Large family structures, late 19th century, especially the placing of children

[guest259648]

Fascinating
Ive heard of a father refusing to acknowledge youngest child in one case he was away at war during time of conception
So that child was adopted

Can you give dna amounts of the matchex

Have i understood correctly that Jones child  Has matches to both maternal SMITH grandparents ie grandmothers maiden name too
But doesnt have matches to either JONES grandparents ?

Is there a cluster of matches to another surname ie TAYLOR that could explain an affair ( by the mother or grandmother)
If there was a double relationship it would explain higher levels of dna matches to SMITH but not necessarily incest. Could be a SMITH cousin or uncle involved.

brigidmac
Thanks for your fresh pair of eyes.
I'll supply some details. Please ask for whatever else you need.

Family set-up:
Mr JONES, from out of county, marries Miss SMITH, 1862.

(The couple then live next door to Mr SMITH + Mrs SMITH (nee BAKER), the bride's parents, who had a lot of SMITH children over many years. Miss SMITH is their eldest daughter.)

Children (JONES + SMITH) are recorded, see baptisms, censuses etc:
1863 (dau 1)
1865 (son 1)
1867 (son 2)
1869 (dau 2)
1870 (dau 3)
1875  (son 3)
1880  (son 4)

The DNA puzzle refers to Son 2 (born 1867).
The DNA should show for him JONES (plus JONES ancestors i.e. his father's line) + SMITH (his mother's line), but the results seem only to contain SMITH + BAKER. These are matches to his mother and maternal grandmother, yes, but that's all.

There are other matches in the 20,000+ batch, of course, which haven't yet been explored, but all the obvious things have been tried and they aren't leading to anywhere JONESY.

The JONES + SMITH Son 2 born 1867 called himself JONES and baptised his own children JONES. So the JONES name has gone on down.

A descendant of Dau 3 has been located and DNA results compared. They match the SMITH. So the SMITH mother is shared with Son 2.

The DNA results for this case are good and accurate, in that they show expected and required matches to all other branches of the family - except for this one son, who appears to lack his father's DNA... but there seems an excess of matches to SMITH.

What can I show you now, which could assist?

[brigidmac]

so does daughter 3 s descendents have matches to father jones + his mother surname X ?

probably better to post examles on a chart on dna forum

would need to know amount of dna cm shared between supposed 2nd and third cousin matches

personally i manage my mothers and cousins dna matches we are descended from real smith and jones remarriages so i understand amounts of half second cousins etc
also my mothers second cousin has authorised me to see her dna matches which helps for elimination

for example my mothers full first cousin is 1.137cm
half first cousin is 336cm
half first cousins once removed range from 220cm -260cm
but its a wide range
there is a dna painters chart to compare and if you have dna linked to your tree thru line possibilities will show up

[guest259648]

so does daughter 3 s descendents have matches to father jones + his mother surname X ?

probably better to post examles on a chart on dna forum

would need to know amount of dna cm shared between supposed 2nd and third cousin matches

personally i manage my mothers and cousins dna matches we are descended from real smith and jones remarriages so i understand amounts of half second cousins etc
also my mothers second cousin has authorised me to see her dna matches which helps for elimination

for example my mothers full first cousin is 1.137cm
half first cousin is 336cm
half first cousins once removed range from 220cm -260cm
but its a wide range
there is a dna painters chart to compare and if you have dna linked to your tree thru line possibilities will show up

brigidmac
Thank you so much.

The purpose of this post is to gather suggestions about what might have happened.
I am pretty confident that JONES is missing. But SMITH is in abundance.

I like to have a plan of action... beginning with the most likely option.

Regarding Son 2's father (who I now believe isn't JONES, because of the DNA results).
Do you feel I should be considering the involvement of:
a) Mrs Jones' own father (SMITH), as her Son 2's father; or
b) Mrs Jones' lover (TAYLOR), as Son 2's father; or
c) Could Son 2 be a child of Mrs Jones' unmarried younger sister (SMITH)? or
d) Could Son 2 be a very late child of Mr + Mrs Smith senior who live next door?

or....?

