration to Virginia & Maryland began in 1642 through 1675. Thus, the first two major migration had been completed by 1675. However, the Quaker migration to New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the Delaware River Valley began in 1675 through 1725. The 1700 migration map is halfway through this major migration and is concentrated in this area as shown in the overview map. Thus, migration to Colonial America had been in progress for over 60 years and was in the midst of yet another major migration. Despite these major migrations, it seems reasonable that migration to Colonial American was more or less continuous. By this time, it also seems reasonable that the East Coast was reasonably developed and colonists and new migrants were beginning to move Westward seeking more land in the vast wilderness of Colonial America. It is curious that the two 1700 migration maps have different time scales on the side. Why the different time scales? The time scale for the Virginia Settlers map is 1700, 1775, 1825, 1850, 1875 and 1900. For these settlers, 1700 is the mid-point of the 3rd Migration and 1775 is the end of the 4th Migration. The 19th Century dates represent the movement Westward for this community, while 1900 represents arrival of some folks in Southern California. The time scale for the Ohio River Settlers map is 1700, 1750, 1775, 1800, 1850, 1900 and 1925. It is believed the Ohio River Settlers maps for 1750 and 1775 are based on the 4th Major Migration. This belief arose when it was discovered inadvertently that these two maps also show migrations from England, Scotland, North Ireland, Germany and France.
Ohio River Settlers, 1750
Ohio River Settlers, 1775
The 1750 map shows migration from Europe to Colonial America about mid-way through the 4th Major Migration. Tear drops in the map represent Price ancestors born in Maryland during the 17th Century. The 1775 map shows migration at the end of the 4th Major Migration from Northern England, Scotland and North Ireland. The tear drops representing three ancestors are the same ones shown in the 1750 map. The Pink tear drop represents a 5th Great Grandmother Price, born in Maryland and dying in Kentucky. It was this map where it was discovered that a tear drop of a family ancestor will be shown at their birthplace and where they died. Thus, it is possible to see two tear drops for any of our ancestors. By selecting a specific time on either the Virginia Settlers or Ohio River Settlers map, a new map for the community is shown. Basically, these maps show the community’s growth and Westward movement. Rather than presenting each of the maps, only selected ones will be provided to give a sense of our family’s history.
The first map to present will be the Ohio River Settlers in 1800. This map of the community was selected because this year was near the arrival of the first of the Graham family.
Ohio River Settlers, 1800
This map shows how these settlers moved Westward since 1700 into the Ohio River Valley. Our 3rd Great Grandparents William and Jane Niblock Graham arrived in the Northwest section of Pennsylvania, about 100 miles South of Lake Erie, in about 1803 or perhaps in the late 18th Century, from Ireland. The Blue and Pink tear drops represent the parents of our Great Grandmother Sarah Ann Paxton Graham. The yellowish tear drops with the number five in Kentucky represents Price ancestors in the Virginia Settlers community. Next, let’ s considers the 1850 map for both communities. The 1825 map for the Virginia Settlers was skipped because it shows the movement form Maryland to Kentucky by our 3rd Great Grandparents Richard and Rachel Willet Price in about 1800. Next let’s look at the maps for 1850 for both the Virginia Settlers and the Ohio River Settlers, they are very interesting.
Virginia Settlers, 1850
Ohio River Settlers, 1850
The Virginia Settlers community in 1850 is quite surprising! It is shocking to see how this community migrated into the Midwest, especially in the Ohio River Valley. In fact, some of this community moved as far North as to be in Canada, North of Lake Erie. Of course, the real shocker is to see there was a Mormon segment of the community migrating to the Salt Lake Valley. Brigham Young led that migration in 1847 with thousands following. There are Blue dots in Northeastern Kansas, but this was prior to any Price family arriving, but 3rd Great Grandfather Haid did arrive in Kansas about 1850. The Ohio River Settlerscommunity has several dots in Northwest Kansas, which may represent this Great Grandfather. There are several tear drops in this map, with most of them representing Graham ancestors. The one tear drop in Kentucky is a duplicate from the previous 1850 map. There is one aspect about the tear drops that has been discovered while preparing this essay. Ancestry provides “hint” for most everyone that is in the Price/Grahamtree. These hints related to records associated with that person. These hints refer to Birth, Marriage, Death and Census records and sometimes to other member’ tree. All of these hints have not been explored, but the ones that have been accepted are presented as a tear drop in these maps. Currently, there are over 99 hints that have not been reviewed. It is possible more tear drops would appear after reviewing and accepting these hints. Reviewing these maps, it seems the Virginia Settlers populated more of the Midwest than the Ohio River Settlers. This latter community’s migration seemed to be more Westward than the Virginia Settlers. Now let’s consider these two communities in 1900.
