A Wilson Family Tree

DNA

DNA testing is an exciting new method of genealogical research. It can supplement traditional records-based research by suggesting directions for the research or by confirming uncertain links where definitive records have not been found. It can even identify connections for which documentation might never be found; though, at least with current technology, DNA evidence can only identify that there is a connection, but not exactly what that connection is.

There are three kinds of DNA tests: Y chromosome tests, which give information only on the direct paternal ancestry (my Wilson ancestors, in my case); mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) tests, which give information only on the direct maternal ancestry (i.e., mother, mother's mother, mother's mother's mother, etc.); and what are called autosomal DNA (atDNA) tests, which look at all the other chromosomes. I have done DNA tests through four companies now: Family Tree DNA for Y and autosomal tests; the National Geographic Genographic 2.0 test (which is no longer offered) and 23andMe, which look at all three types of DNA; and Ancestry DNA, which just looks at atDNA. Ancestry is by far the biggest in terms of the number of people they have tested, so there is a much greater chance of finding matches with them. As an extra added bonus, Genographic also told me that I have 1.5% neanderthal DNA! (23andMe also has some information about neanderthal DNA.)

Y DNA

My Y chromosome results were unexpected. R1b is by far the most common Y haplogroup in Western Europe and the British Isles, and therefore is by far the most common Y haplogroup for Wilsons (see, for example, the results for the Wilson DNA project at Family Tree DNA), so that is what I expected. When my results came back as haplogroup E3b (notation since changed to E1b1b or E-M215; E1b1b1 or E-M35 is a sub-branch, but encompasses almost all of the haplogroup), I was very surprised. Only a few percent of the population of the British Isles are in this haplogroup. Further testing revealed that I am in a small subgroup even of that haplogroup, a subgroup designated E-V22. Though unexpected, this is pretty interesting. Being in such a small group means that there is a good chance I am related to any other E-V22 Wilsons, though possibly pretty far back. Of further interest is that I have more Ramsey/Ramsay Y DNA matches on FTDNA than Wilson matches. For matches with 37 markers, I have 21 Ramsey matches, eight Ramsay matches, six Wilson matches, three Ferguson matches, one Barnett match, and one Terry match. It looks very much like a Wilson ancestor a few hundred years ago might have been a Ramsey who was adopted by a Wilson. (Of course, adultery is always another possibility as well.) I have a close Y DNA match with a Wilson fourth cousin who also descends from William Adair Wilson (born 1807), so the Wilson/Ramsey switch had to have occurred before that. In an attempt to learn more about the Wilson–Ramsey connection, I have taken FTDNA’s most advanced Y DNA test, called Big Y. Those results show me in a sub-haplogroup designated E-FT452020, which split off from the Ramseys probably in the 1600s or earlier. FTDNA’s time estimate for E FT452020 is 1550±200 years, which is perhaps the time frame for the Wilson–Ramsey split. There are so far two other Wilsons, a Barnett, and a Terry in the E-FT452020 branch. The number of people who have taken the Big Y test and are relatively closely related to me is rather small, so we can’t draw very firm conclusions yet.

Here is a map showing the distribution of haplogroup E1b1b (obtained from The Genetic Atlas):

E1b1b distribution

As shown in the map, E1b1b occurs with greatest frequency in Eastern and Northern Africa, but it does also occur with modest frequency in the parts of Europe that border the Mediterranean Sea. There is more detail on Europe in this map from Eupedia:

E1b1b in Europe

One theory for how E1b1b came to the British Isles is that it might have been introduced by Roman soldiers from the Balkans during the period when Britain was part of the Roman Empire. There is an interesting paper by Steven C. Bird giving evidence for this theory [Journal of Genetic Genealogy 3(2), pp. 26–46, 2007; available at https://jogg.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/32.006.pdf]. The discussion in the paper is specific to E-V13, but E-V22 could have followed a similar route. Another paper, by Leon Boer (unpublished, as far as I know, but available here), suggests that E-V22 in Britain and northwestern Europe originated with Roman soldiers from Egypt. And another paper, by Elizabeth C. Hirschman, discusses DNA evidence for Jewish ancestry among lowland Scots [IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 26(6), pp. 22–42, June 2021; available at https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.26-Issue6/Series-10/B2606102242.pdf]. The Eupedia page referenced above says that E-V22 in Europe is associated with Phoenicians and Jews (see also the discussion at https://e-v22.net/references/). E-V22 is relatively common in the Middle East, where both Phoenicians and Jews originated. The Phoenicians had many colonies along the north African coast and across the Mediterranean in Sicily, Sardinia, and southern Spain, while Jewish people spread throughout the Mediterranean area during the Jewish diaspora. Information about the prehistoric migration of E1b1b within Africa and up to the Mediterranean area can also be found in the Wikipedia articles on haplogroups E-M215 and E-V68, and detail specific to E-V22 can be found at the sub-pages of https://e-v22.net/. There are indications that our Ramsey/Ramsay branch spent some time in northeastern France in the vicinity of a town called Ramousies before migrating to Scotland or England. Here is a map showing the distribution of E-V22 (obtained from the Genographic Project):

E-V22 Heatmap

Mitochondrial DNA

Unlike for Y DNA, my mtDNA results fall into a mitochondrial haplogroup, H, which is very common in Europe. It is believed to have originated in southwest Asia and to have reached Europe before the last glacial maximum (ice age). Most of Europe was depopulated during the glacial maximum because it was covered by a large ice sheet. Then, as the ice sheet retreated (around 15,000 years ago), people moved back into the depopulated area, many of them with mtDNA haplogroup H. (Similarly, this is how Y-DNA haplogroup R1b became so common in Europe.) Today, about 40% of all maternal lineages in Europe belong to haplogroup H. Some additional information is in the Wikipedia article on Haplogroup H.

