DNA Testing - The problems with it!

Any time a scientific method is used in evidence (whether in court or in family history or when-ever), it is important to consider its 'weaknesses'. Many researchers are not willing to do this, but I've always felt it is important.

DNA has three major weaknesses.

The first weakness of DNA testing is that all men in a direct relationship have the same DNA. For example, let's assume that several generations from now there is a Norton descendant who thinks he descends from Marc Norton. He could end up with a perfect match with another descendant, but he also would get a perfect match from a descendant of Ned, or Uncle Hub, or even a more distant 'Uncle'. DNA tells us that we are from a particular 'clan', but we still need to have historical documents to show us the exact relationships.

The second weakness of DNA is that once in a while there is a match with a family of a different surname. This could be random chance, since there are billions of people on this planet! More likely is that the two folks share common ancestors before surnames were ever used! Between 500-1000 years ago, surnames were first used by Europeans. It was even more recently than that in some cultures. There are obviously many people who share common ancestors from the pre-surname era, but have totally different surnames. I actually have a fairly good match with a man named Fishback (translated from German as Fish-Creek). His family and ours came from the same area of westcentral Germany at about the same time in the early 1700s. We almost certainly have a common ancestors. There is just no way to say who or when.

The third weakness of DNA is that sometimes there is no match when it seems that there should be. This is usually because of what is called a 'non-paternal' event. Some non-paternal events may have negative connotations. Examples of these would be rape or infidelity. Because we may never know the details of such a situation, or the reasons for such an occurrence, it may be better to leave it alone. Some examples of non-paternal events can be viewed in a much more positive light. Two examples of this would be adoption or step-family situations. If any of these situations are 'known' by future generations, there are no surprises, but as we all know 'family secrets' are very common, sometimes for good reason. It turns out that even if the odds of such an occurrence are low, when several generations are involved, it becomes quite likely that some sort of 'non-paternal' event may occur. If the historical documentation is good enough, even if the DNA does not match, it could be the correct family.

Since the Y-chromosome is what is tested in this type of analysis, every generation in the line of folks tested must be men. There are types of testing in which women can be involved, but because of the surname tradition in America, it is difficult to find a long line of women for whom the 'paper trail' exists. This means that there is no easy way to use DNA to verify our connection to families such as the Beasleys, Roes, Fosters, Woods, Hudsons. All of these lines are important to us, we just have to use traditional family history methods to verify the relationships.

DNA Results - The Long Version

Let me first state that I do not feel that our genes or DNA connections are of any significance. The only reason I work on family history is because I enjoy it, and I certainly hope others will do the same. I love all of my current family. The relationships I have with cousins, nieces, nephews, siblings, or any 'in-laws' are all SOOOOOO importance to me, whether we share DNA or not!

The reason DNA testing is important is that it can scientifically verify whether the 'paper trail' we have found is correct or not.

We now have proof that goes back three centuries. Hans Heinrich Hoffman's 300th birthday will be in 2012, and Ebenezer Norton's 300th birthday will be in 2015. We have DNA confirmatiion that these men and their wives were our g,g...grandparents.

We do not have any DNA from these folks, so how does this DNA thing work? Here is my best effort at an explanation:

Most of human DNA gets all mixed up because we get half from our mother and half from our father. But the copies of the Y-chromasomes are passed down with no changes from father to son, although rare mutations do happen. Because this Y-chromasome does not change much, men who share the same male ancestors also share exact copies of his Y-chromasome. My Y-chromasome is the same as Joe Hoffman, is the same as Harold Wayne Hoffman, is the same as the father of Sylvester Hoffman, is the same as the g-g-g-grandfather of Sylvester, etc.

If we can find a very distant cousin who descends from a known common ancestor, we can verify this relationship with DNA testing.

This is exactly what we've done in both the Norton and Hoffman families.

For our Hoffman family, there is a man named Lee Hoffman, who lives in Montgomery County, Kentucky. He has traced his ancestry to the same family as we have (Hans Heinrich and Margaret [Huettenhen] Hoffman). After DNA testing, he and I ended up with a 36/37 match for our Y-DNA. The odds of this happening are difficult to calculate, but they are astronomical. Imagine two people, each sitting down with dice and rolling matching numbers 36 out of 37 times. In the case of our DNA, the laboratory measures 37 different locations on the Y-chromasome. One of the 37 markers obviously had a minor mutation. In fact, the one marker that mutated in this case, is a spot that has a fairly high mutation rate. So when considering the 15 generations that separate Lee and I, it might be expected to have at least one marker off by one. (From me to Hans Heinrich is 8 generations, and from Hans Heinrich down to Lee is 7 generations).

