The ALLEN DNA Patrilineage 2 Project

The ALLEN DNA Patrilineage 2 Project

This ALLEN patrilineage project is dedicated to furthering the genealogical research of the members, each of whom has sponsored a Family Tree ySTR DNA test of 37 markers (or better) that matches to the haplotype pattern for this ALLEN patrilineage. Our goal is to promote both individual and collaborative genealogical research aimed at reconstructing the overall tree of descent from the patriarch common to all of the members, using their ySTR DNA test results to guide us in our research, and our conclusions.

-

The Likely Origins of this Patrilineage in Somersetshire, England

The most fertile of the immigrant American patriarchs of this patrilineage, George1 ALLEN of Sandwich, Plymouth, emigrated in 1635 to the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Although a few possibly matching records have been found for antecedent George ALLENs back in England, this is hardly surprising given the commonness of the surname, but where the wider context of these particular records has been explored, the circumstantial evidence does not support the identification. See MacDONALD, p.2, for more on some of these English ALLEN red herrings.

What we do know about George is that he and part of his family sailed for New England from Weymouth, Dorset, in March, 1635, on the ship Marygould bearing a company of followers of the Rev. Joseph Hull of Broadway, Somersetshire, who according to colonial governor Gov. John Winthrop brought 21 families with him. Annotations on the ship’s passenger list and other evidence places several of these families in Broadway, and others in Batcombe, Somerset. As can be seen by this map, Broadway is about 7 miles SE of Taunton, near Ilminster, while Batcombe is about 25 miles to the NE. One of the other known Broadway passengers, Thomas Holbrooke, is also known to have married and had his first two children in Glastonbury, Somerset, about 9 miles due west of Batcombe, while Joseph Hull is known to have been born in Crewkerne about 7 miles SE of Broadway.

This whole area had been a hotbed of radical Protestantism and consequent emigration for many years, starting in early 1630 with the passengers on the first ship of settlement to the Bay Colony, the Mary & John, who were largely followers of the Rev. John Warham who had preached in Crewkerne and other parishes of this area, and who led the Mary & John company to the New World. This first expedition, and many others that followed were also sponsored by the important minister, the Rev. John White, of the large town of Dorchester, Dorset, which can be seen near the bottom right of the map. The port of Weymouth is off map to the south of Dorchester in the same direction.

It is thus probable that George and the other patriarchs of ALLEN Patrilineage 2 came from this area of central Somerset, though no one so far one has found the smoking gun evidence. Unfortunately, for the obvious first place to look, Broadway, the extant parish begin only in 1678. Some further details on these likely English origins will be found on page 15 of my report “Two New England Patriarchs”.

Three American ALLEN Patriarchs

Newly brought forward genealogical information, and a reconsideration of the DNA evidence, make it clear now that there have been at least three American patriarchs of ALLEN Patrilineage 2, representing three immigrant lines—not just the one—George1 Allen of Sandwich, Plymouth Colony (say 1585 - 1648).

The second ALLEN Patrilineage 2 patriarch is George’s close relative, the immigrant Samuel1 Allen of Braintree, Massachusetts Bay Colony (say 1604 - 1669), and you will find much more on him below, and in the newly researched papers I’ve published: “Two New England Patriarchs...”, and the accompanying evidential timeline. I am indebted to genealogist Susie Hartman for supplying the key genealogical evidence that shows that Patrilineage 2 patriarch Samuel2 ALLEN of Bridgewater, Plymouth, was in fact the son of Samuel1 of Braintree, not of George1 of Sandwich, as other circumstantial evidence strongly suggested.

The third ALLEN Patrilineage 2 patriarch is Joseph1 Allen of Charles County, MD (say 1718 -), whose patrilineal descendants I’ve named “the Maryland cluster”. We now have four descendant haplotypes of this branch of the family, project member Kathy Phipps, and new members Marilyn Krell and Steve Jacobs, who is managing two different haplotypes of this line.

Although I’ve suffixed all three of these patriarchs with a “1” (the generational designation usually reserved for the first generation to immigrate), the origins of Joseph of CharlesCoMD remain obscure, and I suspect that he was not himself the first generation immigrant of his line, as there were several antecedent ALLENs in sparsely settled CharlesCo dating back to the late 1600s. More research needs to be done in this area.

The posted pedigrees for each member have been organized on the Descendancies page under these heads:

The GEORGE1 ALLEN of Sandwich, Massachusetts, Descendancy

The SAMUEL1 ALLEN of Braintree, Massachusetts, Descendancy

The Maryland ALLEN Descendancy

Unconnected NORTHERN ALLEN Pedigrees

Unconnected SOUTHERN ALLEN Pedigrees

George ALLEN of Sandwich, Massachusetts (say 1585—1648)

Two of the ySTR DNA tested members of this project can trace their lines all the way back to the immigrant, George1 Allen of Sandwich, Plymouth Colony, in Massachusetts. These are 02-John-02, who descends through George’s son Ralph2, and Bill-L-10, who descends from George2 (George2). Although the evidence supporting some links of the ancestral chains of these two is not as strong as it might be, and although a chain is only as strong as it’s weakest link, the fact that these lines follow a very different geographical course, and have been researched both ably and independently (and confirmed by DNA testing), gives us a very high confidence level that they are correct. This is particularly so in the case of 02-John’s ancestry back through Ralph2; there is a bit more chance that the line that runs back to George2, whose descendants remained for some time in New England amidst so many other ALLEN cousins, may have taken a slightly different path back to George1 than appears. In fact, now that we know that the haplotypes inherited by George1 and Samuel1 were identical, we cannot rule out the possibility that Bill-L’s line runs back to Samuel1, and not to George1—except, of course, on genealogical grounds, which are always problematic.

Still, on the genealogical side, we are fortunate that exhaustive research has been done on George himself, and on his conjugal family. The definitive reconstruction of George’s family is found in ANDERSON-GeorgeALLEN-Sketch, below, although a careful reading of the “George Allen” sketch in that book should make it clear that the considered judgement of the authors, the very best of New England genealogists, working with an exhaustive compilation of facts from the primary records, is still not necessarily the last word on this family. The authors themselves note that “At one time or another just about every young Allen male in southeastern New England has been placed as a son of George Allen.”

The best published treatment of the descendancy of George1 is a paper by Jack MacDonald. This paper, though sparsely sourced, is particularly strong in its tracing of the Quaker line of Ralph2. MacDonald has also paid some attention to the English origins, and has usefully undermined a few of the half-baked ideas advanced by others.

The most comprehensive and best evidenced treatment that I know of for the generation of George1 and Samuel1 are the two papers that I’ve just published (Apr2014): “Two NewEngland Patriarchs, Not One: Samuel Allen of Braintree ”, and the corresponding “Evidential Timeline for Patriarchs George1 & Samuel1 ALLEN”. These papers do not cover all the details of these men’s careers, but they do focus analytically on all the salient genealogical and contextual historical evidence concerning these men and their relationship, and they show, I believe, conclusively, the George and Samuel must have been the closest of relatives short of being father and son.

Samuel1 ALLEN of Braintree, Massachusetts (say 1604—1669)

This Samuel is not really a new discovery. In fact, most of the published secondary sources, including James Savage in his Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England... have made this Samuel the father of Samuel2 of Bridgewater, Plymouth Colony, to whom several of our Patrilineage 2 project members, trace their ancestries. But none of the sources I have seen provide any evidence for this attribution, and all the circumstantial evidence has seemed to favor George of Sandwich as the father of Samuel2 of Bridgewater.

In 1656 (within months of the founding of Bridgewater), Samuel2 of Boston, the son of George1 of Sandwich, joined with brother Henry in selling land in Sandwich that they had inherited from their father—and that is the last we hear of Samuel2 (George1). What could be more natural than that George’s son should have taken the proceeds of his inheritance and become a proprietor of the newly forming town of Bridgewater, in Plymouth Colony? Then, there is the claim, often advanced (but also unevidenced as far as I have seen) that Samuel of Bridgewater was aged 71 in 1703, thus born about 1632. This matches almost perfectly to the estimated birth date of George's son, say 1633, in ANDERSON-GeorgeALLEN-Sketch.

However, another descendant of Samuel of Bridgewater who has researched him extensively in the primary records, has provided me with evidence that seems incontrovertible that Samuel of Bridgewater was the son of Samuel1 of Braintree. The latter made a will in Braintree 2Aug1669 (proved 16Sep1669) leaving 20 to his son Samuel to be paid within four years of his death, and making wife Margaret and son Joseph executors. Then, on 16Sep1672 a deed to 12a of Braintree land was acknowledged by the grantors “Margaret ALLEN, the late wife of Sammuell ALLEN now deceased, and Joseph ALLEN my son, both of the town of Brantry of the government of Massachusets, in consideration of 20 given and appointed to be paid by the abovesaid Sammuell ALLEN, deceased, to his son, Sammuell ALLEN of Bridgewater in the government of New Plimouth”.

What was Samuel1 ALLEN of Braintree to George1 of Sandwich?

Samuel1 of Braintree can be ruled out as the son of George1 because the circumstantial context doesn’t fit. For one thing, George’s son Samuel is grouped with his brother Henry, and the other George’s “five least children” in the latter’s will. For another, unlike George’s older sons by his first wife (John, Ralph, and George) Samuel is not found in possession of any of this father’s lands in Weymouth, or is any way associated with Weymouth in the records, even though the circumstantial evidence for Samuel of Braintree shows that he was married say 1631, so would probably have been George’s oldest son.

On the other hand, given that the DNA of at least one descendant of Samuel and at least one descendant of George matches perfectly on the 67 marker Family Tree DNA test, the two must have been very closely related indeed. My guess is that Samuel was George’s nephew, but they may have been first, or possibly second, cousins. Until and unless their English origins can be found, it is doubtful that anything more can be said about their relationship.

Joseph ALLEN of Charles County, Maryland (say 1718 -)

I haven’t yet finalized or posted the descendancies/pedigrees for this branch of the ALLEN Patrilineage 2 family, but the research on these Maryland lines looks pretty solid, and I’ve added a bit to it myself, extending it at least a generation farther back. I expect to be able to post a single consolidated pedigree for the Maryland Cluster in the coming months.

In the meantime, however, I have posted their DNA (at least to the project haplotype chart—they’re grouped at the bottom) so that everyone can see how different and distinctive it is compared to that of the descendants of the two New England patriarchs. Since in addition, there are indications that this line runs back into at least the late 1600s in Maryland, it is almost certain that it stems from a third immigrant ancestor, not a descendant of either of the New England patriarchs, who came over to Maryland on his own hook and in his own time, and though he probably came from the same area as the New Englanders, he may have been only their distant cousin. If it seems anomalous that he would have migrated to Maryland rather than New England, I note that as David Hackett Fischer has pointed out in his classic, Albion’s Seed, the fountainhead for emigrants to the Chesapeake tidewater area (besides the port city of London) was the southwest of England.