Virginia Settlers, 1900
Ohio River Settlers, 1900
The Virginia Settlers map shows migration of the community to Southern California in 1900. The map shows a Blue tear drop in Southern California and a Pink tear drop in Northeast Kansas. Great Grandfather Robert S. Price is the Blue tear drop and Great Grandmother Mary Ann Richards Price is the Pink tear drop. Placement of these tear drops is misleading for a number of reasons. Our Great Grandparents Price are listed in the 1900 Federal Census as married and living in Shannon, Pottawattamie County, Kansas. Great Grandmother Price passed away in 1908, and Great Grandfather Price was listed in the 1910 Federal Census living with his Son Nicolas W. Price and family in Blue Valley, Pottawattamie County, Kansas. It was not until the 1920 Federal Census listed Great Grandfather Price living in Orange, Orange County, California. This 1920 Census also listed Grandfather Robert Alfred Price living with Great Grandfather Price. There is no family information as to when they arrived in Orange, California, nor whether they arrived together or separately. Whichever it was, they were the first members of our Price family to reside in California. According to family records, Grandfather Robert Alfred Price returned to Kansas in 1922 and brought sonWalter Herman Price to live with him in Orange also. My Dad, Robert Otto Price, left Kansas in 1926, worked in Colorado for about a year before arriving in Southern California in 1927. In 1928, or 1929, Dadreturned to Kansas and brought his sister Gladys Mae Price to California also. Aunt Gladys is listed in the 1930 Federal Census boarding with a family in Santa Ana. This 1930 Federal Census shows both Uncle Walter and Dad living in Riverside, California. Thus, by 1930 all members of our Price family were living in Southern California. In conclusion, Grandfather Robert A. Price’s older brother Nicolas Walter Price and family moved to Sacramento, California by 1930 and is listed in that year’s Federal Census.
The Ohio River Settlers also show migration to Southern California, as well as Oregon and Washington. This migration to Los Angeles and Orange Counties certainly occurred during the last years of the 19th Century. Iowa and Nebraska picnics were common place into at least the 1980s. Tear drops in Illinois and Iowa represent Graham ancestors. Migration to Oregon and Washington was surprising, probably because we have no known relatives in those states. However, the 1925 shows the Graham family arriving in Southern California.
Ohio River Settlers, 1925
Grandparents George P. and Minnie plus Pauline G. Graham (Mom) are listed in the 1920 Census living in Pomona. They were living in Santa Ana 10 years later. It is curious that both the 1900 Virginia Settlers and the 1925 Ohio River Settlers community maps have no further migration maps. The reason, or reasons, for ending in 1900 and1925 are not clear, and why they end here is a mystery. Perhaps maps later in the 20thCentury, these communities maps have no real meaning because there would be dots all over the United States.
Although maps for the Virginia and Ohio River Settlers end in the early 20th Century, these few maps show the history of our Price and Graham families thru the years. It is my belief that this DNA Story provides some degree of certainty to the family research accomplished to date. Perhaps reviewing all the unexplored hints will compensate for the Cabin Fever experienced during this Coronavirus Pandemic! Who knows what other family history surprises will be uncovered. Now that this part of the DNA Story has been explored, let’s consider the ethnicity estimates for the close relatives initially listed.
As a refresher, the relatives listed are Darryl Price (Son), Cousin Once Removed Bill Pappas (Cousin Carol’s son), Cousin Twice Removed Samantha Rogers (Cousin Donn’s Granddaughter) and Second Cousin, Sarah Jean Byers There are interesting background stories associated with Samantha Rogers and Sarah Jean Byers that will be shared.