Since I know a little bit about laboratory testing, I was actually somewhat suspicious of how accurate these results would be. After looking into it, I can confidently say that it is amazingly precise. It is much like counting the links of a short chain, between about 10 and 25 links at each 'location' along the Y-chromasome. The way that these links are 'counted' is as nearly perfect as any testing can be.

Because the Y-chromasome is passed down through men, only men can participate in Y-DNA testing. But women can benefit from the knowledge. Ruth's brother Dan was just recently notified of his results. Our reasearch showed that our Nortons descend from a family in Guilford, Connecticut in the late 1600s. Two other descendants of this family have had DNA testing, so we hoped for a match. Dan matched one man 23/25 and the other man 35/37. These matches are not perfect, but are very, very good. The coordinater of the Norton DNA Project immediately knew which family we came from, even before we told him!

In the left hand column of this blog, I will link to the two DNA projects mentioned above. I would love to get a DNA verification of other branches of our family. I know there are Stout men and Bagley men who could contribute to this. If anyone knows of someone who would be willing to participate, please let me know. It is a very simple thing. You just rub the inside of your cheek with a swab they send you in the mail, and send it back to them. Then wait to see if you hit the lottery numbers right or not! There is a cost, but if you are interested it is well worth it.

Like all forms of 'evidence', there are some problems with DNA testing, I will cover these in the next post.

DNA - The Short Version

Taking a break from 'Family Sketches' in order to share DNA news.

This is the short version of our DNA story. If you are interested in more detail, the next post will have much more detail.

DNA testing has verified the Hoffman branch of our family tree back to Virginia in the early 1700s. It has also verified the Norton family back to Connecticut before the American Revolution, verifying that Ebenezer Norton (born in 1715 in Durham, CT) is the 4th great grandfather of George Marcus Norton.

I am hoping that these success stories will spur at least one Stout and one Bagley man to also contribute to the database. Maybe there are others?

The 'paper' trail for both the Hoffman and Norton lines is very strong, but there is always a possibility of a mistake along the way, especially when tracking back six or eight generations. DNA testing creates virtual certainty that these are the 'clans' we descend from. We may be able to do the same thing with the other surnames in our family.

If you are interested in the science behind DNA testing, please stayed tuned in, I will write an extended article next.

Mom's Two Uncles who died in the Civil War

Our 'Grandma Roe' was Sally Foster. Her father, Andrew Boyd Foster, was detailed in an earlier post. Andrew had two brothers who died in the Civil War. In 'Family Sketches', written by their father, Thomas Boyd Foster, the service records of 5 of his sons are detailed. In this post, I will summarize what he says about his two oldest sons, William Mason Foster, and Samuel Cowan Foster - our Uncles.

First I want to comment on the names. 'Family Sketches' is the only source for their full names, but it is obviously a very reliable, written by their father. Samuel was given the first and last name of his maternal grandfather, Samuel Cowan. William was given the first name of his paternal grandfather, William Foster. He did not have an ancestor with the name Mason, but the Mason family was very close to the Foster family. I have found several cases where middle names were adopted out of respect for a close friend or close family, so this is probably the source of this middle name.

William was the first son of Thomas Boyd Foster and Eleanor Cowan. He was born on March 15, 1838 in Bolivar, Jackson County, Alabama. He entered the Confederate States Army early in the war. His father says that he had broken his thigh as a boy, was lame due to the injury, and could have avoided service because of it. He saw his younger brothers going, and thought he might be of some help to them, so his generosity carried him into battle. The story goes "When killed he was talking to a friend. A bullet struck a tree and glanced and struck him in the breast, and killed him instantly". This was in June 1864 near New Hope Church, Georgia. His Masonic emblems, his watch and his razor were sent home. Almost 30 years later his father wrote "I still have them and as long as I live, will shave with that razor".

Samuel was the second son of Mr. and Mrs. Foster. He was born on August 11, 1839. His father wrote that he loved books. He goes on to say he "carried his books in camps, studied while fighting for his rights; professed religion as a boy, and died happy". One day before his brother (William) was killed, the two young men had been in battle together. Samuel received a minor wound, as a bullet passed through the tendon just below his knee, but not breaking any bones. It disabled him enough that he was carried to the hospital. From the description, it seems that the wound must have gotten infected, as his leg was amputated, and he died. Samuel was cared for in the hospital camp by a young woman, a distant relative, who is described only as "the daughter of John Swope". The words of Thomas seem to breath appreciation toward this young lady.