Descendants of George1: Quaker ALLENs and the Southern Branch of the Family

One of the most interesting features of the descendancy of George ALLEN of Sandwich is the fact that he projected offshoots into the American South. In fact seven of the twenty-one project members claim such southern roots, presumably through the line of George1’s son Ralph2, though only one of these, 02-John-02, can at present trace his lineage back to George.

It would be an understatement to say that this New England—Southern connection was unusual. To find great-grandchildren of New England Puritans in the Anglican plantation society of Virginia would be distinctly anomalous. The anomaly is accounted for, though, when we learn that many of George’s children were caught up in the first wave of New England Quakerism, for the Quakers were persecuted and hounded in the Puritan settlements, and encouraged to flock to the frontier in search of peace. And the areas of Virginia, and also North Carolina, where these Quakers settled were indeed America’s western frontiers, where they joined such other unwanted peoples as the feisty Scotch-Irish, and the pietistic, hard-working Germans.

Certain Quaker enclaves did emerge in southeastern Massachusetts, and of course in Rhode Island, the first polity in the world in which religious toleration was written into the constitution, and it is in these New England enclaves that George's Quaker progeny first took refuge. The largest number settled in DartmouthMA on the southern coast next to Rhode Island, and their descendants continued to constitute one of the largest families in the town on into the 1800s. Others trickled into Rhode Island, and as orthodox Puritanism began to lose its grip, on to Connecticut, Vermont, and New York.

But meanwhile several families of George ALLEN descendants made the big leap to Monmouth County, New Jersey where a small Quaker settlement and monthly meeting sprang up in the township of Shrewsbury. From there, it was only natural that subsequent generations should continue the migration south toward the newly opening western frontier of Virginia, west of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Towards the end of the 18th century, the north central counties of North Carolina (Orange, Rowan, and the counties they gave birth to, Guilford and Rockingham) became a Quaker stronghold in their turn, but a generation before that, beginning in the 1730s, George ALLEN descendants were participating in the first settlements of the Valley of Virginia, in Augusta and Frederick Counties. The story of these first Quaker settlements beyond the Blue Ridge is told in WORRALL.

Of the four project members who can trace their lines back to George, two are descended from sons of George who went Quaker. Member Bill-L-10 descends from George’s Quaker son George, through progeny who settled first in Dartmouth, then migrated later to Rhode Island and New York. The line of the fourth member, 02-John-02 (representing testee David Allen) descends from George’s Quaker son Ralph, through his son Joseph, who ended up in MonmouthCoNJ. Two of Joseph’s sons, Benjamin and Reuben, migrated in turn first to CecilCoMD, and from there to AugustaCo in the upper Valley of Virginia, appearing there first in 1739. 02-John’s line runs through Reuben.

-

Further Research Possibilities for the Southern Branch

One of the more salient problem regarding the patrilineage right now is how to connect the unconnected southerners to their DNA-indicated line of descent from George1 of Sandwich through the mostly Quaker lines of his son, Ralph2. The descendancy of project member 02-John-02 gets this line into the Valley of Virginia. What is left is to figure out how to bridge the one- to two-generation gap from the time the earliest known ancestors of project members begin to be identifiable as such in the records of FranklinCoVA and nearby areas in the late 1700s, back to the early-to-mid 1700s when Quakers first began to filter down deep into VA and NC.

The starting point would be to follow up on the brothers Benjamin and Reuben in Augusta, Frederick, and other related Valley of Virginia counties, and to look for the appearance of other ALLENs in that area who might be descendants of George of Sandwich’s Quaker sons. Targeted DNA testing might be in order to address this problem.

The descendancy of Reuben has been fairly thoroughly researched and accounted for, though some of his grandchildren may have migrated farther south. MacDONALD seems to have foreclosed on the possibility that Reuben’s brother, Benjamin, had children, but I am not so sure about that. He does note that further research needs to be done on the ALLENs of this area, but I imagine that the reason he himself didn’t pursue things further, is that there simply aren’t likely to be any, or many, records for this area which do not already appear in CHALKLEY—and I have made my own abstracts of all that do. There are also a few ALLEN records in the order book index for OrangeCo, Augusta’s parent, and there may well be deeds records there too.

Both Benjamin and Reuben took out early patents in the Valley, evidently intending to settle (MacDONALD notes these too, albeit with a couple of minor errors), but there may be others in SW Virginia by other related ALLENs. Wonderfully, the VA Patents have all been abstracted, indexed, and put online by the Library of Virginia, the search link for which is to be found here. By entering Reuben Allen and following the links you can access and download Reuben Allen’s patent.

There is a tantalizing reference in MacDONALD to an Augusta order book record dated 18Mar1746/7 which associates a Daniel Allen with the probate of Benjamin, and he notes at the same time that additional research is required on this Daniel, whom he thinks was probably married in CecilCoMD, as was (brother) Reuben. As usual, MacDONALD provides no citation for this record, but since the order books are chronological, I’ve scanned all the Chalkley abstracts for that court date (Chalkley 1:26) and there is no such record to be found—nor are there any corresponding Daniel Allen references in the indexes to any of the three Chalkley volumes. Is this one of the items which Chalkley missed, and did MacDONALD himself plow through every page of the early order books trolling for ALLENs, or perhaps it was the probate records which were meant, or maybe the date was wrong. Only the original books themselves are likely to yield up that secret, and for such a potentially important record, only the original document will do.

If Benjamin and Reuben’s brother, Daniel, did come out to the Valley, and especially if he was a Quaker, he may well have continued south in his search for vacant land in a less violent area than Augusta, which was populated largely by pugnacious Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, and occasionally raided by Indians (one of my own Quaker ancestors did just that, leaving my Scotch-Irish ancestors to wrestle with the raw frontier). Daniel would only have had to journey another 80 miles due south down the Valley, crossing back over the Blue Ridge mountains to reach FranklinCoVA (perhaps passing over the old wagon road which passes within 100 yards yards of where I live), and it would have been only another 50 miles due south from there to present day RockinghamCoNC, where Bill-B’s Allen ancestors may have come from. Moreover, I have noted the presence of at least one Daniel Allen in RockinghamCoNC, though much later in the 18th century.

The goal here would be to try to match up the early Allen settlers of Augusta and Frederick Counties in the Valley, with the Allens who turn up early in FranklinCo (and its predecessors, Bedford and Lunenburg) just to the south, over the mountains—meanwhile taking care not to conflate the Allens of this patrilineage with the many unrelated Allens of Patrilineage (I) who were also pioneers in these Southside VA counties.

I would recommend, therefore, to any of this southern crew who are determined to try to solve these knotty genealogical problems, to begin to dig into the primary records of all these counties (Franklin, Bedford, Lunenburg) and compile everything found there on Allens. At the same, the data at the other end of the missing link (Augusta, Frederick, and Shenandoah Cos) needs to be systematically compiled to identify possible descendants of Benjamin, Reuben, and perhaps Daniel or others who went south instead of north as most of the Quaker Allens did.

Because the records are so scant in colonial Virginia (and North Carolina), and vital records are almost entirely lacking, there is a need to thoroughly mine all such records as exist for whatever they may yield, and to try to reconstruct, not just the focal Allen ancestral family, but all of the Allen families, in order to be able to assign all the little shards found in the record books (here a signature on a deed, there a record of jury service, or as a party to a lawsuit) to the proper identities. It is possible, by diligently pursuing this comprehensive method, to build a strong circumstantial case even where direct evidence is lacking.

-

Deepening and Extending Your Genealogical Research

On the genealogical side, the descendancy of George of Sandwich and the other patriarchs of Patrilineage 2 is so extensive, particularly in New England, that we may hope to attract many other testees in time, and any one of these may match mutations with existing members, and/or be able to contribute some missing piece of the genealogical puzzle. Thus, even though some project member’s lines appear to be “brick-walled” at present, there is always hope. And having examined to some degree the evidence that the existing members have predicated their genealogies on, it seems to me that there is still plenty of room in most cases to dig deeper into the primary records of the places indicated by the work that has been done.

It’s all too easy with these New England and Quaker lines and their plenteous vital records to assume that since the published data that comes easily to hand appears to have been plausibly shuffled into coherent families, that all the necessary research has been done. However, I have found that by digging into the primary probate, land, tax, and miscellaneous court records of a place, one almost always finds additional bits of circumstantial evidence, and quite often something of genealogical significance will turn up. One is also likely to encounter anomalies—new potential pieces of the puzzle which cannot be accounted for by the prima facie theories with which most people are too easily satisfied, and while these complications and apparent contradictions may be initially frustrating, some of these anomalies may turn out to be leads opening up new avenues of research for apparently blocked lines.

It should be within the compass of any of you to access the original records without an undue amount of travel or expense. Pretty much all of the county courthouse records in the US have been filmed by the LDS (the Mormons), who are deep into digitizing these records and putting them online at FamilySearch (Browse) for free. And in the worst case, just about everyone can find one of the LDS Family History Centers within an hour’s driving distance (usually much closer), and can borrow therefrom the relevant films from the LDS archives in Salt Lake City for a small fee. Either way, the online FHL Catalog is the best guide to the extant records of most American jurisdictions, and it is the first place I turn to when I am familiarizing myself with the research possibilities of a new area. If a particular set of films has been digitized, there will be a notice to that effect in red on the same catalog page as the film numbers, and if not, one can set up an account and place an order for films to be sent to your local LDS branch through this portal.

It’s true that primary records research in the colonial and early American records can be quite challenging. These old manuscript records are typically hard to read, and their correct interpretation requires familiarity with the law and customs of the time. But as long as such records exist unexamined, no one can reasonably claim to be brick-walled. And even though no genealogical nuggets are lurking in these primary records, one nearly always acquires through their patient examination, a few clues to who these people were and what their lives were like. Family history leads on to local history, which in turn plugs into the broader historical contexts with which we may be more familiar, but which without the personal dimension that family history brings, lack a certain reality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PUBLISHED SOURCES for ALLEN Patrilineage 2

-

ANDERSON-GeorgeALLEN-Sketch
pp. 27-35 in
Robert Charles Anderson, George F. Sanborn Jr., Melinda Lutz Sanborn
The Great Migration: Immigrants to New England: Immigrants to New England, 1634-1635, Volume I, A-B, (Boston: NEHGS, 1999)

This crucially important sketch can be accessed by subscription at NEHGS (American Ancestors) page, or at Ancestry.com.

Although the Sanborns were important collaborators for this volume, I’ve elected to style this source just ANDERSON-GeorgeALLEN-Sketch. Given the problematic nature of the reconstruction of the conjugal family of the immigrant, George of Sandwich, it’s likely that all three authorial heads were brought to bear.

The authors first note {p30} that “At one time or another just about every young Allen male in southeastern New England has been placed as a son of George Allen.” They then proceed to consider the strongest claimants, and end up with a list which is considerably different from that found in GARDNER, though with respect to inclusiveness it matches MacDONALD except for the latter’s inclusion of son Francis. However, because MacDONALD evidently failed to take into account the many pieces of circumstantial evidence available to the authors at the NEHGS library in Boston, his estimates of the birth dates of George’s children are significantly different from those in this sketch, leading to a considerably shuffled birth order.