Darryl Price, Son
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
99%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
73%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
25%
|
Germanic Europe
|
0%
|
Norway
|
1%
|
Africa
|
1%
|
Cameroon, Congo & Southwestern Bantu People
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, May & October 2019
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
99%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
67%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
28%
|
Germanic Europe
|
4%
|
Norway
|
0%
|
France
|
0%
|
Africa
|
1%
|
Cameroon, Congo & Southwestern Bantu People
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, November 2019
Darryl’s ethnicities changed little from May to November. A couple of years ago, Darryl submitted a sample, and ethnicities were very different than the May results. Unfortunately, those estimates are no longer available. Reasons for the minor changes from May to November are mainly in England and Ireland ethnicities. Obviously, Darryl did not receive any of my Norway or France DNA and very little of my Germanic heritage
Bill Pappas, Cousin Once Removed
As previously noted, Bill is Cousin Carol’s son. Carol’s husband, Tom Pappas, was of Greek heritage. After seeing Bill’s ethnicities, she was rather surprised that Bill’s ethnicity did not contain more Greek DNA. It is rather surprising there is only 36% Greek & Baltic ethnicity and seems to be more European than Greek. However, at this time I have no information about Tom’s parents and their heritage. I know only Carol’s father’s heredity, and very little of her Mom’s. An educated guess would be that Carol’s heredity may be similar to mine, but that is a real wild guess. While I know Uncle Walter’s heredity and I only know a little of Aunt Dot’s heredity. Aunt Dot’s maiden name was Newton, which is probably English, but nothing else for sure. Maybe some research can be done to help answer some of these unknowns.
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
100%
|
Greece & the Balkans
|
34%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
20%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
25%
|
France
|
12%
|
Italy
|
10%
|
Germanic Europe
|
4%
|
Sweden
|
4%
|
Norway
|
3%
|
Portugal
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, October 2019
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
100%
|
Greece & the Balkans
|
36%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
31%
|
Germanic Europe
|
16%
|
France
|
13%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
3%
|
Sardinia
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, November 2019
Bill’s ethnicities changes were dramatic going from nine to six. Bill’s results resemble mine when you consider the 2015 results to those of 2019. As a guess, Bill sent his DNA sample in when the Reference Panel was different than 2015 and 2019. Unfortunately, AncestryDNA does not date the ethnicity results. Dating the result would be very helpful in understanding these type ethnicity changes.
Samantha Rogers, Cousin Twice Removed
I received an e-mail, thru Ancestry, from Samantha around Christmas 2017 stating we might be related. She indicated Donna Bramley was her maternal Grandmother and inquired if I knew anything about Donna Bramley. I responded indicating we were Cousins, and grew up with her and Cousin Bill Bramley. I provided the link to the blog and my contact information. She responded to my message, asking if it was okay to call and gave her phone number. Not hearing any response, about four months later I called her. We had a conversation, and I discovered the gaps in my knowledge about Donna, her marriage and Samantha’s story. Donna married Clifford Brown in 1957 and they had two sons. I had discovered the marriage and the birth of one son William but not two sons. William was the second son and had passed away in 2002. Samantha told me she was helping her Dad find his roots, which was a surprise to me since William had passed 15 years ago. That’s when I discovered that her father was the oldest Son and had changed his name to Harry Rogers. Here is the story Samantha related to me during our conversation.
Donna and Clifford divorced, or separated (not sure which), and for some reason gave her two sons to Clifford to raise. I mentioned not finding a birth record for her Dad; she said her Dad did not like Clifford, his father, and changed his name to Henry Rogers. I have searched various records and have been unable to discover any information for him or Samantha. When asked why Donna gave up the boys, she indicated that was her Dad’s story and she would keep it private. While talking with her, she was viewing the essay Aunts, Uncles and Cousins and said, “She had seen all the pictures of Donna, Billy and myself,”
so it was obvious we were indeed related. Since that phone call, I have not heard from Samantha or her Dad. Her ethnicity results are shown because she is closely related.
so it was obvious we were indeed related. Since that phone call, I have not heard from Samantha or her Dad. Her ethnicity results are shown because she is closely related.
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
85%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
68%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
7%
|
Portugal
|
4%
|
Spain
|
2%
|
Germanic Europe
|
2%
|
European Jew
|
1%
|
Basque
|
1%
|
Native American-North, Central, South
|
14%
|
Africa
|
1%
|
Mali
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, October 2019
Ethnicity Region
|
Percentage
|
Europe
|
86%
|
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe
|
72%
|
Ireland and Scotland
|
6%
|
Spain
|
4%
|
Portugal
|
2%
|
European Jew
|
1%
|
Basque
|
1%
|
Native American-Mexico
|
13%
|
Africa
|
1%
|
Mali
|
1%
|
Ethnicity Results, November 2019
Ethnicity estimates for Samantha experienced only minor changes. Probably the major region change was from all of North, Central and South America to just Mexico, but the percentage was almost the same. The contributions from Spain, Portugal and Basque could be a result of the Conquistadors invading and controlling Central America.
