I submitted a DNA sample to Family Tree DNA about 2 years ago under my
surname..Hinkle..and I was told of 2 matches. I would have never found them in my
research, but they are at least 20 generations old and probably back in
Germany. Another intersesting item poped up with the 2 matches is that both were
within 100 miles or less of each other. These are present day living Hinkles
to whome I match...
bill hinkle
in Oklahoma
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
I belong to a small group of researchers who are trying to prove the ancestry of one Daniel Hubbard b.1714 in Massachusetts who is said to be descended from a William Hulbert - immigrant from England in the 1600s. Daniel was informally adopted by a supposed aunt and uncle, Thomas and Mary Hulbert Ponder. We were trying to prove the Hubbard-Hulbert connection.
We submitted two DNA samples - both came back with no match for known descendants of William Hulbert - - but ours came up with numerous matches for - (ready for this?) - SMITH!!!
I guess it might be another thing for Americans, but I personally would not spend money for a test just telling me my ancestors were from Germany - which of course I already know...
I am not so sure, concerning the names, if all of the testers know, that names could change a lot. I have some cases in the Hannover region but lots in my home region Westfalia, where my ancestors surnames (male line) changed nearly each generation, because a farmers son who did not inherit his fathers farm liked to marry a farmers daughter who got the heir. He would then be called by the name of this farm and his children would have the farm's name and not his birth name. This means, if your Hinkles had been farmers in Westfalia or maybe another northern region, the recent Hinkles now living in Germany must not neccessary be descandants of yours. As rather often fathter or mother died and the remaining part remarried - in some families this happened up to three times in one generation and the older children then were no biological relatives of the younger ones - but they all would have the same surname...
Actually, it might help you pin down what the true ancestor's surname was,
thus being able to prove a connection to a specific surname.
If the matches for DNA results come back with 100% match to several people
name Mueller, then it would be a good bet that the original male's surname
was Mueller... Thus opening the possibility of finding the christening
records for your farmer who married an heiress and who took her surname.
Hi Bonita,
of course I have learned to track down the changing surnames - just the way in other cases they mothers surnames will always change. I my region I am aware, that for example Gerd Benningmeyer married and was called Vossschulte, his son Gerd Vosschulte married and became Gerd Weller, his son Bernd Weller later got the Acholk farm and was probably called Ackolk... I don't think, any DNA-test would help to figure out these things, even church books are not enough and you need to read the farm records too.
I only was in doubt, if the US genealogists are aware of these names changings, because even in Germany beginners or people living in the south, often don't know you can't always just follow a family name.
I am not so sure, concerning the names, if all of the testers know, that
names could change a lot.
It ... does ... not ... matter !
Names (in "our" [= human] time) have originated, got transferred, changed, were superimposed or whatever.
DNA (the 'scripture' from 'the beginning') also changes ... but much more slowly (DNA is 'ultraconservative' [when you look at it globally]).
The point is, that looking at the "junk regions" (non-gene region) of males (i.e. on the Y-chromosome; sorry girls ...) you can compare and identify contemporary "co-humans" ('Mitmenschen') who MUST have originated from the same ancestor (whatever his name was ... probably 600 years ago [= 24 generations ago] he did not even have a last name...).
That's why this "DNA thing" is so exciting !
We carry our (family)history within each and every of our zillion (= couple of trillion) cells.
I have some trouble understanding what the benefits of DNA are in finding ancestors. Their DNA is not available.
Yes of course DNA will help you to discover someone who came from the same ancestors 5 or 6 generations (or more) ago, but do they know who those ancestors were?
Are you going to search their family tree to see if you can get back to find the common ancestor?
I think someone has already mentioned the exponential way in which the number of ancestors go up each generation.
2 4 8 16 32 64 128 I did not take time to confirm my numbers, but use thes numbers as an example. I do not believe that I would have time to run down 128 family trees to find out the name of an ancestor 7 generations ago. The odds are that you would have to look at 64 of them before you made a hit. Now if they all were in a data base, it would be simple. I doubt that that will happen unless DNA tests become mandatory. There are all kinds of theories about how DNA data bases can be misused for various negative purposes and many people do not want that to happen.
Actually, I was not aware of the name change until about a year ago. The
one drawback we have living in the US is that we do not have access to the
wonderful records you have in Germany ... The same in England.
Unfortunately, it seems as people moved West in America, they seemed to
think far less of keeping records, course the lack of churches and
established towns were probably the main problem.
I know I would love to be able to read through all the records you have
available in Germany on my family -- HILLMER and HILMER. I am stuck in the
early 1700s in Lower Saxony (Niedersachsen). From one HILLMER family my
brother's DNA matched went back to Denmark, so I now wonder if we originally
came from Denmark down to Germany... Or that son that was not going to
inherit anything from the father may have just gone to Denmark and married.
(There are very few HILLMER / HILMER in Denmark so the latter is probably
true).
I have one male Hilmer (as it was spelled then) in a place called
Wichtenbeck (now in Niedersachsen) ... Part of Emike.. I found in a book on
Eimke that there were several farms in Wichtenbeck. One belonged to a
Hilmer family #5, another farm #9 was inherited by the wife (GRAUWELMAN)
(but he did not change his name). I found the christening records for the
son's children which mentioned the grandparents lived on farm #9 in
Wichtenbeck but did not give his given name(s). The marriage records for
the couple are not available (I am told by a local researcher), so I know
only the grandmother's maiden name was GRAUWELMAN (the spelling was
illegible so this spelling could be incorrect). The christening record
mentions the great-grandfather since the grandfather was deceased (died
young .. About age 35)and the grandmother had remarried to a man named
Michael JOHANNES. The grandmother died and was left to her 2nd husband even
though there were at least 3 sons by the HILMER marriage. Of course, when
Mr. JOHANNES died, the farm was inherited by the JOHANNES children.
