More Clues on the Brooker line

New College Chapel Interior 2 Oxford UK - Diliff 
New College, Oxford, by Diliff (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 or GFDL], via Wikimedia Commons

Following advice on the Berks & Bucks Ancestry & Genealogy Group on Facebook, I commissioned fresh searches county indexes by the Oxfordshire FHS (Family History Society).  It hasn't done anything to confirm my Hagbourne hypothesis.  However, it did uncover my 6xgreat grandparents Brooker's marriage, and it wasn't somewhere that I would have looked.  They were married 1st November 1746 at New College, Oxford.  Both bride and groom recorded Long Wittenham as their parish.  I would not have expected such a grand wedding venue for my ancestors.  It turns out that it was quite common for people, even poor people, from parishes in the surrounding countryside, to be married in Oxford, as many of the clerics were also academics within the colleges.  The entry also gives me Mary's maiden surname - GARDINER.

I now have TWO suspects for 6xgreat grandfather John Brooker's origins.

  1. The Hagbourne John Brooker, son of John and Ursula.  Baptised 1723.
  2. An Oxford St Mary John Brooker, son of a John.  Baptised 1723.

The agent for the Oxfordshire FHS search, did warn that he felt it a little unlikely that my John was the son of John and Ursula Brooker of Hagbourne.  The reason being, that other than "John", there is little evidence of other family forenames such as Ursula or Elizabeth.  However ... it looks as though Mary Gardiner herself was baptised in 1717 at East Hagbourne.  If she hailed from there, then that provides a strong correlation.  If I do eventually tie my John Brooker to the Hagbourne Brookers, then I have a fair chance of extending the line back to 1642.

Another interesting thought, is that Hagbourne if accepted, does take us in the right direction for a piece of DNA evidence.  We know that in the 1740's, a Thomas Chandler lived at Basingstoke, Hampshire, that shared our Y-DNA.  At some point, our Brooker line and that Chandler line must have had a common paternal ancestor.  Hagbourne is taking us in that diection.  Only 28 miles by road from Basingstoke.  A massive assumption here.  Chase our paternal Y-DNA line back further, we KNOW that it arrived in Southern England, from Asia, most likely during the Medieval period.  Basingstoke is on a direct trajectory between Hagbourne and Southampton docks.

The search goes on.

Additional News

The marriage certificate of George Barber and Maria Ellis at St Michael, South Elmham, Suffolk, turned up in the post this morning.  No nasty surprises.  It utterly confirmed that my George Barber, was the son of Robert Barber, etc.  Another marriage date added to the tree.  This couple were ancestors of my grandmother Doris Brooker.

Family Tree Quality Control

As I wait for my Living DNA test results, I've been investing more research time into my documentary trail.  This has included ordering several birth - marriage - death certificates from the GRO (General Register Office, UK Gov), and further checks, rechecks, and searches online using Ancestry.co.uk, Findmypast.co.uk, and FamilySearch.org.

Filling in the blanks.  looking for correlations.

I've recently found an incorrect ancestor.  A Nicholls on my mother's side.  The usual case.  I had found a perfect candidate in one very close parish.  I followed their trail, added three generations including heaps of siblings.  On recent review though - I find another candidate, in another close parish.  Sure enough, when I investigate all of the evidence - this one was far more likely.  It was backed by census claims.  I even found my previous candidate living with another family years later in a census.

I still make mistakes in genealogy, and expect to continue to do so.  In this case, I've had to crop away at a bushy branch and replace it relatively, with a twig.  It's all about pursuing the truth though, isn't it?  To the best our abilities to use data that is available.

The new GRO certificates haven't revealed anything revolutionary so far.  All of them though have turned out to belong.  The marriage of great grandparents Fred Smith to Emily Barber gave me their non-conformist chapel location in Norwich, their marriage date, and confirmed everything that I knew about them at this point of their life.  The death of my 2xgreat grandfather Henry Brooker gave me his death date, cause of death, last job, last address in Dartford, and was registered by my great grandfather (living at the same address as during the 1939 register).  without seeing the certificate, I could have never have proven that this was my Henry Brooker on the indexes.

