Problem solving advice

[Norfolk Nan]

I’ve mentioned my Green brickwall on the forum so won’t go into details again but any advice for a DNA newbie would be happily accepted. I have my known line of Greens stopping beside another Green family in the same village, and the two families may be related. I’m hoping my recent Ancestry DNA test will help me solve this puzzle. My own tree is linked to my test results but I’m wondering how to include the detailed tree for the other family - is it possible, is it necessary, is it helpful? Ancestry makes lots of links based on trees so It seems useful to an inexperienced me.

I’m talking about a match starting around the 6th g-grandparent and sibling level so any modern match would be way down in the 30cm or less range, I think. There aren’t many trees in this catchment so I was wondering if filling in the known tree right as far to today as possible and matching surnames to test matches is a better option? Or, any other suggestions based on experience please? It’s new territory for me so please share your expertise. Thank you.

[Mick Loney]

If you have as many of your direct ancestors in your tree on Ancestry, that should be enough, but it may help if you include some of their descendants on there as well, as this will make it easier for Ancestry to spot common relatives with potential DNA matches. Remember, the trees of your potential DNA matches may not go back far enough to contain your common ancestor, but they may contain some of your distant cousins.

If someone has done a DNA test, and are directly related to these ‘Greens’, Ancestry will spot if their DNA Matches yours and if so, indicate where it thinks your trees match. i.e. who are your common ancestors.

[Norfolk Nan]

Thanks Mick, my tree is pretty full but, as far as I can tell, there aren’t many other trees linked to the man I’m hoping to call an ancestor. I’ve a long list of matches for that side of my tree but a large proportion don’t provide any information with which to make a stab at a rough and ready tree. Nothing unusual I guess

[AdrianBruce]

I wouldn't hold out a lot of hope for someone descended from "the other lot" to do their DNA, but I would advise: create the unrelated Greens, and extend their tree as far as possible / as far as you feel the urge. Who knows, they might have an easier connection back into history than yours? Doing that might (or might not) help Ancestry's ThruLines facility to connect different profiles, or might provide you with a clue (e.g. a reference in a will that you suddenly realise refers to one of yours...).

(Creating an unrelated person in Ancestry is an utter pain - what you have to do is create that person as a relative of yours and then break the link. An utter failure of imagination by Ancestry... See https://support.ancestry.co.uk/s/articl ... -to-a-Tree and go down to "An unrelated person" at the bottom.)

[Norfolk Nan]

Thanks Adrian. ThruLines is a bugbear with me. It insists on inserting incorrect people, including a wife of a great grandfather who didn’t provide a child as my direct ancestors. It might be ignorance on my part but I haven’t found how to put these errors right.

I had thought of adding the other Greens to my tree (with fingers crossed for the fib) hoping that helps identify their direct descendants.

I’ve uploaded my test results to MyHeritage for free and have matches but for more help I will need to pay and upgrade. Is this worth doing?

Thank you.

[Mick Loney]

Thrulines is only reflecting what other people put in their tree. If they’ve screwed up, there is nothing you can do, other than tell the tree owner the error of their ways.

I’d refrain from putting people in your tree that shouldn’t really be there, as that is just going to cause the same sort of problem for others that you are complaining about above, and run the risk of others copying it to their trees.

My advice is be patient, Rome wasn’t built in a day. You never know, tomorrow a new DNA match may appear to solve your problem.

[AdrianBruce]

... I had thought of adding the other Greens to my tree (with fingers crossed for the fib) hoping that helps identify their direct descendants. ...

Whatever you do, don't "fib" because it'll then get copied for ever and a day!

What you can do is either:
1. Add them to your Ancestry "tree" but make sure they are NOT connected to your own relatives - in effect this gives you two unconnected trees within your Ancestry tree (sorry, I'm using "tree" in two senses here)

or

2. Create a completely new, completely separate Ancestry tree for them - this is what I've done for investigation in the past, especially to see what hints I get. Use menu option Trees / Create & Manage Trees - then use the option to "Create a new Tree". The "Home Person" is up to you but should be someone in the "other lot". This might be safer than option 1..... You can also make this tree private, etc.

[Norfolk Nan]

Thanks both. I do have a separate tree on Ancestry for the other Green family so it’s there and searchable. I guess I hoped to link it to my DNA test and find the answer easily but it hasnt worked like that. As Mick says, I’ll have to be patient. Or perhaps I have my answer already - there is no connection!

However, the DNA match list has a search facility including matching surnames in match trees (still with me?). I tried that, using two names connected to the other Green family but more recent. To my delight, almost 20 matches were listed, suggesting their published trees included these names. Despite my best efforts I can’t find one example. I’m dispirited. I’m probably doing something wrong but I’m giving up trying to cut corners and will wait for a true match to crop up the usual way.

Thanks both.

[avaline]

Unfortunately when your likely 'common ancestor' is as far back as 6xG Grandparents, you're facing an uphill struggle.

Estimates I've read suggest that fewer than 5% of your 7th cousins would share any DNA with you, and for those that do it would usually be around 15cMs or less.

I'm still fairly new to it myself, but I've found Thrulines pretty useless.

Despite this, I've managed to find three good matches that prove my 3xG Grandmother married twice (they descend from the children with her first husband, whereas I descend from the second family).

Thrulines doesn't show these people as a match though, as their trees have her surname spelt wrongly, don't know about her second marriage, and have the wrong death for her (only 35 years out!). The matches ranged between 18-38cM.

I think in your shoes I'd add as many generations as you can for this other family without connecting them to anyone in your existing tree, then search for other trees that have the same people. You can then click on the name of each tree owner to see if you share any DNA with them.

That's sort of how I found my matches - it was a little bit of a slog, but well worth it.

[Norfolk Nan]

Thanks, Aveline. Every bit of advice is useful. I had expected any match between my Green chaps to be quite small so what you say doesn't surprise me. I'm also adopting the process you mention - the disappointing thing is that I frequently find trees featuring 'the neighbour' but so often have different combinations of descendents which means either they are wrong or I am (and of course I'm never wrong ). I think I'll fall off my chair in shock if I found a completely matching branch for this chap.