Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Am I getting too much exercise jumping to conclusions?

The next set of results (37 markers) are in for (Eckford:F-27), a descendent of the Robert who married Elizabeth YOUNG, which places this line closest to that for James and Helen (GOODFELLOW) Fairbairn (sharing marker 570 = 18 with a small group of Lineage 1 "clump 2").
Assuming that the James married to Helen GOODFELLOW, is indeed the James, son of George and Janet (MURRAY) born Kelso 1788, he has a brother Robert. However that Robert is fully accounted for in census and death records, so cannot be this Robert.
Some trees believe the George who married Janet MURRAY is the son of the John who married Helen ANDERSON, which would make him brother to the schoolmaster William (married Margaret SCOTT).
Which is where I'm getting my exercise jumping to several possible conclusions.
William had a second string to his bow, as a surveyor.
This Robert of Eckford (married Elizabeth YOUNG) appears in records as an engineer/surveyor for the Duke of Hamilton.
William is not known to have had a son Robert however, and to the best of my current knowledge, nor do any of his brothers, but maybe this has just changed?
Both the supplementary pages, and the result summary pages have been updated, although for the former, the DNA Signature Chart for Lineage 1 "clump 2" has not been updated - waiting for the last panel of results for that.

The Family Tree DNA Time Predictor shows that (Eckford:F-27) and Doug (GOODFELLOW) F-6 have an 82.6% probability of a common ancestor by 8 generations, and by 12 generations it is 95% (using the setting of no known match within 3 generations).


  1. I have William the schoolmaster down as both having an elder bro George born 1750 @ Nenthorn and also as his second son George born 1780 @ Bowden. I haven't examined either of them beyond their births (yet!) JCPB

  2. Further: I must have been taking too much exercise too - jumped to conclusions; but, if William did have a son Robert it would probably have to have been in 1786. It's the only unclaimed timeslot in the Fairbairn/Scott tot production line. I will look further into it. JCPB

  3. John,
    Robert married to Elizabeth YOUNG said he was 52 in the 1851, although the writing is unclear, and it might be 62.
    Not yet identified in 1841 - there's a challenge for you, it might identify who his assumed first wife, father of his son John, might be.
    Take a look at the DNA signature chart for "clump 2" for how I've actually tentatively linked him into the overall jigsaw.