I also purchased the birth certificate of my 3xgreat uncle Henry Shawers.  i was hoping that it might give some clues to my elusive 3xgreat grandfather Henry Shawers, and onto his origins.  Nothing there I'm afraid, although again, it belonged to the right family.  Confirms that he was who I thought.

Now I'm waiting on the marriage certificate of George Barber to Maria Ellis.  I have some concerns on this one, touch wood no unpleasant surprises.

Breaking through? My Brooker line - the Hagbourne records

Hagbourne St Andrews, Berkshire.  By Andrew Mathewson [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.

I have recently become aware, that there were Brooker families, including John Brookers born circa 1722 in the parish of Hagbourne, only 5 km / 3 miles by road, from Long Wittenham, where my ancestor john Brooker, married to a Mary, fathered several children between 1749 and 1760.  I'm here collating evidence and data.  The problem is that there are TWO candidates for my direct ancestor in the same parish.  One baptised 1721 (the son of widower, Elizabeth Brooker (nee Fox), and the late John Brooker), the other 1722 (son of John and Ursula Brooker (nee Deadman).  I have to somehow decide which one it is, if either.  Both families may descend from a Thomas and Anne Brooker, that were in the village, married before 1662.

Hagbourne Parish Register Transcript CD-ROM OXF-WAL02

Marriages

  • 1679 15 Jun BROOKER Thomas to HIDE Lettice
  • 1694 6 Oct BRUCKER John to HEWS Martha
  • 1698 12 Nov BRUCKER Lawrance to WOODLEY Anne
  • 1700 5 Jun HOLDER John Aston Upthorpe to BRUCKER Mary widow
  • 1714 20 Jun JONES Edward to BROOKER Mary
  • 1716 24 Feb BROOKER John to DEADMAN Ursula
  • 1720 27 Nov BROOKER John to FOX Elizabeth
  • 1721 3 Sep CHILD Luke to BROOKER Anne
  • 1728 23 Feb BROOKER John to ACRES Sarah

Baptisms

  • 1662 Apr 1 BROOKER John s. Thomas & Anne
  • 1667 Sep 3 BROOKER Anne d. Thomas & Anne
  • 1673 11 BROOKER William s. Thomas & Anne
  • 1679 Apr 5 BROOKER Marie d. Thomas & Anne
  • 1680 Aug 8 BROOKER Marie d. Thomas & Lettice

Gap

  • 1696 May 21 BRUCKER Anne d. Thomas & Lettice

Gap

  • 1712 18 BRUCKER John (no parents!)
  • 1714 18 BRUCKER Anne d. William & Elizabeth
  • 1714 24 BRUCKER Martha (no parents)
  • 1718 May 4 BROOKER Mary d. John & Ursula
  • 1719 Jan 3 BROOKER Elizabeth d. John & Ursula
  • 1721 Oct 21 BROOKER John s. Elizabeth widow
  • 1722 Dec 2 BROOKER John s. John & Ursula
  • 1725 Oct 24 BROOKER William s. John & Ursula
  • 1730 Dec 13 BROOKER William s. John & Ursula

BURIALS (FindMyPast Berkshire Burial Index)

  • 30 Mar 1721 John Brooker St Andrews, Hagbourne (appears to be late husband of Elizabeth Fox?)
  • 12 May 1745 John Brooker St Andrew, Hagbourne
  • 4 jun 1783 John Brooker St Andrew Hagbourne

MARRIAGES (FindMyPast England Marriages 1538-1973)

23 Feb 1728  John Brooker to Sarah Acres, Hagbourne.

MARRIAGES (FindMyPast Sarum Marriage Licence)

02 Oct 1745 John Brooker to Ann Dearlough at Blewbury.  grooms parish Hagbourne.

So, 

Likely founder is Thomas Brooker & Anne married before 1662, OR Thomas Brooker that married Lettice Hide 1679, OR John Brucker and Martha Hews that married Oct 1694.