At the end of the sketch, two secondary sources on this family are recommended. These are GARDNER and J.K.ALLEN, below. Evidence and argument supplemental to and corrective of this sketch on certain minor points is also cited by Anderson at GMN 10(Jul-Sep2001):23.

This Great Migration George Allen sketch must be considered the definitive source. Like all the other sketches in the GM series, it is not only based on every shred of primary records evidence which has come to light in 150 years of research on these early New Englanders, it also takes into account the best secondary sources. Furthermore, all three authors are F.A.S.G.s—members of the most elite society of American genealogists. limited to no more than 50 living members, all elected by their peers. Robert Charles Anderson himself is undoubtedly the greatest New England genealogist of our day, or probably of any day.

However, precisely because the authors of this work are so well regarded, I am quite sure that they would be the last to claim that what they have published is anything but the best current take on the accumulated evidence to date regarding this extensive and genealogically important family. Nothing is every proved in history, and all historical propositions remain open and subject to revision in the light of new evidence, or new ways of looking at the existing evidence.

Both BOWEN and ROBB-2Patriarchs have adduced new evidence and/or argument, and the latter also examplifies looking at old evidence in new ways, in this case through the lens of ySTR DNA testing.

-

BANKS
Charles Edward Banksr
History of Martha’s Vineyard, 3 vols, 155(Apr2001):212-214

The first volume is a general history of Martha’s Vineyard that mentions James and later other prominent ALLENs at several points; Volume 2 covers the records of the town, wherein I find the claim that “James Allen [of Sandwich, and also later of Martha’s Vineyard] was the son of Samuel Allen of Braintree”, but no citable evidence or extended analysis to support this claim; Volume 3 (which I’m unable to access online), purports (according to a footnote to BOWEN) to include a genealogy of the family of James, at 3:3-7.

-

BOWEN
Richard LeBaron Bowen Jr
“Notes on George Allen of Weymouth and Sandwich”, in NEHGR, 155(Apr2001):212-214

Bowen’s article, cited in Anderson’s GMN 10(Jul-Sep2001):23, supplements Anderson’s Great Migration:1634-1635 “George Allen” sketch with additional evidence and argument, and corrects certain details, with special focus on the two Ralph Allens of Sandwich. Bowen also points out that “the most recent serious treatment of George Allen and the two Ralph Allens” is to be found in Bertha Clark, “A Sandwich-Dartmouth-NorthKingston Allen Line”, a typescript at NEHGS (a source I haven’t examined). As Bowen also notes, Charles Edward Banks, History of Martha’s Vineyard, 3 vols (1925), 3:3-7, and 2:25-28, makes a strong case that James Allen of Sandwich who ended up on Martha’s Vineyard, was the son of Samuel1 of Braintree.

-

GARDNER
Charles Carroll Gardner
“George Allen of Sandwich”, in A Genealogical Dictionary of New Jersey, 16:1-4, 49-52
(reprinted in Genealogies of New Jersey Families (Baltimore: Clearfield, 2005), 2:150-169)

Robert Charles Anderson calls this the best (previous) treatment in print. Although GARDNER cites some evidence not explicitly referenced in the Great Migration sketch regarding the immigrant George and his family, his reconstruction of George’s conjugal family must give way to the more comprehensive and astute analysis in the definitive ANDERSON-GeorgeALLEN-Sketch. What makes GARDNER indispensible nonetheless, is the work he has done on many of George’s descendants, all of which is backed by copious evidential extracts and full source citations.

-

J.K.ALLEN
John Kermott Allen,
       “George Allen of Weymouth, Massachusetts...
  &  “Ralph Allen of Sandwich, Massachusetts

According to ANDERSON, These two typescript papers were published informally in 1924 by the author, and distributed to “major genealogical libraries”, including, no doubt, the NEHGS library in Boston. I have not been able to obtain copies of these papers myself.

-

MacDONALD
Jack MacDonald,
“The Allen Family: Descendants of George Allen of England, and Sandwich, Massachusetts, 2019”

MacDonald is a professional genealogist who has researched the descendancy of his ancestor, the immigrant George1 Allen of SandwichMA for many years, working with some primary sources as well as high quality published secondary sources. The link is to his latest published version of this report, which aims, essentially, to do for the George1, immigrant to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1635, what the Mayflower Society “silver series” of books do for certain of the 1620 passengers on the Mayflower: provide a comprehensive catalog, in loose Register generational format, of all the descendants of George for the first five generations. This is supplemented with a continuation of the author’s own line down to the present.

MacDonald provides prefatory material defining his abstracting conventions, and numbered superscripted citations throughout the body of his work to 944 endnote references in the third of the three PDFs that comprise this publication; however, many of these references are generic, and don’t cite to specific page#s, persons, or other identifiers essential for finding the particular record, and only a few of these references include hyperlinks. There is also, either in the body or the endnotes, precious little in the way of analysis or argument. Like the “Silver Books” (which MacDonald cites as such at one point), this is merely a presumably well-researched catalog of descendant family groups, linked by Register style numbering; it does, however, have an invaluable every name index at the end of the third PDF.

Although the author cites to a few Register articles, and a few surname genealogies, he unaccountably misses the most comprehensive, well reasoned,, and indeed definitive, account of the immigrant George1 ALLEN and his highly problematic conjugal family at The Great Migration: Immigrants to New England, 1634-1635, 27-35, not to mention Robert Charles Anderson’s Focus on Weymouth {GMN 5(Oct-Dec1994)}— four concentrated pages of evidence-based analysis of the history and records of the first Massachusetts town where George and certain of his grown sons settled, along with most of the other passengers on the unnamed ship from Weymouth, Dorsetshire that brought George and family to the New World in May of 1635.

Despite his not citing either of these definitive secondary sources, Mr. MacDonald deserves credit, first, for coming up with a version of George1’s conjugal family that closely matches ANDERSON’s, and second, for considering, but like Anderson, dismissing, several of the most popular theories regarding George’s English origins—in fact, this latter discussion is a useful supplement to Anderson’s sketch.

In my opinion, the greatest deficiency of MacDonald’s work, besides it’s being largely devoid of analysis and argument, is his failure to adopt the modern style of family reconstruction advocated by Anderson in the prefatory material of every one of his Great Migration volumes, starting with the first, published 1995: to reconstruct conjugal families as fully and accurately as possible, in birth order, and with guessimated “say” dates for the birth of each child, and for the date of the parents’ marriage—even where specific evidence is lacking. The rationale for doing this is the same that requires scientists to construct specific hypotheses, which are then subject to tests that attempt to falsify them. The construction of hypotheses, the bolder the better, forces the scientist, or the researcher, to account for and try to integrate all the little shards of evidence in a way that avoid contradiction, and the very act of attempting this inevitably yields inferences and insights that would otherwise be left fallow.

-

ROBB-2Patriarchs-2Patriarchs
John Barrett Robb
Two New England Patriarchs of ALLEN Patrilineage 2:Samuel1 of Braintree, and George1 of Sandwich

The goals of this paper are

(1) to validate the descent of ALLEN Patrilineage 2 project members Melava-07, Nancy+B-13, Marlon-22, et al. from the immigrant patriarch Samuel1 ALLEN of BraintreeMA, by marshalling and summarizing the relevant genealogical evidence;

(2) to thereby show that, since
    (a) certain other project members, such as 02-John-02 and Bill-L-10, have equally solid descents from the immigrant patriarch George1 ALLEN of Sandwich,

  & (b) that given the near identity of the 111-marker ySTR haplotypes of certain descendants of both Samuel1 and George1,

the two patriarchs must have been closely related genealogically;

and

(3) to present genealogical evidence of association between these two patriarchs.

Although the evidence offered for (3) is in itself capable of other interpretations, the case made for (1) and (2) on the one hand, and for (3) on the other, are mutually reinforcing and taken all together essentially conclusive on all points.

Abstracts of the evidence and detailed citations for this paper have been offloaded into an associated evidential timeline.

OTHER, GENERAL, SOURCES of relevance

-

BERRY
Ellen Thomas Berry & David Allen Berry
Our Quaker Ancestors: Finding them in Quaker Records
(Genealogical Publishing Co, 1987)

This little book is a must-own guide to locating and understanding the Quaker records.

-

CHALKLEY
Lyman Chalkley
Chronicles of the Scotch-Irish Settlement in VA, Extracted from the Original Court Records of AugustaCo, 1754-1800, 3 vols.
(1912; rpt. BaltimoreMD: GPC, 1999). Chalkley is now in the public domain and may be accessed here.

Judge Chalkley indexed virtually all of the records found at the AugustaCoVA courthouse as of the late 19th century, though he deliberately omitted records which concerned only people of obvious German surnames. There are also some gaps in his abstracts, and inevitably, some mistakes. The abstracts themselves, though intelligent, and focused on genealogically relevant information, are often quite inadequate as representations of the records themselves, and they can even be misleading for those not well versed in both the colonial common law and institutions, and in the local geography. Nonetheless, since AugustaCo was the western Virginia frontier from the 1730s until the Revolutionary War, during which period the initial trickle of Scotch-Irish into this wilderness swelled to a flood, CHALKLEY is an indispensible resource for anyone researching 18th century Virgina beyond the mountains. It is important to understand, though, that CHALKLEY should be treated as an imperfect index to the actual primary records, and not as a source in itself.

-

FISCHER
David Hackett Fischer
Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America
(Oxford University Press, 1989)

Although there is nothing about ALLENs here, this is perhaps the single most important work in print on the four most important subcultures of early America: the New England Puritans; the settlers of the Virginia and Chesapeake tidewater region; the Quakers; and the Scotch-Irish settlers of the western frontiers. Since ALLENs of this patrilineage mingled with all four of these cultures, this book provides some context for their varying family histories and some perspective on their evident adaptability

-

QUAKER_ENC
William Wade Hinshaw
Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy. Vol. I - VI
(1936-1950; published on CD by GPC, 2003)

Transcriptions of the vast majority of extant Quaker Monthly Meeting records. An indispensable source for Quaker genealogy. It includes the records for the important Virginia monthly meetings, but not those for Shrewsbury MM in New Jersey.

-

QUAKER_SHREWSBURY
Shrewsbury Monthly Meeting Records
on microfilm at Swarthmore College Library, and available through the LDS.

Transcriptions of the Shrewsbury MM, in Shrewsbury Township, MonmouthCoMJ—an important location for early ALLENs of this patrilineage.

-

WORRALL
Jay Worrall, Jr
The Friendly Virginians: America’s First Quakers
(AthensGA: Iberian Publishing Co, 1994)

This is an anecdotal and narrative-style history of the American Quakers, with a useful chapter on the history of the first Quaker settlements west of the Blue Ridge, in the Valley of Virginia. This raw western frontier was first settled in the 1730s by the Quakers, by various German Mennonite groups, and by the Presbyterian Scotch-Irish, all seeking religious, cultural, and economic freedom. WORRALL tells the story of the organization of the first Quaker Monthly Meetings in the (now) counties of Frederick, Shenandoah, and Rockingham. ALLENs of this patrilineage first appeared in the RockinghamCo area in 1739, the southernmost of these counties, when it was still part of AugustaCo, but they are later found north of there in ShenandoahCo, and they belonged, variously, to the Crooked Run Monthly Meeting, north of Front Royal, and the Hopewell MM north of Winchester. Their land probably lay in the main part of the Valley and it would have been a long haul to either Monthly Meeting.