Here is a map showing the distribution of mtDNA haplogroup H (obtained from the Genographic Project):

H heatmap

Autosomal DNA

In contrast with Y and mt DNA, atDNA results reflect all ancestors, not just the direct paternal or maternal line. However, the results only reflect recent generations rather than thousands of years in the past. A popular product of the atDNA tests is information about the ethnic mixture indicated by your DNA. Be careful not to put too much credence in the reported results, though! From my four atDNA tests, I have received 15 ethnicity reports because the companies keep updating their methods. I have three ethnicity reports each from FTDNA and 23andMe, and eight from Ancestry (!). The results are different enough that it really makes you wonder how meaningful any of it is. Ancestry in particular keeps making changes, and the results can be quite different from one version to the next. I also got my sister to do the Ancestry DNA test a while ago, and it is remarkable how different our ethnicity results are, when in reality they should be the same. At a very high level, all the results are consistent in reporting that we are mostly European. However, the breakdown of regions within Europe is not very consistent. Below is a simplified comparison of nine of my ethnicity results. There were getting to be too many bars in the chart, so I left out Genographic and five of the Ancestry reports. Scandinavia is not listed separately in two of the results; it must have been lumped in with other groups (West–Central Europe or British Isles in this figure). Also, the recent Ancestry reports have lumped together England and northwestern Europe. I'm including that here within the British Isles category, but it's probably really a combination of British Isles and West–Central Europe. That's why the blue bars here are so much longer for Ancestry than the others. In addition, the "Other" is so much higher for 23andMe because of a category they call "Broadly European".

Ethnicities

Some of the results are fairly odd. The second FTDNA results reported me as 51%  East Europe, which does not seem at all reasonable. Their third set of results went back to being much more like the first set, though, and seems much more reasonable. FTDNA 2 and Genographic reported a component from around the Persian Gulf, which seems very unlikely. I think it most likely that my Middle East and North Africa components (which I have lumped together here) are actually ancestors who were in southeastern Europe, with possibly a little infusion from the near Middle East or northern Africa. My paternal grandmother was a full-blooded Croatian, so I am 25% Croatian. The first Ancestry results are the only ones that show a large South Europe component – but they showed quite a bit of that as being from the Iberian Peninsula, which seems unlikely. Probably most of the South Europe and East Europe components are from Croatia (23andMe and Ancestry actually include a Balkan component, which I included in South Europe, but it is very small for me). Anyway, more work is definitely needed on separating out the various European sub-populations.

FTDNA has another report that says "The most up-to-date research into these ancient migrations on the European Continent suggests that there were three major groups of people that have had a lasting effect on present day peoples of European descent: Hunter-Gatherers, Early Farmers, and Metal Age Invaders." They estimate that my DNA is 42% hunter-gatherer (paleolithic) origin, 47% early-farmer (neolithic), and 11% metal-age-invader (Bronze Age).

23andMe has another interesting figure, below. I'm not quite sure what to make of it, but it's interesting. Their short description is as follows: "Ancestry Timeline is a 23andMe feature that enables customers to find out, for each of the ancestries they carry, when they may have had an ancestor in their genealogy who was likely to be a non-admixed representative of that population."

Ancestry Timeline

Autosomal matches to other people who have taken the test are of great interest because they can offer an independent confirmation of parts of the family tree. FTDNA, Ancestry, and 23andMe offer this sort of matching, but Genographic does not. The matches I have obtained are heavily concentrated on my mother's side of the family, at least in part because the families are bigger so I have a lot more relatives on that side of the family. Plus, some of the lines on my father's side of the family are relatively recent immigrants, so many of the potential matches are over in Europe rather than in the U.S. So far, matches have been identified for the following common ancestors (just showing the farthest back for each surname).

Great grandparents:

Great-great grandparents:

Third-great grandparents:

Fourth-great grandparents:

Fifth-great grandparents:

According to FTDNA, their Family Finder test is able to identify relatives out to about the fourth cousin level, possibly a little further. Ancestry has some interesting statements: "Our research shows that third, fourth, and fifth cousins in DNA Circles [an Ancestry product that has been replaced by something called ThruLines] are all likely to share DNA with each other. But relatives who have a common ancestor further than six generations back are less likely to share any DNA. For example, the randomness of genetic inheritance means that there’s only an 11 percent chance that two sixth cousins will share any DNA ... If we look beyond six generations of ancestors, we also find that while two individuals might share DNA and have a common ancestor in their trees, it’s often not because they inherited their shared DNA from that ancestor. Because of the way modern populations have grown, individuals who share DNA are often related through multiple ancestors.... Our research shows that descendants of an ancestor who lived more than six generations ago have more DNA in common with other descendants of that ancestor than they’d be expected to. This discrepancy increases the more generations you go back in time and suggests that descendants are actually related through multiple ancestors". Taking that into account, I have truncated the above list at fifth-great grandparents (and even then, some of the matches listed might be misleading).
Note: Some of the information in these pages is uncertain. Please let me know of errors or omissions using the email link above.    ...Mike Wilson
Page updated September 2024