Both John Seniors (circa 1695) could have been grandchildren of Thomas & Anne Brooker.  One, son of Thomas & Lettice.  The other of John & Martha.

John Senior 1 married Elizabeth Fox in Nov 1720.  He died Mar 1721!  She gave birth to son John Junior 1 in Oct 1721.

John Senior 2 married Ursula Deadman in Feb 1716.  They had children between 1718 and 1730 - Mary, Elizabeth, William (x2), and son John junior 2 in Dec 1722.  He may have died May 1745.

Surviving in village was a John Brooker that married Ann Dearlough Oct 1745.  Junior 1 or 2?

My John Brooker had children at Long Wittenham 1749 - 1760 with his wife mary (married circa 1748?)  Included a Martha, Anne, John, Sarah, and Mary.  Junior 1 or 2?

  • Gen 11: Thomas & Anne (mar. before 1662) Did the same Thomas later marry Lettice? 
  • Gen 10: John (b. 1662.  Mar. 1694 to Martha)  John (mar Ursula 1716), John (mar Elizabeth 1720), William (b. 1673.)
  • Gen 9: John 1 (b 1721 John & Elizabeth) John 2 (b 1722 John & Ursula) William (John & Ursula 1725)

Resolution.

I need to see marriages of all John seniors (1694, 1716, 1720).  Two could have been same guy (2nd as widower).  I do think there were two John Seniors, because John & Ursula had kids contemporary to John & Elizabeth.  Martha could have died, replaced by Elizabeth?

Update.

A member of the Facebook Berks and Bucks Ancestors and Genealogy Group, dug up the burial of Junior 1.  Widow Elizabeth's young son tragically died, and was buried at Hagbourne 12th January 1723.

Now can I tie Junior 2 (son of John Brooker and Ursula (nee Deadman) to my ancestor, John Brooker, married to Mary, at Long Wittenham?

Two Fathers and more Online Genealogy

The above photograph is of my great great grandfather, William Bennett Baxter, born at Gressenhall Workhouse, Norfolk, England, in 1846.

Well, I've finally updated my Gramps genealogical database for the first time for months.  It's grown!  It now includes details for over 1,600 ancestors and family relatives.  I have to admit, a lot of the swell is down to online genealogical research, using Findmypast.co.uk, Ancestry.co.uk, Norfolk FHS, BMD, FamilySearch.org, etc.  I DON'T ever resort to copying off other people's trees, although I do at times, when I'm stuck, check them to see how other's think, as the hints that they should be.  To be honest though, I often don't agree with their conclusions.  

I do use Search.  I do use transcriptions - but whenever the original image is available (as it increasingly is now), I do verify with it.  Quite often, transcribers get it wrong.  I do also enjoy browsing through digitalised images of parish records, looking for siblings and clues.

Two Fathers

With traditional documentary-based genealogical research, we of course cannot prove a biological line.  We can rarely identify NPEs (Non-Parental Events).  All that we can do, is do our very best to track names through family interviews, documents and records.  Wherever possible, we should verify connections, check and record sources, look for correlations.  This isn't however always possible.  The genealogist has to then decide whether they have enough evidence to connect an ancestor.

For quite some time, I was proud that I had recorded all of my ancestors up to and including great great grandparent level.  However, at great great great grandparent level (Generation 6), I had three missing direct ancestors.  All three of them were the unrecorded father's of three great great grandparents, born illegitimate in Norfolk during the 19th Century.  I had 29 out of 32 biological ancestors recorded for Generation 6.

Then recently, I cracked two of them!  At least I have one evidence for their names.  Two of my illegitimate born great great grandparents, William Bennett Baxter, and Harriet Barber, were actually a married couple.  They were both illegitimate, and had both been born in Gressenhall Union Workhouse close to East Dereham in Norfolk.  William was base-born there  to a pauper named Eliza Baxter.  That she gave him the middle name "Bennett", and there had been Bennetts in the area, always made me suspect that his biological father was believed to have belonged to a Bennett Family, but which?