The ALLEN Patrilineage 2 Haplogroup, R-L21->DF13->ZZ10->BY12512
and the deep ancestral history of the patrilineage

The most precise, articulated, designator of the haplogroup for ALLEN Patrilineage 2 is now R-ZZ10/BY12512, based on the Big Y test results of project member Dick-01 and others. However, since little is known about this most recent subdivision of the haplogroup tree, the following much broader and generic explication of where the patrilineage fits into human population history will have to suffice.

This Allen (R-L21*) Patrilineage (to use its full name) is of quintessential British stock.

There is evidence that humans and protohumans had lived in Britain as long as 700,000 years ago, but all were driven out by the glaciers which overran Europe during the last Ice Age (20,000-8000 BC). As the glaciers melted, the human population, which had been pushed back to refugia in the Iberian Peninsula and other parts of the Mediterranean, followed them north and eventually regained access to Britain, which was at the time a peninsula of Europe, linked to it by a land bridge called Doggerland. As the ocean waters continued to rise, first Ireland (about 7500 BC), then England (about 6500 BC), were cut off from their adjoining land masses.

The R1b haplogroup, of which R-L21+ is an offshoot, goes back about 22,000 years to the Middle East, and as it happens, it became the prevalent haplogroup of the repopulated Europe. However, the mutation which marks the L21 branch occurred about 3000 years ago, long after Britain had become separated from the Continent. Consequently, although the type is also found in northern France and Germany, most R-L21+ males today are of British descent.

The Celtic culture and language was brought to Britain between 1200-800 BC, and by the time Julius Caesar led the Roman armies to Britain (about the time of Christ), Britain was Celtic. Ireland, of course, had long been separated by water from Great Britain, and Scotland by its remote geography, so it shouldn't be surprising that in time the basic Celtic culture trifurcated into three subcultures: Brythonic (covering the area of modern England, except for Wales and Cornwall), Gaelic (Ireland, the SW of Scotland, Wales and Cornwall), and Pictic (the remainder of Scotland). By about the 10th Century AD, the Gaelic subculture had largely prevailed over the Pictish subculture of Scotland, except for the lower border areas which were influenced by the Brythonic.

Since all of these cultural developments took place long after the L21 mutation had arisen in Britain, the type is to be found in all these subcultural areas. However, later offshoot branches of L21, marked by the characteristic M222 mutation, have been identified specifically with the major burgeoning of the Irish population associated with the semi-mythical tribal chief Ui Néill, about 500 AD, and descendants of these lines also made an impact on the population of the SW parts of Scotland which have always had two-way intercourse with Ireland.

The Allen Patrilineage is negative for this M222 mutation, as well as for all other mutations subsequent to L21, so it most likely descends from the English (Brythonic) strain of Celts.

It used to be thought that in the centuries 300-400 AD, when the Anglo-Saxons “invaded” England, filling the vacuum left by the Romans, that they displaced much of the native British population, or at least the population of procreating males, but recent DNA research has given this the lie. It turns out that there is very little genetic difference between the population of southern England, where the Anglo-Saxons eventually set up the Kingdom of Wessex, and the other areas of Britain. Britain is now, as it has been for many thousands of years, predominantly R1b, and especially R-L21. Based on recent DNA studies, about 65% of male Britons are of the broad European haplogroup R1b, and fully 25-50% of the current male British population is R-L21. The so-called Norman invasion, while it wreaked profound changes to the language and cultural forms of England, had even less genetic impact—on the order of 1-2%.

For those interested in reading more into these subjects, I recommend this Wiki article on Prehistoric Britain, and this Eupedia page illustrating and summarizing the diffusion of human haplotypes.

The Technical Stuff about ySNPs & Deep Ancestry

Although a male's deep ancestry can be predicted to some degree from the test he takes to determine his surname patrilineage, it requires additional kinds of yChromosome testing called deep clade testing or Family Tree DNA’s Big Y test to determine the most recent haplogroup into which his yChromosome falls. We are indebted to project members Dick Allen and JohnW for undertaking this additional Big Y testing. Since this has been done, there is little value in other project members ordering these types of tests, as all share in the same yDNA with just minor, inconsequential variations.

While the focus in this project is on the genealogy of the descendants of the particular male ancestor who first adopted the surname ALLEN say 600-800 years ago, and thus became the founder of this ALLEN genealogical patrilineage, the founder himself, as well as all males alive today, are descendants of a much broader patrilineage which comprises all the descendants of an original yAdam who lived (it is estimated) between 50-100,000 years ago. And just we test ySTR mutations to sort living male descendants into particular genealogical patrilineages, so we may test ySNP mutations to map the whole history of the human patrilineage, and indeed all of humanity as it emerged from Africa and spread out across the continents.

ySNPs mutate so rarely that so far they have proved to beof little or no value for differentiating male lineages over the genealogical time frame of a few hundreds of years, but they work very well in sorting out patrilineages over many thousands of years. As the yChromosome of the original yAdam has been passed down the exfoliating tree of his male descendants, a few of these rare ySNP mutations have occurred, each constituting a branching of the human tree. And where the bearers of these mutations can be tracked by archaeology, and their remains successfully DNA tested, it becomes possible to correlate accumulated patterns of ySNP mutations with particular populations and their migrations over time.

Technically, each new ySNP mutation creates a new human population branching, which may be referred to, more or less interchangeably as a “subclade”, or just as a new “haplogroup”. What is important is not the terminology, but the conception of a single patrilineal tree (call it a “ySNP haplotree”) which has been divided, and subdivided, and subdivided again by successive mutations to the original yAdam’s yChromosome, each mutation marking a new branch. Already, there are many hundreds of these known ySNPs, and many new ones are being discovered every year.

The highest level (earliest) branches of the human haplotree are identified by the capitalized letters of the alphabet (A, B, C, etc.), each representing a single early mutation of the original out-of-Africa yChromosome; then, as subsequent mutations have occurred wuthin each of these major haplogroups, corresponding small letters and numbers have been appended to the initial letter—analogous to the Henry System of genealogical numbering. Like the Henry System, unfortunately, as the qualifying ySNP mutation designators have accumulated, the identifying labels have become increasingly long and cumbersome, so that an entirely new nomenclature was introduced a few years ago, which is still only slowly catching on. In fact the field of ySNP testing has been burgeoning so rapidly that the nomenclature system itself has already changed several times, most recently just a couple of months ago, rendering all earlier publications obsolete in their terminology. Thankfully, the new system should render such wholesale systemic revisions unnecessary.

The old (Henry System style) designator for Allen Patrilineage 2 down to the R-ZZ10 level is “R1b1a1a2a1a2c1d”, but that nomenclature has become so unwieldy that it is now generally deprecated in favor of abbreviations of the form R-ZZ10 or even R-BY12512. Unfortunately, the downside of these abbreviations is that they leave out the long ancestral hierarchy of these most recent ySNP mutations to this patrilineage. However, one can find the full hierarchy either by finding the FTDNA Haplotree in your personal FTDNA pages, or at the public ISOGG Haplotree for the R Haplogroup (when you click this link, do a CTL-F search for ZZ10 to find the furthest articulation of the ALLEN Patrilineage Haplogroup—the BY12512 mutation is so new that it apparently hasn’t yet been recognized by ISOGG.

Over the next several years, I expect that enough downstream ySNPs will be discovered that the history of this Allen patrilineage will be brought down to within 1000-1500 years of the present, and perhaps even to a particular geographical area, and that not many years after that it will become possible to identify men surnamed Allen as members of this patrilineage just by ySNP testing. Even then, though, we will want to continue to test ySTR markers, because they mutate so much more rapidly than ySNPs, that they will still be the best means of sorting members of the patrilineage into sub-branches. In fact by that time, I expect that ySTR testing will also have improved its discriminatory capabilities, so that it will much more useful for genealogical purposes.

-

This project is in no way affiliated with the DNA testing company, Family Tree DNA, or any of its surname projects, even though many of the members of this independent patrilineage project may also be members of the FTDNA ALLEN Surname Project.

Navigating from here

The menu buttons at top right take you to other pages on this site, while the nav panel above targets other points on this page, or brings up other resources (papers I’ve written, and the like). If you find yourself lost, the browser BACK button will take you back to where you were (some people also have a convenient BACK button on their mouse, right under their thumb). Or hitting the HOME key of your keyboard will take you back to the top of this page where you are now.

Some Key Terms: haplotype, haplogroup, patrilineage, RPH.

ALLEN Patrilineage 2 Directory of Researchers

Active researchers of this ALLEN patrilineage are listed below, in order by Handle (generally their first name). For each yDNA haplotype there is one Principal Researcher member of the project, and where the haplotype was supplied by a surrogate that person is listed immediately below, in parentheses. One or two active satellite researchers may also be listed next, with their names preceded by a "-".

I usually refer to the researcher members of the project by their Project# and/or their unique Handle, which is generally their first name or preferred nickname, disambiguated where necessary by appending either a "-"[middle-initial] or a "+"[surname-1st-initial] for members whose surname isn’t ALLEN. Where a particular member has sponsored, or represents, more than one haplotype, I’ve disambiguated these memberships by appending "("[1st-initial-or-name-of-testee]")".

Clicking highlighted Project#s will take you to the posted descendancy for that member. Clicking their full name, if highlighted, will bring up an email blank addressed to them (at least if your access device has a client email program installed).

Proj#  “Handle”         Researcher       
      (Test Subject)        
Test
Panel
A-04 Angeline      Angeline Fowler
(Christian Lee Allen)
F37
A-08 Bill-B William Bethel Allen F37
A-10 Bill-L William Lewis Allen
F67
A-09 Bob Robert Grantham Allen F111
A-26 Coni Constance Marie DuBois
(Kenneth Dale Gilbert)
F111
A-16 Dave David Robert Werner F67
A-01 Dick Richard John Allen F67
A-28 Eileen Eileen Carol Parrott
(Gene Everett Parrott)
F111
A-25 Jack Dr. Jack Weston Nash F111
A-23 Jerry Jerry Lorell Allen F67
A-02 John John Walden
(David Ehm Allen)
F37
A-02a —David Ehm Allen
A-24 Judy+J Judy Johanson
(William Duane Allen)
F37
A-05 Judy+M Judy McMahan
(Wilbur Eugene Allen)
F67
A-05a —Eunice Eversdyk
A-05b —Sheryl Kurtz
A-17 Larry Larry Kenneth Allen II F37
A-12 Kathy Kathleen Allen Phipps
(Jeffrey Donald Allen)
F67
A-27 Margaret Margaret Canella
(James Clarence Safford III)
F111
A-18 Marilyn Marilyn Krell
(anonymous)
F37
A-22 Marlon Marlon Lee Allen
(Harry Maurice Allen)
F37
A-07 Melava Melava King
(Dean Evan Allen)
F67
A-13 Nancy+B Nancy Elaine Allen Barton
(John Samuel Allen)
F37
A-11 Nancy+R Nancy Welty Ross
(Frederick Lee Allen)
F37
A-15 Sarah Sarah Quinn Hambrick
(William Preston Allen)
F67
A-14 Sharland Sharland Reeves
(William Frank Allen)
F111
A-03 Steve-K Steven Kenneth Allen F111
A-03a —Cherie N.
A-19 Steve+J(Greg) Steven Jacobs
(Greg W. Allen)
F37
A-20 Steve+J(Leonard) Steven Jacobs
(Leonard E. Allen)
F37
A-06 Tim Timothy J. Allen F67

To Join this ALLEN Patrilineage 2 Project

This project is open only to males who have already DNA-tested at Family Tree DNA on 37 markers or more and been found to match closely to the project reference type (the RPH), and/or to the genealogists who have sponsored the tests of such males. Those who have taken less discriminating tests (the FTDNA 25-marker test, or tests at other companies) are strongly encouraged to upgrade their tests to FTDNA-37 or FTDNA-67. These are the only tests on the market which have sufficient mutational sensitivity to make it possible to help sort members of the patrilineage into different family branches.

If you have tested to a lesser standard and believe that your genealogy meshes with the one for this project, please contact me, and I'll be happy to evaluate your existing test results in light of your genealogy. Most of those who have tested at other companies can upgrade to FTDNA-37 by printing out this form and ordering the 37-marker test through the FTDNA ALLEN Surname project.

Or, if you have tested at FTDNA to either 12 or 25 markers, you may upgrade through your personal FTDNA webpage for $99, or $49 respectively.

If you are simply an ALLEN genealogist who hasn’t DNA-tested yet, and if you are a male surnamed ALLEN or have found a related one to test, you should seriously consider ordering the 37-marker test through the ALLEN FTDNA Surname project. The discounted price for ordering it through the project is $149—$30 less than the best Ancestry.com test even though it offers 62% more mutational sensitivity. Even if your test results don’t match the template for this Allen Patrilineage 2 project, you might qualify for the other, Allen (I) Project which has been organized along similar lines, and if you are of a different ALLEN patrilineage from either of these, there are still another 300+ FTDNA-tested ALLENs in the ALLEN Surname project to whom you might match.

The reason the FTDNA 37-marker test is required is that it includes in the 28-37 marker segment the majority of the markers which are most likely to have mutated during genealogical time. We are able to post for comparison any of the tested markers offered by any of the testing companies, and if or when any of them chooses to offer a test with the mutational sensitivity of FTDNA-37 or better, we will consider recommending their test as well. We are not beholden to any particular testing company in this project. It is simply a matter of merit. However, FTDNA has been the premier company in this field since it pioneered testing for purposes of genetic genealogy in the year 2000, and its database of already tested males is far larger than those of all the other testing companies put together.

ALLEN Project NEWS

16Nov2010

The ALLEN Patrilineage 2 Project web pages are up!

30Jan2011

Sharland Reeves (#A14) has joined the project; her haplotype is a perfect match to those of the project RPH, Bill-L (#A10), and Melava (#A07), but her ancestry runs back to PA, and perhaps NJ.

28Nov2013

Larry K. Allen (#A17) has joined the project. Like so many others, his haplotype is nearly identical to the project RPH through the 37 markers that he has tested on, and his ancestral line, though unconnected, fits the broad profile of emanation west through VT to western NY state.

8Apr2014

A more thorough canvass of the available evidence has identified a second New England patriarch of this patrilineage: Samuel1 ALLEN of Braintree, Massachusetts. It turns out that he, and not George1 Allen of Sandwich, is the father of the Samuel Allen of BridgewaterMA (in Plymouth) who is the ancestor of project members Melava-07, and NancyB-13. The posted pedigrees and other references on these pages have been changed accordingly.

See the extensively revised text on this page for an overview of what this does to the history of the patrilineage, as well as the new text on its likely origins in Somersetshire that my own new research has delved into. My paper “Two New England Patriarchs...”, and the accompanying evidential timeline collects and discusses in detail all the salient evidence for both of these men, and for their interrelationship; the timeline provides complete scholarly citations to the sources.

26Jun2014

New project member Marlon Allen, makes our third descendant of patriarch Samuel1 of BraintreeMA, through his great-grandson, Joseph4 of WindhamCT. His advent has provoked me to extensively revise my paper “Two New England Patriarchs...”, and the fact that his haplotype includes the CDYa=37 value that his known cousin Nancy+B also has, but his other known cousin Melava-07 does not, and further, the fact that (as will appear in the next revision of these pages) the CDYa=37 value is also shared by several new project members not yet incorporated into the project, cousins of Kathy-12 and descendants of a third Patrilineage 2 patriarch from Maryland, raises many questions regarding the interpretation of this marker. I’ve addressed these in a rewrite of the section on the CDYa mutation.

15Sep2014

Jerry Allen (#23) is our latest new member, and like member Sharland Reeves (#14), his ancestry is shallow and runs back only as far as Texas. And like the majority of project members, who remain unconnected to one of the known early patriarchs of this patrilineage, the best hope for these two to get pointed in the right direction may lie with a group project to extend the majority of member haplotypes out to 111 markers in the hopes of discovering additional mutations that will be distinctive of particular family sub-branches.

We have another new member, Judy Johanson (#24), who like several other of our unconnected members, has ancestry that runs back through New York—in fact uniquely (so far) it remains in NY virtually until the present. I’ve dubbed her “Judy+J” to differentiate her from existing project member Judy McMahan (now “Judy+M”).

Like several other project members (which include descendants of both New England patriarchs, George of SandwichMA, and Samuel of BraintreeMA) Judy+J’s haplotype is completely lacking in distinctive mutations through the first 37, except that markers DYS459a&b and DYS437 are missing altogether. This is a different and much rarer kind of mutation called a “deletion”, and I suspect that this haplotype experienced just one such rare deletion event that affected both these markers. While this deletion is completely distinctive of her family sub-branch, it likely occurred quite recently, so probably marks only her closest male ALLEN relatives, who may be mostly already known to her. In the hope of turning up other, deeper mutations shared with other project members, current or to be, Judy+J is extending her haplotype to 67 markers, and plans to extend it to 111.

Extending to 111 may provide the best chance for our many unconnected members to obtain some guidance as to which of the innumerable branches of this deep and prolific ALLEN patrilineage they belong to. In fact, there is hope that by extending key members with known descents from George and from Samuel, we may find a mutation that will differentiate the descendancies of these two principal (and closely related) patriarchs of this ALLEN clan.

19Mar2015

There is much new to report. First, I seem to have neglected to note here above the acquistion of new members Marilyn Krell (#18), and Steve Jacobs who is the genealogists for two descendant haplotypes (#s 19 and 20), all of whose haplotypes match closely to the previously anomalous haplotype of long time member Kathy Phipps (#12) who descends from a Maryland-origined ancestor. Marilyn and Steve have provided me with extensive additional genealogical research on this line, which both I and member Dick-01 have supplemented with additional research, and as time permits, I will be collating this and posting a consoldated pedigree for these four. All the indications are, both from the genealogy and from the DNA, that this Maryland cluster descends, not from either of the New England patriarchs George1 or Samuel1, but from a third American immigrant who probably first appeared in colonial Maryland in the late 1600s.

Second, we have two more new members.

Dr. Jack Weston Nash (#25), who as his surname indicates, is an ALLEN NPE, has a very interesting descent from a slave ancestor, Henry Nash, who was chosen county commissioner of his rural South Carolina county during the Reconstruction aftermath of the Civil War, but was then assassinated by Ku Kluxers. At least that is the direction his Nash pedigree runs, but there is a very good chance that the ALLEN kink in his line occurred within the last several generations. Jack, like our other NPE Dave Werner, has extended his haplotype to 111 markers in the hope that closer ALLEN cousins whose genealogy is more definitely known will turn up.

Jack’s genealogical case has attracted the interest of celebrity genealogist Dr. Lewis Henry Gates and his associates at NEHGR who did some research on Henry’s possible origins, and both Jack and I have looked at other possibilities, but of at least equal importance is to try to figure out where the ALLEN line came in. And this should be of broader interest as well, since heretofore there has been no showing of the ALLEN Patrilineage 2 as far south as South Carolina.

The final new member, Coni DuBois (#26), who is an expert in Amerind, or Native American, genealogy, represents an ALLEN line whose origins are somewhat mysterious. Although ALLEN is her inherited surname, her earliest known ALLEN ancestor, born just after the Civil War, apparently didn't know the name of his own father, so there is an NPE-like break in her lineage.

Coni’s haplotype is likewise anomalous with its heavy load of accumulated mutations, but by the same token it is extremely significant for the patrilineage as a whole as it points to yet another (a fourth) American immigrant ancestor, and a very early adoption of ALLEN as a permanent hereditary surname back in England, most likely as early as the 14th century.

While this means that Coni is at present stranded out in left field waiting both for further genealogical evidence to be found, and/or for a reasonably close ALLEN patrilinieage cousin to DNA test and join the project, it is fortunate for the project as a whole that she, like Jack, has extended her haplotype to 111 markers, because it is precisely the most diverse and distant haplotypes that still fit into the patrilineage, that have the most to tell us about the overall depth and shape of it, and more specifically about the original (unmutated) haplotype of the MRCPA—the forefather—of all project members. As is typical when further knowledge is turned up, new questions arise as well. I have more to say about this in my “DNA Analysis of the patrilineage as a whole” elsewhere on this page.

Finally, in response to the many extensions and the several new members who have extended to 111 markers (making a total of 10 out of the 16 members), I have replaced the previous 67-marker GD matrix with a 111-marker GD matrix that from now on will be the definitive one for this patrilineage (the 37-marker matrix has also been retained though it is much less meaningful and reliable than its 111-marker sibling). The new 111-marker definitional standard has also prompted me to replace the former RPHaplotype (of member Bill-L-10) in the project haplotype chart, with a new synthetic RPH that I believe more closely approximates the original (unmutated) ancestral haplotype.

I have also completely rewritten the DNA-analytical sections of this page, links to which will be found in the upper left navigation panel at the top of this project main page. The new analysis is organized from the point of view of identifying what I’ve come to call closer cousin clusters (CCC for short), each defined by one or more mutations characteristic of the family sub-branch that each represents.

8Apr2016

Since the last update to the project about a year ago, two members have extended their haplotypes to 111 markers, Steve-K-03 and Bob-09, and the various charts have been updated accordingly.

