I was reading my friend’s, “The Legal Genealogist”, blog post: Big Sale and Big Y and thought I would take a moment to share my experience.
A couple of years ago, I did a Y-DNA test from Ancestry.com and got the results and details. Haplagroup J2A was the results and took “my line” back 10,000 years, or some out of this world number. All I want is back to about 1650. So that didn’t do anything for me.
I then found that my Surname has a DNA Project on Family Tree DNA, so at my expense, transferred my results over to FT-DNA. I even had to talk to the FT-DNA folks at a conference to make that all happen. Very nice folks there, very helpful. When the results finally were posted, I have 3 “new” cousins. Actually, I knew one of them, talked to him on the phone, and found that we descend from the same son of Capt. John Worthington. The other 2 people are cousins, one of which had 2 surnames as part of his name, so there was not doubt about the connection. BUT, there was NOT a “hit” across the pond. That is, no one from the UK matching the J2A. So, I let it sit for a couple of years. In fact, it hasn’t changed.
So, Ancestry.com came up with New and Improved DNA testing. I get “cousin” hits several times a week, for 5th to 8th cousin’s. Wow, gonna find something here, even had a couple of closer cousins in these results.
You are supposed to be able to compare your Ancestry Member Tree (AMT) to these “hits” / cousin hits, so I have been keeping my AMT up to date, so that I can compare.
Looking at these other AMTs has been very disappointing. Very, very few common surnames, and only location matches to a state, no closer.
Here is the view that I received:
50% Scandinavian ?????? That’s no where close to J2A.
27% Irish ??? A great-grandmother married an Irishman, in fact I carry his surname as the name most of you know me by. No blood link there.
But the kicker is 5% Great Britain. All of the published genealogies of the Worthington Surname gets back to the 1300′s in England. 5% ???
There is something that I must be totally missing here and am certainly NOT spending any more money on DNA testing. I am struggling to understand the two sets of test results from Ancestry.com. Now, I do accept “new technology”, but there should at least be some common ground for the two sets of tests.
I have blogged about this before: News at 11: Just found out that my “brick wall” may now be a ” black sheep”
So, Judy, of The Legal Genealogist, lets talk. I guess my real question here is, how close do “the numbers” have to be, in the y-DNA testing. to be considered “cousins”? Is it possible that the notion in that previous blog post might be worth looking into?