Then some research online, and it was a back to basics research that cracked it.  I was sure that I had seen their 1866 marriage certificate or entry, at nearby Swanton Morley before, probably years ago.  But if I had seen it before, and I now suspect that I hadn't, then I missed the key.  They BOTH named their alleged biological fathers in their marriage register entry!  How could I have not seen this before?

William Bennett Baxter claimed that he was the son of a labourer, by the name of ... William Bennett.  Harriet Baxter (nee Barber), claimed that her father was a labourer by the name of William Barker.  It's only their word, on their marriage entry - to their knowledge, but I've accepted that testimony, and have added ancestors on those lines.  I haven't yet found much about William Bennett. But I did quickly find more on my 4 x great grandfather William Barker.  He was a shoe maker in East Dereham, the son of a master boot maker.  Perhaps his family didn't approve.  Two years later he married an Elizabeth Wales.

My Fan Chart of Direct Ancestry, updated. I now have 234 direct ancestors named.

Other New Ancestors

The majority (but not all) of my newly claimed ancestors have been Norfolk ancestors on my Father's paternal side, balancing things up rather nicely.  Some of the newly discovered branches include a substantial number of new ancestors recorded both in Dereham, Norfolk, and in the nearby village of Swanton Morley.  They were two very ancestral homes in my tree.  I've recently extended the Baxter of Dereham line back safely to the 1760's.  I've also traced more of my great grandmother Faith Brooker's (nee Baxter) tree, including her direct maternal line to a Rachael Bradfield of Dereham.  Her daughter Elizabeth was baptised there in 1745.  In 1767, Elizabeth Bradfield married our 7 x great grandfather Solomon Harris at Swanton Morley.

I've also extended the line going back from my paternal grandmother (Doris Brooker nee Smith).  I've found more of her ancestors in the South Norfolk village of Hedenham, stretching back to a James Goodram, the son of John and Lydia Goodrum.  James was baptised at Hedenham in 1780.

Finally, I've tidied a few dates on my mother's side, and even started to reassess the ancestry of my children's mother.

Here is a count of direct ancestors from a Gramps report:

Generation 1 has 1 individual. (100.00%)

Generation 2 has 2 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 3 has 4 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 4 has 8 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 5 has 16 individuals. (100.00%)

Generation 6 has 31 individuals. (96.88%)

Generation 7 has 55 individuals. (85.94%)

Generation 8 has 53 individuals. (41.41%)

Generation 9 has 44 individuals. (17.97%)

Generation 10 has 16 individuals. (3.52%)

Generation 11 has 6 individuals. (0.59%)

Total ancestors in generations 2 to 11 is 235. (11.68%)

That's enough genealogy for a while!  Living DNA report next.  Sample was activated and returned.

Story of L. My Big Y Test Results

The above Photograph of the Sumela Monastery, Trabzon Mountains, former Pontus, by reibai of Flickr under Creative Commons Licence.  Close to the home of my nearest recorded Big Y cousins today.

The Big Y Test

The FTDNA results came back.  As with the Y111 test results, they were three weeks earlier than scheduled.  So what has this test told me, about the story of my Y-DNA, and it's exotic L-M20 genetic marker? It was not a disappointment.

Warning

Remember, I am only telling the story of one single line of descent.  Y-DNA merely provides a convenient genetic marker of mutation, that can be compared and traced with others.  It does not define anyone.  From an anthropological perspective, haplogroups are of value in a collective sense - to a population.  I no doubt share the story of my Y with many more people alive today.  I may be a carrier of it, but it is also your story, just as the haplogroups that you carry, are also my story - through our mothers and shared descent.  Y-DNA passes strictly on only one line of descent - from father to son.  It is not inherited nor passed down by women.  Only on that one strict paternal line of descent. The Y haplogroup is only a convenient marker of one line.

