GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268175872


From: Steven Bird <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] British Isles DNA on-going discussion at newblog if interested
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 18:04:32 -0500
References: <927983.1778.qm@web82407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <927983.1778.qm@web82407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


This is "Deacon" George not "Farmer" George Clark, correct?



I suppose it depends on your goals. 67 markers provide more precision about TMRCA, helps pinpoint various cousin relationships, etc.


For those who have never researched the surname Clark(e), it is a treat! ;-) Six John Clarks in New England alone in the mid 17th century, for example. One of them lived next door to my ancestor, Mary Clarke, of Farmington and her husband Joseph Bird in Farmington, CT. Oddly enough, there is no evidence to link Mary and John except for physical proximity. :-) Mary was definitely from Windsor, CT, born there in 1638. Her brother (named Joseph Clarke) died as a young adult in about 1659. Mary inherited the estate from their father, yet another Joseph Clarke, (perhaps brother of William Clarke of Windsor, CT and Northampton, MA); Joseph Clarke had owned property in Farmington and died there in about 1641. John was not Mary's brother, but could have been a cousin. OUCH, my head hurts. ;-)




Steve



> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:53:23 -0800
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] British Isles DNA on-going discussion at new blog if interested
>
> Steven, I am wondering about my Clarks of Connecticut and how I can advance home origin and tie up with other Clarks.We have a very rare haplotype. Certain cousins vary by 5 in 5 generations. Three Clarks of CT prior to1640 in rare R1b are S286F,known cousin V 7682, and 53YHS. Would you test the first and third farther out to 67 markers? All three are positive for rs34276300. Margretta...family of deacon George Clark of Milford
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 2, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Steven Bird <> wrote:
>
>
> Andrew,
>
>
>
> I'd like to get your opinion about something. My Bird Y DNA line can be traced to a resident of Hartford, CT who died there in August 1662, Thomas Bird, who had moved there by May 1644, when he shows up in the land records. He was found previously in Ispwich, MA in 1638/9, also in the land records. Because of the nature of the migration to New England prior to 1650 and the extensive associations with other New England families (not to mention the nature of the surname itself) it is a virtual certainty that he came from England to New England. After 150+ years of research by several generations of my relatives, however, we still cannot place Thomas Bird definitely in a particular location in England.
>
>
>
> Recently, a distant cousin came to light (7 one step differences out of 67 markers, all at fast movers) with a different surname, Wells. Since with our somewhat oddball haplogroup (E1b1b1a2-V13) and the reasonably "close" match on STRs, we are very sure that there is a common ancestor, probably sometime in the 16th century. His Wells family is definitely from Bedford, Bedfordshire and has been in Bedfordshire since at least the mid-16th century. We have good records for both families since 1639; the Wells records go back to 1550, roughly. This of course suggests a possible NPE in the mid or late 16th c. involving the Bird and Wells families, perhaps even Thomas Bird himself, who would have been born about 1593, roughly, based on his children's birthdates.
>
>
>
> Again, we have been unsuccessful in placing Thomas Bird in any particular parish in England because of the plethora of Thomas Birds in that period. It turns out to be a VERY common name in that time frame. My question is, how does one handle this sort of a problem in a geographic project such as the British Isles Project? I have a dozen married lines that can be traced to the region encompassed by Bishops Stortford, Braintree, Essex, and Saffron Walden, plus this odd little genetic link to Bedford, so it is probably safe to place Thomas in the southeast part of England. Still, it must be stated that we do not KNOW where he is from yet and may never know.
>
>
>
> What are your thoughts on this problem? How does one handle a haplotype that clearly is British, yet its origins cannot definitely be place geographically? I'm sure that I am not the only person with this problem. :-)
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
> To:
> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 21:53:39 +0100
> Subject: [DNA] British Isles DNA on-going discussion at new blog if interested
>
> A second post at the British Isles Project aims to keep discussion going
> about how to bring this project to its full potential...
>
> http://britishislesdna.blogspot.com/
>
> Regards
> Andrew
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/


This thread: