DNA match to an Northern Irish Kirk.

[up2you2]

The most closely related Kirk from my own 23&Me DNA test results, can trace his family tree back to Northern Ireland.
2nd cousin once removed, shared DNA 1.19% 89cM.
Here is what has been established, sourced and confirmed:

James Kirk abt 1720 -1775 born and died in Ballymoney, County Antrim, Northern Ireland. Married Mary Jean Agnes Edmiston (Edmundson) 1733-1772.
Matthew Kirk 1760-1839 married Grace Johnston 1769-1858
James Johnstone Kirk Sr. 1794-1857 married Jane Walker 1796-1835
Matthew Biggart Kirk 1824-1879 married D.R Hulda Jones 1833-1871
John James M Kirk 1853-1888 married Mahaly Louisa Mowdy 1855-1933
Jack Theodore Kirk 1888-1965 married Iona Fowler 1909-1977
John Oliver Lester Kirk 1931-2007

So far so good, but we have to go back further than James Kirk 1720-abt 1775, for a blood DNA connection.
His Father I believe came from Scotland, and to date I have no idea who he might be.
Matthew's eldest brother was called John, which maybe named after his grandfather John Kirk.

Now to to look at my line, and again I can only go back to the same period:
Also a James Kirk 1725- married to an Elizabeth Brown (Broun) 1730- from Durisdeer, Dumfriesshire, Scotland.
He also named his eldest son John 1760-.

Now as there are both named James Kirk, that in itself precludes that they came from the same Father, so I believe that then dictates we have have to go back at two further generations from here.
Sure this is a tall order, but at least we have proof genetically.

Sure this is a tall order to find Kirks in the 1600's in Scotland that might be related, but this is the first time I have had two arrows to my bow.
Maybe you're thinking even if I had a full quill of arrows it still might be very difficult, but here's hoping that somebody might get lucky please.

[Rosinish]

My concern is, you both have an exact year of birth for James Kirk - 1720 & 1725

Where do the specific dates come from as opposed to circa/abt dates?

One thing I never do is give specific years without actual proof.

Annie

[Ruskie]

This might be better on the Scotland board if the paper search is leading there.

What sort of cMs do you share with your Kirk match/s?

[Lisa in California]

…Now as there are both named James Kirk, that in itself precludes that they came from the same Father, so I believe that then dictates we have have to go back at two further generations from here.
Sure this is a tall order, but at least we have proof genetically…

While it is unlikely, there is a possibility that they could have had the same father.  I have run across trees where first names were handed down.  Most involved passing down a name again after the first child, or two, died but I’ve seen trees (one or two branches in my own tree) where there were two living children in the family with the same first name.  This happened more often in the Irish trees I’ve seen.

[Ruskie]

There are many articles online on the subject and the estimates vary slightly, but when you are looking for common ancestors with DNA matches the average seems to be about 8 generations - 23 and me specifically mentioned here:

https://www.crigenetics.com/blog/how-many-generations-can-a-dna-test-trace-my-ancestry

Another article:

https://www.genealogyexplained.com/how-many-generations-does-dna-go-back/

I’m sure it will vary, as DNA passes down randomly and the above are just a rough guide.

I don’t know how that fits in generation wise with the common ancestors you are looking for, but may be useful to keep in mind.

[up2you2]

Some additions and corrections on my original post:

2nd cousin once removed, shared DNA 1.19% 89cM.
James Kirk born about 1720.
His wife on Family Search Mary Jean Agnes Edmiston (Edmundson) 1733-1772.

So what we have got here are two lines of Kirks going back to Scotland in the 1600's.
The forenames that are croping up on both lines are:

James, John, Thomas and Margaret.
And
John James, Robert, Matthew, James George.

[Ruskie]

Am I right in thinking that you don’t know who the common ancestors are between you and this 89cM match?

They have the surname Kirk in common with you?

I would have thought that 89cM is a closer relationship than one back into the 16/1700s. Have 23andMe estimated yoir relationship as 2nd cousin once removed? It could be that you are related through more than one line though. You might need to look at the female lines as well as the surnames.

Forenames may not be relevant as all those you listed are quite common. 

Eg I have a 61cm fourth cousin match - our common ancestors- husband born 1798 & wife born 1801.

This might help a little:
https://dnapainter.com/tools/sharedcmv4

Your 89cM DNA match can trace their Kirks to Ireland. You can trace your Kirks to Scotland?

Yes, you have an 89cM DNA match so must have common ancestors. DNA Painter suggests “half” relationships such as half second cousins. Have you looked for second marriages?

There are a couple of other possibilities - one or both of you have gone wrong somewhere in your paper trail, or there could be an NPE somewhere.

[up2you2]

Hi Ruskie and thank you for this.

Correct, we do not know who are our common ancestors prior to these dates of 1720 and 1725.
After that we do.

Is there no way of establishing, if our match is through our male line surname or not?

Correct 89cM DNA match can trace their Kirks to Ireland. I can trace my Kirks to Scotland.

Second marriages, all I know is what I have established for 89cM. It would be great for someone to confirm it independently please.
As far as my own line is concerned, it has been thoroughly documented, with all entries sourced and confirmed.

[Ruskie]

Others might have some better ideas, but all I can think to suggest is that both of you need to build your trees sideways, as the match may not be in your direct line.

I would think that your common ancestor/s might be more recent than 1720/1725. There was a lot of travel between Scotland and Ireland.

Once again, someone else may have a different take on it, and other suggestions.