The Y Haplogroup L

Y Haplogroup K formed in a paternal lineage of hunter-gatherer fathers and sons, that share a MRCA (most recent common ancestor) during the Upper Palaeolithic, circa 45,400 years ago.  Where did my Y ancestors live at that time?  We think that they lived in Western or Southern Asia.  Iran is a favourite proposal. My earlier Y ancestors had most likely exited Africa 20,000 years earlier, and were well established in Asia.  They had most likely met and confronted another archaic human species, The Neanderthal. This was however, a time of great expansion by humans.  The first anatomically modern humans had recently entered Europe, while other moderns u were arriving in Australia.  The Ice Age was in a flux, but glaciation was advancing.

Our most recent common Y ancestor to carry Y Haplogroup LT lived circa 42,600 years ago.  Then a mutation in the Y-DNA lead to the formation of Y Haplogroup L, with a most recent common ancestor 23,200 years ago, close to the time of the Last Glacial Maximum, when ice sheets were reaching their maximum positions.  K, LT, and early L, most likely all originated in Upper Palaeolithic hunter-gatherer populations living during the last Ice Age, in the area of modern day Iran and Iraq.  It was a time of increased stress on human populations, that were having to adapt to some severe environmental challenges, and may have at times faced isolation into a number of Ice Age Refuges.

Around 18,400 years ago, M317 appeared on their Y-DNA, then circa 14,000 years ago, my line (L-SK1214), diverged away from L-M349.  L1b today, occurs mainly in Western Asia, from Anatolia to Afghanistan.  L1a occurs mainly in India, Sri Lanka, and in Pakistan.  Where did all of this occur?  We don't know yet.  There is so little data.  Some other divergences popped up in Southern and Central Asia.  Some of these sub clades in India and Pakistan, are the most numerous of L today.  However, the finger keeps pointing at Western Asia, as the source of much of L divergence, particularly in L1b sub clades such as M317, and M349.  But we don't yet know what part Europe played if any.  Both M317 and M349 crops at low frequencies across Europe, particularly along the south coast, and in Italy.  L2 (L595) crops at at low frequency almost exclusively in Europe.  Altogether, L forms only around 0.3% across Europe as a whole, yet, this diversity sits at low frequencies scattered across the continent.

Iran may equally be a key.  We believe that it could have been home to L for a very long time, but we have very little data from that part of the world.  L is also missing from ancient DNA.  A hypothesis has been proposed that some early Neolithic farmers from Anatolia, may have carried L, and may have carried it into Europe for example.  All speculation, but it could explain some of these old divisions of L that we are starting to see across Europe and Western Asia.  Some of the earliest Eurasian L Y-DNA extracted so far has only very recently been reported - in populations of Iron Age Huns, that had migrated westwards into Europe.

My Big Y Results

So what did the test tell me about my line?  Was I descended from a recent immigrant from India or Pakistan?  An Iron Age Hun?  An Italian?  How about a Pontic Greek, or a Persian?  Where do I fit in?

The answers provided by the Big Y were a bit of a shock.  I had 90 novel SNPs in my Y-DNA, that have not been seen before in any other Big Y Test, not even in any of the other 23 Big Y test results within the FTDNA Y Haplogroup L project.  The last SNP to terminate, that has already been reported, was SK1414.  The administrator has not yet found it's non-FTDNA origin, but believes that it came from a test in Iran.  Therefore, my sub clade can now be declared as L-SK1214.

My nearest FTDNA Big Y matches were two from Pontic Greek ancestry.  However, here is the crunch.  The project administrator calculates that even these testers, my closest known Y cousins that have so far tested to Big Y level, last shared a common Y ancestor with me 13,000 years ago.

When I have my BAM file, and submit it to the Yfull tree, it should make a significant alteration to the branches, as my lineage of SK1414, appears to branch off from L1b, perhaps only 1000 years after L1b appeared, and before the PH8 lineage associated with my Pontic Greek cousins formed.