Eventually, the farm was back in the hands of HILMER.
Unfortunately, I have been unable to find any record of who Catherine
GRAUWELMAN's parents were .. Only that she inherited the farm from her
father.
Yes, that is true ... Your ancestor probably was 'taken in' as a child and
raised as a DOERR. Hopefully, your DNA does give you another surname that
your DNA matches. Have you tried checking it against the Sorenson database? http://www.smgf.org ... You might come up with some clues. Of course, there
are other options: birth out of wedlock (took mother's surname), adoption,
foster children, orphan train children ... And of course, the 'milkman'.
It is a 'chink in the amour' but it is just another clue to a new adventure.
Of course, when the trail is clear, you don't need DNA. It is a very good
'brick wall' hammer .. It may not break it down but it does allow you to
concentrate on a few chunks rather than the entire wall.
My WELLS line is a perfect example. I only knew my eldest WELLS was James
WELLS b: 1792 (in NH or CT, depending on which record you were reading).
There are NUMEROUS WELLS in New England in the 1700-1800s .. I used the
techniques of following children's names ... No luck, locations (NH/CT, VT
in 1810 (married), children born between 1811-1830 in NY, VT and OH. I
found two James WELLS both born in NH, both born in 1792 and both died in OH
.. And one record of a soldier with the same facts ... Which was which??
After tracking down a 'living WELLS male' descended from James WELLS, I was
able to eliminate several WELLS lines that I had been researching as the DNA
from their descendants did not even come close to my cousins. HOWEVER, the
DNA DID match about 20 other participants that have proven some of their
lines back to England ... The 1500s. So, then I could concentrate on
looking at those lines. We all have been working together so we do not
duplicate research. Since we live all over the World we have access to
different records and we share the information. From what we can tell there
were at least 4 men who came from England that do not appear to have 'known'
each other but DO share a common ancestor ... Somewhere in time.
So, you see, there is a good reason to do the DNA ... So you don't spin your
wheels off researching some line that genetically can not be related ...
Even if they lived in the same area, state, county and even town.
I have some trouble understanding what the benefits of DNA
are in finding ancestors. Their DNA is not available.
...which is not necessary as "they left us their DNA within ours".
Except in the case of Christobal Colon (Christoph Kolumbus). [watch your newspaper !]
Within the next months it should become clear which background he came from. (like for Goethe, lots of people would like to claim him in their family trees...)
Yes of course DNA will help you to discover someone who
came from the same ancestors 5 or 6 generations (or more)
ago, but do they know who those ancestors were?
Maybe ... if they did research longer than you did ....
Are you going to search their family tree to see if you
can get back to find the common ancestor?
Why not. Aren't we doing this right now here in this list ? Trying to climb into the other ones trees ... ?
I think someone has already mentioned the exponential way
in which the number of ancestors go up each generation.
Have a look in GenWiki or Wikipedia under "Ahnenschwund" (there are some interesting concrete examples...) .
100 years ago the earth had only about 12 % of the population it has now.
So (mathematically) it is correct but more and more individuals (of the past) have more and more Kekul�-Numbers united on them (i.e. my GGGGGGGGGGGGGfather (13xG) on fathers side may also have been my GGGGGGGGGGG-father (11xG) on my mothers side and so on.
I do not
believe that I would have time to run down 128 family
trees to find out the name of an ancestor 7 generations
ago.
You do not ?
Now you do it in familysearch using a => Name-Database <=
In 10 - 15 years you will be doing it in a => DNA-Database <=
Same thing ! 'cept Language has (+/-) 24 letters
DNA only (+/-) 4 ...
There are all
kinds of theories about how DNA data bases can be misused
for various negative purposes and many people do not want
that to happen.
Those kind of data you find in the "Junk-DNA" (where no disease markers or the like are found).
[If someone wanted to "steal" your or your husbands DNA {no ... I am NOT talking about Boris Becker ...} he/she just needs a Tempo-handkerchief you threw away ... or the coffee cup you left behind at the last Autobahn-Rasthaus ...].
However, the people (scientists) who run these kind of databases HAVE TO do it seriously (otherwise these data may be taken away from them by law and they loose the basis of their research).
Abuse of things.
A telephone book (and everything else) can be abused too by
(a) doing Spam calls
(b) whacking it on a head of a person
(c) starting a fire with it to burn down a house.
Stay with the serious guys and do not enter your data into each and every web-portal that then promises you relationship with Einstein or DaVinci (did he have children ???! ... Probably not.)
What you say is not correct. A male passes his Y-DNA on
to his sons, they in turn to their sons. If matching, a male
would be getting the time frame of a direct ancestor. If you
did not have the information going back say 400 years, but
if you matched up with someone you share an ancestor
with, he could possibly have that information going back
that far. It could then be easier to make a connection when
you know where to look.
In any case with Y-DNA you would definitely not be looking
at any of your maternal lines, your father's mother's line, or
your grandfather's mother's line. There by eliminating at least
7/8 of your ancestors before you even start.