Steve-K is one of the class of those I think of as New York floaters—folks who are unconnected to either of the main New England trees stemming from immigrant patriarchs George1 of SandwichMA, or Samuel1 of BraintreeMA, whose ancestry runs back to upstate New York, perhaps by way of Canada. Although Steve-K’s extension did turn up one additional mutation in the upper band, DYS532=14, and even though this mutation happens to match one of Coni-26’s, because Coni’s connection to the main tree is so far back in time it is virtually certain that Steve-K’s mutation occurred independently downstream and was not inherited from a common ancestor with Coni.

Steve-K’s haplotype, in fact, is remarkably unmutated, and since it doesn’t match any of Dick-01’s mutations either, I’ve moved Steve-K’s haplotype down towards the middle of the chart, near the unmutated RPH. Steve-K’s new mutation will probably only come into play if a closely related cousin of his turns up in the project, and if this happens, the new member may well match on Steve’s other mutation to DYS464 in the 1-37 band.

Bob-09’s extension, rather remarkably, and also significantly, failed to turn up any new mutations. This is significant to the project as a whole because Bob is a descendant of the Southern Mutation Cluster who are identified by the mutation DYS449=32, most of whom probably descend through the Quaker branch of the George1 of Sandwich line, who went south to New Jersey, then western Virginia, and the fact that this is Bob’s only mutation is significant, because it means that this is going to be the only indicator of membership in the Southern Cluster going forward. Or in other words, we now know that all the other mutations to the haplotypes of other members of the cluster must have occurred downstream of the defining DYS449 mutation, which probably occurred within a couple of generations of George1.

Although this isn’t a particularly unexpected result, one might have hoped to find another early mutation in this line, because the DYS449 marker is quite prone to mutate anyway, so that possession of this mutation alone could be a false positive indicator of membership in the genealogically defined Southern Cluster. However, since all the existing members including Bob do have southern genealogically-based roots, and few other members of this ALLEN patrilineage do, it is quite unlikely that there are any false positives within the present Southern Cluster group.

27Nov2020

New project member Eileen Williams (Eileen-28) has brought to the project not only a solid ancestry back to the immigrant Samuel1 of BraintreeMA (through his youngest son James2 of Martha’s Vineyard), but also a mutation to the not very mutable marker YG-A10 that matches that of Samuel1 descendant Marlon-22, and thereby proclaims that these two, at least,are members of a Closer Cousin Cluster (CCC) descended from Samuel1 or one of his recent ALLEN ancestors.

Although there are complications in the interpretation of the mutational patterns across the haplotypes of this patrilineage (more on this at “George1 and Samuel1 and their yDNA”) the principal significance of what Eileen has brought to the project is that we finally have a mutation, YG-A10=13, that allows us to differentiate both the descendants of George1, and members of the Maryland Cluster, from the descendants of Samuel1.

As collateral damage from this new finding, the fact that presumptive Samuel1 descendant Melava-07 lacks the YG-A10 mutation (as well as the CDYa=37/38 that Marlon and Eileen share), means that she almost certainly does not descend from Samuel1, and her entire lineage back to Lemuel6 of CanterburyCT (Joseph4’s grandson) now needs to be carefully scrutinized.

It would also be very desirable to extend the haplotype of Nancy+B-13 to 111 markers, as she too claims a descent through a line that overlaps substantially with Melava’s. Finding that Nancy was YG-A10=13 like Marlon and Eileen, would go a long way towards confirming her lineage, and if she lacked the new mutation it might shed light on where (or even if) Melava’s line goes wrong.

Furthermore, the YG-A10=13 mutation, which is also shared by Dick-01 and Coni-26, makes it highly likely either that Dick descends from Samuel1, or, perhaps more likely given the extreme divergence of Coni’s haplotype from those of all the project members, that YG-A10=13 is the original value of the MRCA of all project members, and YG-A10=14 is the mutated value. And if this is so, that would in some way group the George1 descendants with the Marylanders into a meta-CCC while pushing George1 and Samuel1 farther apart in relatonship, despite the close association that I’ve argued in my Two Patriarchs paper these two had in the early New England records.

In other words, this new value of 13 that groups Eileen-28, and Marlon-22 (both of whom have highly credible descents from Samuel1) into a Samuel1 CCC calls much of the rest yDNA architecture of this patrilineage into question, and reminds us that all inferences based on yDNA patterns are probabalistic, not straighforwardly deducible—and that once in a while red comes up 15 times in row in Monte Carlo. Stay tuned!

Analysis of the ALLEN Patrilineage 2 DNA

It’s essential for those who wish to understand just what yChromosome DNA testing can and cannot contribute to our genealogical investigations to read and reflect on my short summary of the Principles of yChromosome DNA Analysis.

invisible writing

Analysis of the patrilineage by CCC (Closer Cousin Cluster),
with consideration for the genealogical evidence

Before digging into this more genealogically relevant analysis, I would suggest that you open the project haplotype chart in a new window, so that you may better follow along with the references made below to the specific colored mutations in the chart.

invisible writing

The Maryland Cluster

Defining mutations: DYS464=13-15-17-17, DYS458=17, & CDY=18-37

Although only a few members belong to this Closer Cousin Cluster, I’ve listed it first because, unlike the classifications of all the other members, their classification as members of the Maryland Cluster are unequivocal. Members who aren’t listed here should skip to the next section “George1 and Samuel1 and their yDNA”, and to the sections following.

All four of the project members who belong to this cluster trace their genealogical roots back to ALLENs of colonial Maryland: these are Kathy-12; Marilyn-18; and Steve-19 and -20.

Although all three of the defining mutations for this cluster are fast mutators, and some of the markers are therefore likely to mutate independently in more than one descendant line, the combination of these mutations is nonetheless definitive for descendants of the Maryland immigrant ancestor; in fact new haplotypes that match to any two of these threee mutations almost certainly betoken membership in the Maryland cluster.

In addition, although only one of the four members of this cluster, Kathy-12, has so far extended their haplotype to 111 markers, hers has picked up two additional mutations, either or both of which may also be characteristic of the Maryland cluster: DYS533=13 (a fast mutator); and DYS561=14 (an average mutator, and therefore a very desirable mutation if shared by others).

invisible writing

George1 and Samuel1 and their yDNA

Two of our project members have credible descents from the immigrant patriarch George1 ALLEN of SandwichMA (02-John-02 and Bill-L-10), and at least three have credible descents from the closely related immigrant patriarch Samuel1 of BraintreeMA (Nancy+B-13, Marlon-22, Eileen-28, and perhaps Melava-07). And because all but Nancy+B have extended their haplotypes to 111 markers, we have the best possible take on the mutational patterns that are distinctive of these two New England descendancies—at least short of everyone upgrading to FTDNA’s still expensive BigY test.

The analysis of these patterns (which I’ve laid out below) is a bit complicated, so here is an executive summary: (1) those who share the mutation YG-A10=13 are probably descended from Samuel1, while those who lack it are probably descended from George1; and (2) among those descended from George1, those who have the mutation DYS449=32 are probably descended through his son Ralph2, most of whom were Quakers who went south, first to New Jersey, and then to Virginia. The haplotype of Melava-07 is a major anomaly because her genealogical evidence seems solid and points towards Samuel1, while her haplotype points toward George1.

-

The Descendants of Samuel1 of BraintreeMA

Until late 2020, the only mutation that the Samuel1 descendants (or most of them) had in common that differentiated them from the George1 descendants, was the CDYa=37 value, which I’ve somewhat arbitrarily identified as a mutation from what I suppose to be the normal value of CDYa=36 (though it’s just possible that 36 is the normal value while 37 is the mutation). The problem with the CDY markers, though, is that they are so highly mutable that in large projects like this one it’s quite likely that this marker will have mutated independently in more than one lineage; so that if two or more descendants turn up with the same mutated value, it’s no guarantee that they inherited it from a MRCA (Most Recent Common patrilineal Ancestor) who lived more recently than the original MRCA of all project members.

In fact, as we examine the haplotype chart, CDYa seems to have mutated independently two or three times: besides these descendants of Samuel1, the members of the Maryland Cluster, who are only very distantly related to the New England descendants, all have CDYa=37, and so does member Jack Nash-25, even though his ancestry is quite different from both the New Englanders and the Marylanders. Also, one of the apparent descendants of Samuel1, Melava-07, lacks this CDYa mutation, perhaps because her CDYa mutated back to its original value.

Since 2020 though, with the accession of member Eileen-28, whose ancestry back to Samuel1 through his son James2 (who settled on Martha’s Vineyard) seems very solid, we’ve picked up a second, and much better mutation characteristic of the Samuel1 descendancy—better, because the mutation is to a marker, YG-A10, that is not particularly mutable, and it is shared with member Marlon-22 who also has a solid descent from Samuel1 through his son Samuel2.

Furthermore, these two also share the mutation CDYa=37/38 (Marlon is 37, and Eileen 38, presumably an additional mutation beyond 37), which makes it highly probable that Samuel1 inherited both these mutations himself, and passed on at least the YG-A10 mutation to most of his descendants. Even ignoring the quite convincing genealogical evidence, and supposing that Eileen by happenstance acquired both of these mutations down the 9 generations that seprarates her from Samual1, the chances that Marlon would have also acquired both these mutations down the 11 generations that separates him from Samuel1 is only 1 out of 278, or in other words, negligible.

This finding immediately makes it highly probable that member Margaret-27, who also has both these mutations but whose ancestry has only been traceable back to 1867, descends from Samuel1.

It also somewhat more provisionally rules out a descent from Samuel1 on the part of other project members who lack the YG-A10 mutation. Leaving the state of the highly mutatable auxiliary mutation CDYa=37/38 aside, suppose another 10th generation descendant of Samuel lacked the YG-A10 mutation: the chances that this was because it mutated back to its original value of 14 over those 10 generations are only 1 in 50.

We may have, in fact, one case of this in member Melava-07, whose apparent descent from Samuel1 through Samuel2, Samuel3, and Joseph4, I have reearched in depth myself. Yet Melava lacks both the YG-A10 mutation and the CDY mutation, and I am therefore compelled to suppose that there is something wrong with her ancestral line. We have another member, Nancy+B, who also descends through Joseph4, but who hasn’t yet extended to 111 markers, and it would be very desirable to get that done, for the light it might shed on this anomaly.

Two additional project members Coni-26 and Dick-01 also share the YG-A10 mutation, though not the CDYa mutation, with Eileen and Marlon. Coni’s haplotype diverges so widely from those of all the other members that it appears that she descends from a fourth immigrant ancestor (besides George1, Samuel1, and the unknown immigrant ancestor of the Maryland Cluster). See “Other ALLEN Immigrants?: Ralph1 of Sandwich and Coni’s haplotype” below for more on this.

Dick’s haplotype also shares Samuel1’s YG-A10 mutation, though it lacks his CDYa mutation. But there’s a 1 in 5 chance that the latter may have mutated back to its original value in Dick’s line, but only a 1 in 50 chance that his haplotype experienced the same YG-A10 mutation: thus, Dick’s earliest known ancestor, Sylvanus Allen born in 1823 in Canada, near New York, was a descendant of Samuel1.