L-SK1414 (L1b2c)

So my new terminal SNP SK1414 separated from the Pontic Greek PH8 lineage around 13,000 years ago.  What was happening in Western Asia then?  This was towards the end of the last Cold Stage.  There were some cold fluctuations in the Ice Age climate, with some advances in glaciation, before they finally started to melt back for the present interglacial period.  Perhaps some of these climatic stresses were involved?  a severe freeze took place around 12,700 years ago. 

My most recent common ancestors to any other Big Y testers - the Pontic Greek samples, lived somewhere in Western Asia around 13,000 years ago.  They most likely were Western Asian ibex hunter-gatherers.  The earliest sign of agriculture in the region, the Pre Pottery Neolithic A doesn't take off until around 10,300 years ago.

Where have my Y ancestors been over the past 13,000 years?  That is the big question that I am probably unlikely to answer within my lifetime.  More testing, by more L testers in the future may reveal more, as would the results of more ancient DNA from excavations.  If I had to bank money on it, I'd say that my Y ancestors were most likely to provenance to the Fertile Crescent of the Neolithic Revolution.  Perhaps in the river valleys of Iraq / Iran.  They may have gone on to take part in the Pre Pottery Neolithic A Culture there.  That might account for their existence over the next few thousands of years.  However, when did my lineage enter Europe?  Did it arrive with Anatolian Early Neolithic farmers?  Or did it arrive later?  Perhaps even, much later?  I just cannot answer that.  Suggestions are most welcome.


The above photograph taken of the excavation of Jarmo, an Early Neolithic village in Iraqi Kurdistan, dated to 9,100 years before present.  From Wikimedia Commons by user Emrad284.

The STR testing, and the matching with the Chandler family might suggest that my Y line arrived in Southern England quite recently, perhaps during the Medieval.  However, I am acutely aware of how very few English have yet tested - that more L could turn up, that rewrite that arrival date.
Unofficial proposed tree by Gökhan Zuzigo

Conclusion

It seems that I have 12,700 years of unwritten or detected family history to research on my paternal line.  The Big Y test told me that I have a hunter-gatherer ancestor, somewhere in Western Asia, most likely Iraq / Iran, perhaps 13,000 years ago.  Then a rather long gap, until the Brooker surname appears on parish registers in the Thames Valley of Southern England, leading down to myself, and onto my son.

The Chandler family, judging by the comparative STR evidence, are Y cousins, with a shared Y ancestry until circa 330 - 700 years ago.

That's it.  We were missing for a long time.  I'm looking forward to trying to work out where my missing ancestors were for thousands of years.  I'm looking forward to seeing more L1b tests appear on Yfull and on the Y haplogroup L Project.  Please test.

The above photograph on Rock Art in Iran, taken by dynamosquito on Flickr linked here under a Creative Commons Licence.  The Ibex seems to feature frequently in prehistoric rock art in the region, and perhaps was a primary prey of our ancestors.

On the Trail of our Y Ancestor

Locator map Iran South Khorasan Province

Early examinations of the Chandler / Brooker Southern English L-M20 Y haplogroup samples, seem to be suggesting that they share a common ancestor quite recently, perhaps between 300 and 600 years ago.  That might mean that a Y ancestor carried the haplogroup into England, perhaps between the 13th and 17th centuries AD.

Where did that Y-DNA come from?  It could have been carried directly by one Y ancestor from a homeland, or it could have transported to England gradually over many generations, from a homeland in Western Asia.

An early match has been forwarded by Caspian, forum user at Anthropogenica.  It is a 111 STR marker, from Birjand / Southern Khorasan, in Eastern Iran.

Could this be the home of our Brooker family Y ancestors?  That is to say, if I was to trace my father, back to his father, to his father - and to continue along this route, might I eventually find my ancestors on this paternal line, in Eastern Iran?  It's an early possibility.  More data, more tests, might eventually give me a better answer.

The STR evidence linked on a Google Sheet.


Edit. 25th May 2016

Early analysis by Gareth Henson, informally suggests a tmrca (time since most recent common ancestor) between myself and the guy in Eastern Iran, of circa 3,000 years ago, or if you prefer, 1000 BC. That would mean that we shared a common lineage until around the time of the Later Bronze Age in British terms. Our common  Y ancestor most likely lived nearer to his home in Western Asia than to mine in North West Europe. 