Sarah Jean Byers, Second Cousin
I remember Grandad Graham once told me all his relatives had passed away by the age of 55. As a consequence, the only Graham relatives I knew were Peaches , Louis and Jack Graham. The essay A Baseball Journey tells of their involvement in my early life. It was a complete surprise when Sarah Jean was identified as a Second Cousin. After some research, it was discovered Grandfather George P. Graham had an older sister Evalena L. Graham born in 1864. Evalena married Mark Anthony Morrison in December 1887 and gave birth to a Son in January 1888. A daughter, Clar Olive Morrison was born in 1895. It is interesting to note that Olive Morrison was Mark’s mother who issued the marriage license for Mark and Evalena. Clara married Alfred Nelson Byers in 1910 and a daughter Sara Jean Byers was born in 1926 in Illinois. It is interesting to note that Evalena passed away in 1930 at the age of 74! Why Granddad told me all his relatives had passed away by age 55 is certainly a mystery. One could guess he was not on speaking terms with his sister. I do not understand this relationship. Sara Jean is still living and would be about 93 years old now. Sara Jean is a Second Cousin because Mom and Clara Morrison are Second Cousins once removed (I think). Cousin relationships are definitely confusing!
Concluding Remarks
After completing the essay, time has been spent questioning the accuracy of the DNA test results. This questioning has centered around two basic questions. First, are the ethnicity estimates correct? Second, is placement in the Genetic Communities correct or reasonable? The simple answer to the first question is yes, the estimates are correct. Skeptical, is the answer to the second question. Let’s consider these two questions with a more in-depth answer.
My ethnicity estimates are correct for two basic reasons. The estimates match both family history and are consistent with family research done to date. However, there is not any reasonable way the percentages can be verified. Both the average and the range for each listed ethnicity has been determined by AncestryDNA processing of my DNA. As such, answering the question depends upon how accurate is their process? It appears their process is fairly accurate, because the process identified four close relatives. However, comparing Bill Pappas’ results with mine raises some questions concerning the accuracy. Bill’s ethnicity results do not indicate a large contribution for his Dad, Tom. Tom’s heredity is Greek, but Bill shows only a 36% average Greek ethnicity. Unfortunately, Bill’s results do not show a range for his largest ethnicity component. It is possible the range could be 34% to 70%, or it could be 0% to 36%. Only Bill has this data. Without knowledge of this data, research was undertaken to determine the accuracy of DNA testing in determining ethnicity or heredity.
Surprise, surprise! While there are several articles on heredity DNA testing, most are comparisons between several commercial companies. There were two articles that claimed it was not possible to use DNA to determine your heredity. These articles were posted six and 14 years ago. These were discounted because DNA testing to determine heredity was in its infancy. Several articles rated the various companies offering this type DNA tests. Both Ancestry and 123anMe were included in all the rating articles and received high ratings. A couple of articles discussed sending samples to several testing companies and discussed the result differences. One article compared results of Ancestry and 123andMe. The author contacted both companies to discuss the differences. The primary reason for result differences were found to be in the Reference Panel each used and the algorithm used to determine ethnicity. While both are accurate, you will have different results. How much different depends on your DNA depending on your heredity. From my standpoint, you should know more about your family’s history before taking the test.
Thus, I believe my ethnicity results are basically accurate. Plus, close relatives were identified accurately. I remain skeptical about Bill Pappas’ ethnicity, primarily due to lack of knowledge about his family’s heredity.
Skepticism about Genetic Communities remains especially for the origin of my family in the Scottish Lowlands, Northern England and North Ireland. Although it was argued this region seemed reasonable, accepting this as fact has some disturbing implications that questions its accuracy. Research to date does not place any ancestor originating in that region. Family research and history place the family’s main origin in Wales, Central England and Ireland. Welsh traits could have been lost since that connection were 14 to 16 generations ago. Both the Virginia and Ohio River Settlers communities make sense because family research matches those communities much better.
Hopefully, this essay has added to your knowledge DNA, ethnicities, heredity and understanding of our family’s history through the DNA test results. Since everyone’s DNA is different, it would be great if everyone had test results. This is probably impractical since each test has a $99 price tag. Ancestry has DNA test sales from time to time, but those are still $59 at the cheapest. This has been a very difficult essay to prepare because there were so many question that arose and reasonable explanations had to be considered for every explanation and map. Please let me know if you have a different opinion about anything that has been stated or discussed in the essay.
No comments:
Post a Comment