-

The Descendants of George1 of SandwichMA

There are no distinctive mutations that stamp all the descendants of George1, so the best we can do for most is to guess that those who lack either the YG-A10 mutation, or the Maryland Cluster mutations, are descended from the only other immigrant of this patrilineage to America that we know of: George1. However, the two well-founded descendants of George, Bill-L-10, who descends thru Geroge’s son George2, and 02-John-02, who descends thru his George1’s son Ralph2, each have one mutation that is shared with several other putative descendants of George1.

invisible writing

George1 Descendants: The Southern Sub-Cluster

Defining mutation: DYS449=32

The mutation DYS449=32 marks the line of 02-John-02, whom we know from strong genealogical evidence is a descendant of George1 through his son Ralph2, and the same mutation marks the haplotypes of some half dozen other project members. Because the marker DYS449 is quite mutatable we must allow for the possibility that not all of these other members share the same descent as 02-John, but the fact that the peregrinations of their ancestors overlap with those of 02-John, whose ancestors were Quaker and followed the typical New England Quaker migration pattern south through RI to NJ, and thence into the western Valley of Virginia, is rather strong circumstantial evidence that these ancestors were also Quakers descended from Ralph2.

Many of the Quakers who migrated to western Virginia continued south from there, and ended up in NC, but by the 1790s most of these southern Quakers had come to the conclusion that slavery was an abomination to God, and migrated north again into the new states of OH and IN, while a feww naturally fell away from Quakerism and remained in VA at least for a generation or two, though some of these former Quakers ended up migrating north as well. In fact, the ancestors of 3 of the 7 project members who share the mutation DYS449=32 ended up in Greene or adjacent MorganCoIL, having migrated from southwestern VA.

invisible writing

George1 Descendants: Does DYS533=12 Define a Possible CCC?

The other known descendant of George1, through his son George2, is Bill-L-10, whose ancestors remained in SandwichMA until about the time of the Revolution, then migrated to upstate NY, first to SaratogaCo, then to OntarioCoNY or adjacent WayneCoNY. Bill-L also shares the mutation DYS533=12 with a number of other project members, including two who were putative descendants of George1, at least by default, though not, apparently through the Quaker branches that stem from Ralph2, because they lack “the Southern Mutation”. Since, however, these two candidates to be closer cousins with Bill-L (namely, Jack-25 and Jerry-23) have rather shallow ALLEN ancestries that run back to SC and TX, respectively, I suspect that neither is a closer cousin of Bill-L, though they were quite likely closer cousins of each other. Furthermore, since this mutation is also found among the Maryland Cluster (which shares no other mutations with Jack or Jerry), and even with Eileen-28, a known descendant of Samuel, it appears that, for reasons unknown, the DYD533 marker is particularly prone to mutate in this patrilineage, well beyond its estimated probability, and thus can’t be considered at all a reliable indicator of common CCC ancestry.

invisible writing

Other ALLEN Immigrants?: Ralph1 of Sandwich and Coni’s haplotype

There were two early Ralph Allens of SandwichMA. One was the son of the immigrant George1, whom we call Ralph2 (the progenitor of the Southern Quaker line), while in the original records of Plymouth Colony he is called Ralph Sr. But as Robert Charles Anderson’s GMB “George Allen” sketch has shown, for at least a few years in the 1640s Ralph2 was joined by a younger immigrant, known as Ralph Jr., whom we may call Ralph1 since he was apparently the first immigrant of his line.

Project member Coni-26 claims a descent from this Ralph1, and having examined her evidence carefully I think that this is plausible though at present there are a couple of weak links in her ancestral chain. Accordingly, I’ve posted Coni’s lineage back only as far as one Henry6 Allen who was born in SomersetCoNJ, in the same vicinity as the Quaker descendants of George1 of Sandwich who went south. I’ve also posted the claimed father of this Henry6, Henry5, in the hope that further research will solidify this additional link, and bring the line nearer to connecting to that of Ralph1’s son Jedidiah2, who is known to have also become a Quaker and migrated to New Jersey. Because the Quakers kept vital records, Jedidiah and his son and grandson who make up generations 3 and 4 of this line are reasonably well documented.

It’s well documented that many of the progeny of George1 became Quakers, if not George1 himself, and I’ve presented evidence and argument in my Two Patriarchs paper that George1 and Samuel1 were associated with religious radicals, both in the Weymouth/Braintree area and in NewportRI. Although no associations have turned up in the Sandwich records between Ralph1 and George1 and his progeny, the fact that progeny of Ralph1 also became Quakers is at least circumstantial evidence of a relationship that goes beyond sharing a common surname.

The only problem with the theory that Coni’s New Jersey ancestors, who had Quaker neighbors, are derived from the immigrant Ralph1 of SandwichMA some of whose Quaker progeny ended up in New Jersey, is that coni’s haplotype has an average GD of 9 from the haplotypes of the George1 and Samuel1 descendants, and has experienced 8 mutations in all, compared to the average of 4 for the four known descendants of George1 and Samuel1. Probabalistically, this projects back to a mutual MRCA for all three of these New England ALLEN immigrants (supposing for the sake of argument the Ralph1 is indeed Coni’s ancestor) who was born say 1490, give or take about 75 years. Ralph1 was a generation younger than George1 and Samuel1, but taking 1490 as the pivot, we may reasonably hypothesize that Ralph1’s father was their 1st-4th cousin, and likely more closely related to Samuel1, since both Samuel1 and Coni’s ancestor (Ralph1?) apparently had the YG-A10 mutation.

Finally, given the glacial pace of internal migration within England, it’s no stretch at all to suppose that even 4th cousins continued to reside in the same local area (thought to be somewhere in Somersetshire) and to be subject in the 1630s to the same currents projecting them to the New World of Massachusetts Bay Colony.

Prospects for Additional DNA Testing

It’s not always beneficial to test beyond the first 37 markers. On my DNA Testing information page I’ve laid out the general principles that govern The Prospects for Additional yDNA Testing.

However, because the majority of project members have already extended to 111 markers, and because they are all of diverse lineage, I would recommend that all of those who haven’t thus extended consider doing so now. The regular price of extending from 37 to 111 markers is $220, but it’s just $129 for the extension from 67 to 111, and those prices typically drop to $188 and $109 respectively in the sales that FTDNA runs several times a year. FTDNA usually has one or two pop sales (not previously announced and of short duration) in the spring and summer, and one big sale on everything for the month of December, so please bring this project in mind when you get email notifications of these sales.

Because, as far as I know, none of the existing members have ordered FTDNA’s BigY test, there is little or nothing to be gained from venturing into that territory. However, I haven’t heard from most members for donkeys’ years, and if several of you have popped for the BigY (currently priced at $449, but typically discounted to $379 in sales) please let me know, and it may prove beneficial for certain other of the many members who haven’t yet been able to connect to one of the main descent trees to consider ordering this test too.

Finally, there is one other potentially more cost effective strategy to milking more out of yDNA testing: targeted testing of potential patrilineage cousins.

The idea is to focus on other ALLENs encountered in the records whose careers seem to intertwine with those of one’s own earliest known ancestors, and who might therefore be related somehow; then attempt to trace their lines down to living male descendants who bear the ALLEN surname, and sponsor DNA tests for them. If these speculative test subjects are well chosen, finding that they are indeed patrilineage cousins could open up a new research front, or contrariwise, if they turn out not to belong to the patrilineage after all, that negative information could also be useful by allowing one to excluded the doings of these other ALLENs as unrelated, and thus avoid pursuing false trails. In addition, whatever work one has done on these other ALLEN lines, and the results of these targeted DNA tests one has sponsored, may turn out to be valuable to ALLENs of other patrilineages either now or down the road.


ALLEN Patrilineage 2 ySTR DNA Haplotypes Compared

The following matrices, one for 37-marker comparisons, and one for 111-marker comparisons (for those project members who have extended to 111) provide some idea of the closeness of relationship across the full set of tested members of this patrilineage. The cell at the intersection of each column/row pair shows the GD (Genetic Distance) between the pair—this is an imperfect count of the total number of mutations that have occurred in both lines of descent since their MRCPA (Most Recent Common Patrilineal Ancestor) walked the earth.

It’s also possible to create corresponding matrices that show TMRCA (Time back to the MRCPA, expressed either in generations or in years), but I’ve decided to forgo such charts because they are just too misleading as indicators of when a particular MRCA lived. Mutations are so sporadic and infrequent (even when a large number of markers is tested) that such estimates can easily be off by many hundreds of years. If one has the irresistable urge to play around with TMRCA estimates between particular haplotype pairs, the best way to indulge it is to run the FTDNA Tip calculator for that pair from one’s personal page—but be sure to input the number of generations for which one knows, genealogically, the bearers of these haplotypes cannot have had a common ancestor.

-

37-Marker Haplotype Genetic Distance Comparison Matrix

Genetic Distances, ALLEN Patrilineage 2, from 37-marker ySTR DNA Comparisons

Color-coding shows whether a haplotype pair Definitely, Probably, or just Possibly belongs to the patrilineage.

The number in each cell is the number of divergent mutations between each pair of haplotypes.

The lowest numbers represent the closest relationships.

Whether an outlier haplotype belongs to the same patrilineage should be judged by its lowest GD number.

However, the color-coded categories and the GD numbers don’t take account either of the common surname that most of these haplotypes share,
     or of the possible convergence of their genealogical evidence at a particular time and place, and where either of these conditions obtain,
     2 or 3 can reasonably be subtracted from the indicated GD in assessing whether an outlying haplotype belongs to the patrilineage.

-


-

111-Marker Haplotype Genetic Distance Comparison Matrix for ALLEN Patrilineage 2

Genetic Distances, ALLEN Patrilineage 2, from 111-marker ySTR DNA Comparisons

Color-coding shows whether a haplotype pair Definitely, Probably, or just Possibly belongs to the patrilineage.

The number in each cell is the number of divergent mutations between each pair of haplotypes.

The lowest numbers represent the closest relationships.

Whether an outlier haplotype belongs to the same patrilineage should be judged by its lowest GD number.

However, the color-coded categories and the GD numbers don’t take account either of the common surname that most of these haplotypes share,
     or of the possible convergence of their genealogical evidence at a particular time and place, and where either of these conditions obtain,
     2 or 3 can reasonably be subtracted from the indicated GD in assessing whether an outlying haplotype belongs to the patrilineage.


ALLEN Patrilineage 2 Mutation History Tree

THIS CHART HAS YET TO BE UPDATED WITH THE NEW MEMBERS ACCRUED SINCE THE FALL OF 2014, OR TO REFLECT THE RESULTS OF THE MANY EXTENSIONS TO 111-MARKERS. IT IS OTHERWISE STILL REASONABLY ACCURATE AS FAR AS IT GOES.

The following tree chart shows the accumulated mutations for each tested descendant of the MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) of this Allen oatrilineage. The MRCA appears at the top of the tree on the left, and the tested members of the project at the bottom, identified by their Allen Patrilineage Project#, and the “handle” of the principal researcher for each tested member’s line. The other numbers in the chart represent mutations which have accumulated for each line of decent. The two members listed at the bottom of the first column (10-Bill-L, and 07-Melava) have a straight, no-mutation descent from the MRCA. My choice of Bill-L as the project RPH, rather than Melava, is for no better reason than that he is surnamed Allen.

