Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gazania

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 86
1
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: X chromosome - confusion? False negative?
« on: Sunday 04 February 18 11:50 GMT (UK)  »
Hi Xin,

I am with you, Xin.  At least I have found a couple of new relatives which my paper trail confirms and we communicate the old fashioned way.  But I have a lot of "matches" which fall into the false negative realm, ie false hope and there is nothing in the paper trail.

The above case is the exception.  The match well and truly fits into our paper trail but the DNA (X chromosome in this case) does not and the measurement is too low anyway.  But I am so pleased that I made contact with the match.  Clear as Mud?  Best wishes, Gazania

2
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: X chromosome - confusion? False negative?
« on: Sunday 04 February 18 11:06 GMT (UK)  »
Ruskie, thanks for the information.  I shall be wary now about interpreting X matches.  Gazania

3
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: X chromosome - confusion? False negative?
« on: Sunday 04 February 18 06:36 GMT (UK)  »
Thanks, Richard, for your prompt reply.  My thoughts too.  DNA and random selection were never meant to be easy. Gazania

4
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / X chromosome - confusion? False negative?
« on: Sunday 04 February 18 06:14 GMT (UK)  »
I have tested autosomal with FTDNA.  I have recently been contacted by a match, I shall call her MA.  Our extremely well documented paper research confirms our links.  We have a common male ancestor, with a very rare surname, I shall call GC.  Our paper trail confirms she is a third cousin, once removed from GC.  We share 47 centimorgans and long block 16.  So far so good.

MA is descended directly along the female line, from the youngest daughter and only surviving child of GC,  from his first marriage.  I ( a female) am descended from the son of GC 's second marriage.  In other words MA is descended from my ggrandfather's half sister.

MA and her family still live within the vicinity of the small town in Yorkshire.

The problem I have:

MA and I share the X chromosome at 5.51cms.  (So does her daughter but at a smaller level)

According to my charting of relationships and the Xchromosome, MA could get the X from our common ancestor GC through his daughter.  But not me as I am descended from his son, albeit from a second marriage.

My confusion arises from how can this be? or is the 5.51cms too small to worry about? or is there something else going on? or I have misunderstood the whole concept?

I do hope this makes sense to read.  Thank you, Gazania

5
The Common Room / Re: Old will - 1729 - Easy to decipher?
« on: Sunday 31 December 17 05:30 GMT (UK)  »
Thank you very much for your most comprehensive reply.  In particular, the notion of asking questions of the RO.  I had not thought of that.

I am now more confidant about ordering the will, with some expectation of what it may or may not contain. Or that I had might miss something in my ignorance.  Or in the worse case scenario, the will is no more than some tangible proof of a possible ancestor.

Thank you again for your thoughts and the the time taken.  Happy 2018!  Gazania

6
The Common Room / Old will - 1729 - Easy to decipher?
« on: Sunday 31 December 17 00:12 GMT (UK)  »
I have identified on a will index, a will for a possible ancestor.  The will is dated 1729 and the person is described as a yeoman.   How easy will it be to decipher a will of this date?  (I have poor eyesight)  And will a will of this date have much information?  I have to purchase the will through an Archives office.  Thanks Gazania

7
The Common Room / Re: GRO Indexes - which to believe?
« on: Thursday 30 November 17 23:55 GMT (UK)  »
Thank you for all your replies.  I agree with all opinions expressed.  Take nothing for granted in this game and be curious about the differences.  Gazania

8
The Common Room / GRO Indexes - which to believe?
« on: Thursday 30 November 17 05:25 GMT (UK)  »
At the risk of sounding pedantic:

A christian name  is spelt: "Cattell" on the "old" GRO birth index.

On the digitised "new" index it is spelt "Cattill".
(Reference:  Sep qtr 1875  for Thomas Catte(i)ll Bromwich CLAYTON)

This difference is no big deal in the scheme of things,but may have implications for the research of surnames. I am not likely to buy the certificate which may show the recorded spelling.  How accurate are both indexes anyway?  Gazania



9
Technical Help / Re: Display size increased.
« on: Friday 24 November 17 04:56 GMT (UK)  »
I had the same problem, yesterday. No 1 son was visiting so we tried changing the Display with some success with reducing the large size.  But did no more about the elongation until No 2, the IT son, comes.  Regards, Gazania

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 86