Where is it best to start looking, given the family practices of the time?

D

[brigidmac]

 i shouldnt really hazard a guess but i think solution c or d are more likely

out of interest were all the children baptised at same church
any clues in the first or middle names

this may have been a secret known only to miss smith /mrs jones so she wouldnt have wanted to leave any clues
if it was adopted child her husband would have known ... did he leave a will was this child treated equally .did they stay close to other family members ?

all sorts of things to investigate

the dna can help you eliminate some possibilities if you have testees from an older generation  otherwise there is plenty of room for error

[guest259648]

i shouldnt really hazard a guess but i think solution c or d are more likely

out of interest were all the children baptised at same church
any clues in the first or middle names

this may have neen a secret known only to miss smith /mrs jones so she wouldnt have wanted to leave any clues
if it was adopted child her husband would have known ... did he leave a will was this child treated equally .did they stay close to other family members ?

all sorts of things to investigate

the dna can help you eliminate some possibilities if you have testees from an older generation  otherwise there is plenty of room for error

brigidmac
Your ideas are very welcome :-)
Most of the time we have to get there by guessing, don't we!
I will collect the details you mention (which church? etc), so there is more to look at.
And I'll write back to you via the messaging system, bless you.
D

[brigidmac]

Thanks for pms Dulcie
Please share your discoveries on the post for others who are interested.

Personally its made me relook at my own matches .why i have lots of dna matches to descendants of great grandparents and none to others .

Luckily both my mother and paternal aunt tested when in their late 80s so sometimes the more distant matches show to them .

[brigidmac]

Heres a link that i found helpful
*
https://isogg.org/wiki/Cousin_statistics

Also you asked what kind of match you could expect .
A personal example ..my great grandfather had a half brother whose great grandson shares 35cm with me
We are same generation so half third cousins .
If you are lucky you may get a similar match

[guest259648]

Heres a link that i found helpful
*
https://isogg.org/wiki/Cousin_statistics

Also you asked what kind of match you could expect .
A personal example ..my great grandfather had a half brother whose great grandson shares 35cm with me
We are same generation so half third cousins .
If you are lucky you may get a similar match

brigidmac
That's a super link, very many thanks.
I will post up shortly some of the things I've discovered while you've been helping me.

Your support makes a real positive difference.
D

[guest259648]

I'm posting this now:
a) to thank RootsChat member brigidmac (all other contributors) from the bottom of my heart, and
b) to help anyone else who's on a similar search.

I took a DNA test this summer and it has blown apart my Family Tree, which I've spent 30 years creating. It's shown that what's in the records isn't necessarily the correct information. In my case, no matches at all came up for my surname i.e. my Dad's line, his father's side. Was it all a mistake? A rubbish test, a bad service? Or - was my name not really my name?

Well... the DNA test is accurate, and it's what's written down in the records which is not correct. You might find the very same thing, in your own family!

I am 'repairing' things (building the new, correct line for my late Dad) by carefully examining the DNA results back to 4th cousins, connecting with the people I find, and - especially - going back to the records for a new look, with different eyes.

brigidmac suggested I re-visit church records and looked for clues in among what the 19th century family was doing, when + when the baptisms were conducted, where the family was living etc. And the clues are there, I'd just never noticed them before. Also a fresh look at the censuses revealed tiny but hugely important things I'd never 'clocked', but which now make very good sense.

So my advice would be: trust the DNA... and if it shocks or surprises you, still trust it and go back to the paperwork with a very open heart and mind.  All may not be what it seems.

In my case, I was right to ask RootsChat about 'large family structures' because the responses showed me what to look for... and I've been finding what I need.

Please share your own stories here too, because stories I've read on this site have also guided me towards The Truth in my own case.