The mutations are represented by the numeric IDs of the ySTR markers tested by FTDNA with the “DYS” prefixes truncated to save space. The marker number is followed by a “+” or a “-” to indicate whether the mutation resulted in the gain or loss of a repeat; where there is a two step difference between a member’s marker and that of the RPH, this will be shown as two separate mutations. The GD (Genetic Distance) between any two members of the patrilineage is equivalent to the number of mutations encountered when tracing a path from their “handle” at the bottom of the tree to the handle of the other member. Each mutation (or unit of GD) represents, typically, an extra 190 years back to their common ancestor. However, these estimates are so loose that even a perfect match on 67 markers, like Bill-L and Melava have, only estimates the probability of a common ancestor 4 generations back at 44%, 6 generations back at 82%, and 8 generations back 1t 94%.

Allen Patrilineage 2 Mutation History Tree

It will be seen that there are two principal watershed mutations for the patrilineage at present.

First, there is DYS449+, which I’ve dubbed “The Southern Mutation” (despite the fact that one southern-rooted member of the patrilineage, 08-Bill-B, lacks it) probably occurred in the genetic transmission from patriarch George1 of Sandwich to his son Ralph2, or from Ralph to his son Joseph3, who migrated to New Jersey, and whose descendants, most of them, moved on to Maryland, and the Valley of Virginia. Joseph3 (Ralph2, George1) and most of his descendants were Quakers, and followed the principal Quaker migration south, and then back north to Ohio, and Indiana. However, a number of descendants of this southern branch of the family fell out of the Quaker discipline and trickled a bit farther south to FranklinCo, before later treking back up through Kentucky to the states of the “Old Northwest”.

The other watershed mutation, CDYa+, though very important, is considerably more problematic. It’s important because it appear to mark the line of descent from Joseph4 of WindhamCT (Samuel3, Samuel2 of BridgewaterMA, Samuel1 of Braintree), as it’s shared by two of the three known descendants of this line: 13-Nancy+B and 22-Marlon, as well as by 04-Angeline, whose unconnected line probably hooks up with this descendancy at some point. This mutation is problematic, though, because the CDYs are the very most mutable markers, and with large patrilineages like this one, there’s an excellent chance that two descendants who share it came by it through two independent mutations in their respective lines, rather than by inheritance. In fact, the descendants of the unknown early Maryland immigrant patriarch of this patrilineage, are also CDYa+ and there is a distinct possibility that that is the normal value, while the descendants of the patriarch George1 of Sandwich have the mutated value. Either way, though, this mutation differentiates one of the three known ALLEN Patrilineage2 patriarchal lines from the other two (with the reservation about independent mutation that I’ve notes), and that is much. With luck, by extending certain project members haplotypes to 111 markers we will pick up a better, less mutable mutation to help us in this task of differentiation.


ALLEN Patrilineage 2 ySTR DNA Haplotypes

The chart below shows the haplotypes for each tested project member of this patrilineage. I’ve decapitated most of the marker names (truncating “DYS393” to just “393”) to improve readability. The colored markers mutate slower or faster than the norm. Thus, [DYS]439 is fast, [DYS]458 is faster, and CDYa&b are blazing, while [DYS]393 is slow. Shared mutations to slow markers are the most valuable as they are almost sure to have been inherited from a common ancestor, whereas shared mutations to fast markers may have occurred independently in two or more ancestral lines.

Haplotype Identifiers FTDNA 37-Marker Panel FTDNA Markers 38-67 FTDNA Markers 68-111 Haplotype Identifiers

Proj
#
 Principal
 Genealogist
Earliest Known Patrilineal Ancestor
(ALLEN surname omitted)

Name
(Birth - Death)
c=circa
3
9
3
3
9
0
1
9
/
3
9
4
3
9
1
3
8
5
a
3
8
5
b
4
2
6
3
8
8
4
3
9
3
8
9
I
3
9
2
3
8
9
I
I
4
5
8
4
5
9
a
4
5
9
b
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
4
7
4
3
7
4
4
8
4
4
9
4
6
4
a
4
6
4
b
4
6
4
c
4
6
4
d
4
6
0
Y
G
-
H
4
Y
C
A
I
I
a
Y
C
A
I
I
b
4
5
6
6
0
7
5
7
6
5
7
0
C
D
Y
a
C
D
Y
b
4
4
2
4
3
8
5
3
1
5
7
8
3
9
5
S
1
a
3
9
5
S
1
b
5
9
0
5
3
7
6
4
1
4
7
2
4
0
6
S
1
5
1
1
4
2
5
4
1
3
a
4
1
3
b
5
5
7
5
9
4
4
3
6
4
9
0
5
3
4
4
5
0
4
4
4
4
8
1
5
2
0
4
4
6
6
1
7
5
6
8
4
8
7
5
7
2
6
4
0
4
9
2
5
6
5
7
1
0
4
8
5
6
3
2
4
9
5
5
4
0
7
1
4
7
1
6
7
1
7
5
0
5
5
5
6
5
4
9
5
8
9
5
2
2
4
9
4
5
3
3
6
3
6
5
7
5
6
3
8
4
6
2
4
5
2
4
4
5
Y
G
-
A
1
0
4
6
3
4
4
1
Y
G
-
1
B
0
7
5
2
5
7
1
2
5
9
3
6
5
0
5
3
2
7
1
5
5
0
4
5
1
3
5
6
1
5
5
2
7
2
6
6
3
5
5
8
7
6
4
3
4
9
7
5
1
0
4
3
4
4
6
1
4
3
5

Proj
#
 Principal
 Genealogist
A-26  Coni Dubois Zelotes (1828 NY - 1902 TiogaCoPA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 14 13 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 16 19 17 36 37 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 9 12 20 15 15 14 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-26  Coni Dubois
A-01  Dick Allen Sylvanus (1823 CAN - 1865 MI) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 23 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 37 15 9 16 12 25 27 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-01  Dick Allen
A-17  Larry Allen Harvey (c1810 NY - 1891 NY) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 A-17  Larry Allen
A-04  Angeline Fowler Phineas (say 1800 VT - say 1846 [OH]) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 37 38 11 12 A-04  Angeline Fowler
A-13  Nancy Barton Samuel1(of BraintreeMA)->Samuel2(-1705 Bridgewater) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 1717 37 38 11 12 A-13  Nancy Barton
A-28  Eileen Parrott Samuel1(of BraintreeMA)->James2(-1714 TisburyMA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 19 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 38 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-28  Eileen Parrott
A-22  Marlon Allen Samuel1(of BraintreeMA)->Samuel2(-1705 Bridgewater) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 37 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 9 10 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-22  Marlon Allen
A-27  Margaret Canella Clarence Safford (1867 PA - 1959) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 37 39 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 22 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-27  Margaret Canella
A-07  Melava King Samuel1(of BraintreeMA)->Samuel2(-1705 Bridgewater) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-07  Melava King
Root Prototype Haplotype 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11  RPH
A-24  Judy Johanson Elias (abt 1796 - aft 1860 SteubenCoNY) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-24  Judy Johanson
A-14  Sharland Reeves Washington (c1814 [PA?] - aft 1870) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 16 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-14  Sharland Reeves
A-03  Steve-K Allen Spencer (say 1769 CT - c1820 [NY?]) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 15 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 14 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-03  Steve Allen
A-10  Bill-L Allen George (say 1585 - 1648 SandwichMA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 15 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 16 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-10  Bill-L Allen
A-23  Jerry Allen Jerry (c1858 TX - abt 1909) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 12 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-23  Jerry Allen
A-25  Jack Nash Henry Nash (abt 1830 SC - 1871 SC) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 37 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 25 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-25  Jack Nash
A-08  Bill-B Allen John Davidson (1805 TN - 1865 AR) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 A- 8  Bill-B Allen
A-02  John Walden George (say 1585 - 1648 SandwichMA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 13 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 17 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 21 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-02  John Walden
A-05  Judy McMahan Daniel (c1781 - say 1851), of VA 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 A-05  Judy McMahan
A-15  Sarah Hambrick William (say 1749 VA - aft 1Jul1835) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 24 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 A-15  Sarah Hambrick
A-09  Bob Allen Nathan (1799 VA - 1878 GreeneCoIL) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-09  Bob Allen
A-11  Nancy Ross Nathan (1799 VA - 1878 GreeneCoIL) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 19 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 A-11  Nancy Ross
A-06  Tim Allen Isaac(c1833 VA|KY - c1894 MorganCoIL) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 A-06  Tim Allen
A-16  Dave Werner unknown ALLEN 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 15 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 11 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 13 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 25 14 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-16  Dave Werner
A-12  Kathy Phipps Zephaniah (1800 MD|VA - 1899 KS?) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 13 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 18 37 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 1236 12 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 15 15 26 17 12 14 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-12  Kathy Phipps
A-18  Marilyn Krell Zephaniah (1800 MD|VA - 1899 KS?) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 13 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 18 18 37 38 11 12 A-18  Marilyn Krell
A-19  Steve+J(Greg) Joseph Allen (c1776 VA|MD - s1825 OH) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 13 15 17 17 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 18 37 38 11 12 A-19  Steve+J(Greg)
A-20  Steve+J(Leonard) Richard Allen (s1775 VA|MD - s1845 OH) 13 24 14 11 11 14 13 12 12 14 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 32 13 15 17 17 10 10 19 23 16 15 17 18 37 38 11 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 13 11 13 11 11 12 12 36 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 12 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 14 24 13 9 11 20 15 16 15 26 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 A-20  Steve+J(Leonard)

You may click on highlighted Project#s (like A-01) to see the posted pedigree for a particular test subject. Click on highlighted Researcher names, like Dick Allen to go to the project directory that shows the full names of the members, and provides clickable e-mail links for the names highlighted.

A synthetic Root Prototype Haplotype (RPH) has been contructed to represent the most likely (unmutated) haplotype of the Most Recent Common Patriarchal Ancestor (MRCPA) of all the members of this project. In most cases the marker values of this RPH are those which are the most common across the haplotypes that have been extended to 111 markers. Marker values that deviate from those of the RPH are deemed to be mutations, and are highlighted in lime green—or tomato, for multistep mutations. Markers with null values, due to deletions, are rendered in dark seagreen.

Where the multicopy markers DYS464 and YCA (each taken as a whole) diverge in value from those of the RPH, the whole adjacent set of values will be colored yellow green, and will be counted as a single mutation. In the same way, reclOH mutations, which may affect several blocks of separated markers, will be colored orange and treated all as a single mutation for purposes of calculating Genetic Distance.

*** THIS CONTENT WAS STOLEN FROM JOHNBROBB-2Patriarchs.COM IN VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT LAW ***


Last updated 23Apr2022
© John Barrett Robb
Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict Valid CSS 3

*** THIS PAGE WAS STOLEN FROM JOHNBROBB.COM IN VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT LAW ***