In 'Family Sketches', Thomas describes many troubles caused by the Civil War, the loss of these two oldest sons must have overshadowed all other trials.

Family Sketches - Part 3 - The Death of Our G-G..Grandmother

It is a difficult decision to write this article. Some things are better left behind. The tenderness with which Thomas writes about the loss of his wife is remarkable, and he must have wanted to communicate this to his descendants. Thomas Boyd Foster and Eleanor Susan Cowan had married on April 6 1837 in Bolivar, Jackson County, Alabama. She was pregnant with her 11th child in the early spring of 1854. Here are the events, exactly as Thomas wrote it in January 1893:

"In 1853 but little of importance remembered save work, work. I had to have timber cut and put upon the bank of the river. Money had to be raised for the Pogue land. And I could sell fuel to the steam boats ..... The year 1854 rolls on. The darkest period of my life. In the early part of the year I was at home but little. Had been out attending to the duties of my office. [County Surveyor] Returned home. Had several plats and certificates to make; was engaged in this work. My wife, not feeling well, laid down on a small bed by me. She called my name two or three times in quick succession. I turned toward her. She was going into a spasm. These spasms continued until sometime in the night. She was relieved. Expected to be confined soon after. [give birth] The time came. The spasms returned on the 27th of March 1854, her babe was born. The mother was a corpse. Tongue cannot tell; thoughts, inexperienced cannot imagine. Words, when spoken advisedly, fall from the lips meaningless. Time heals many sorrows. The grave alone can cover these. Nearly half a century has elapsed. The Savior said "What I do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know herafter". The knowing time is at hand. This may be wrong. Father forgive. The next summer after the death of my wife I took my children to the mountain for health."

His normal writing style was not in the short sentences of this paragraph. He obviously remembered Eleanor with a very special love.

Family Sketches - Part 2

THE PHILOSOPHY OF THOMAS BOYD FOSTER

Sprinkled throughout the 46 pages of "Family Sketches" are several items which reveal the most important beliefs of Thomas. Some of these are just side notes concerning cousins, but in a couple of spots he intentionally writes about ideas he hopes his descendants will embrace.

He felt that he was too old and weak to work, but he could still write, so this was a way he could contribute. He elaborates, giving one of the reasons for his effort: "I have long held, unwaveringly, that every member of the human family should be employed in doing something good and profitable".

His hard work and education served him well eventually, but when speaking of his young marriage while financially broke: "We enjoyed life to the full extent. Honest poverty coupled with hard labor is no disgrace. He that will frown upon you and forsake you because you are poor, is unworthy of your confidence".

Speaking of one very successful family, he says "we conclude that in constituting a family, great care should be taken in the choice of material, or there is great danger of building on the sand, the structure worthless and the builder dishonored".

When speaking of his long career as a County Surveyor: "During this time, my business made it necessary for me to visit the homes of, and associate with, all classes of people. I am proud of the great kindness shown me. I was at home when among the wealthiest, and made myself equally so when with the poorest."

Concerning his father's brother: "Uncle Joseph [Foster] was not prosperous. He loved to hunt and fish better than he loved to grub and plow."

Later he tells of living with his sister's family (Prucence, who was married to John E. Caperton). During this time he spent his "Saturdays usually squirrel hunting. I was a good squirreler, and Caperton had a good rifle".

I conclude from these two stories, that he believed in moderation in his recreational hobbies.

Five of his sons fought in the Civil War. Speaking of this service he said "I disdained the epithet of Rebel, but was for Southern rights. I was unwilling to bear the contempt and injustice heaped upon the Southern people. My sons were of proper age for soldiers. They volunteered. It was not in my heart to oppose. They went; my prayers went with them. Preferring an honorable death to an ignominious life."

His loyalty to the South was life-long. He was straightforward when telling of the family of his sister Prudence. Three of her sons were killed in the War. After sharing a few details, Thomas said "Here was a family of noble sons murdered while contending for their rights".

Thomas was very active in the protestant religion known as the "Cumberland Presbyterian Church". He complimented numerous relatives on their commitment to this church.

And in conclusion he says about his life "When I review my life and take into consideration my inconsistencies, I am ashamed of it. Now in old age my hope is in the atonement made by the Blessed Redeemer, and I heartily recommend the Christian religion to all who may read these sketches."