That isn't long ago. It might suggest that our most recent common ancestor lived in Western Asia around about the time of a series of tensions and conflicts  between Greeks and Persians.  On the other hand, Anthropogenica user Anabasis, using the Clan McDonald TMRCA Calculator, suggests a more recent date, around 1,800 to 1,500 years ago.  That in his words puts it into a context of "In that times Roman - Sasanian wars happened along Eastern Anatolia. Greek- Persian wars were 1 millennium earlier.".  However, he warns, that STR data is not a trustworthy indicator of a TMRCA.

What I love though, is that it stirs the imagination.  Whether 1,500 years ago, or 3,000 years ago - I, an East Anglian, had a paternal ancestor somewhere most likely, between Eastern Anatolia, and Afghanistan.

The Chandler-Brooker Y haplogroup L1b (L-M317)

Link to STR data for Southern English L M20 (Brooker / Chandler)

My Family Tree DNA Y111 STR test results are in.  Only yesterday, I predicted that ftDNA kit number 29369 could be of particular interest.  That prediction has now been proven correct.  Here is what I have learned since yesterday.

The 12 marker STR kit belonged to a descendant of a Thomas Chandler, that lived 1728 to 1782 at Basingstoke, Hampshire.  Although only 12 markers - it proved a perfect match for my first 12.  100%.  Family Tree DNA rated it's genetic distance as zero.

Basingstoke, Hampshire by modern road is only 32 miles (51 km) from Long Wittenham, Berkshire (now Oxon), where my surname ancestor, John Brooker lived, at the same time.  Based on the limitation of a 12 marker comparison, FTDNA give 71% confidence to the testers sharing a common Y ancestor within 12 generations, and 91% confidence of us sharing a common Y ancestor within 24 generations.  I'd say that suggests that myself and the present day descendant of Thomas Chandler, shared a common Y ancestral lineage until between circa 1500 and 1700.

So most likely, between the 16th and 17th centuries inclusive, the Y chromosome moved between two surnames, what we call an NPE (non parental event).  Usually either illegitimacy, where the Y-DNA detached from the surname of the biological father, or simply, the biological father of an ancestor, was not the husband of their mother.  This event most probably occurred in England, somewhere in the Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxfordshire area.  Both my Brooker lineage record, and the Chandler record, merge somewhere in that area.

It gets better.  Searches on FT-DNA, ySearch, and an email trail, revealed more Chandler Y cousins with an L haplogroup. All together, I have today found two 12 marker STR tests, that match my first 12 markers perfectly, with a prediction of zero genetic distance.  I have found another 12 marker with  slight difference, and a genetic distance of 1.  I have found a 37 marker test with some differences, but that still gives a genetic distance of 3.  A comparison with the Y37 test result, predicts 78% confidence of sharing a most recent common ancestor with me within 12 generations, and a 99% confidence of us sharing common Y descent within 24 generations.  This correlates quite nicely with the two perfect 12 marker testers.  All four testers are descended on the paternal line from Chandlers in the Basingstoke area.

The Chandlers of Basingstoke

The FT-DNA Chandler Surname Project is very well managed through the Chandler Family Association.  The three Y12 test kits, that hail from a Basingstoke ancestor, and have proven to belong to the exclusive L M20 Y-DNA haplogroup, have been clustered together as Chandler Group 10.  If our surname was Chandler, rather than Brooker, my Y111 results would fit perfectly into this cluster.  This is because we shared a common paternal lineage, until between 500 and 320 years ago.

Origins of the Chandler-Brooker L1b Y haplogroup

That one has still to be answered.  I'll be consulting others, the Y haplogroup L project administrator, and looking forward to my Big Y test, which is scheduled to take place soon.  However, judging by how very few L-M317 Y haplogroup carriers have so far been recorded in the British Isles, or in North West Europe; I'd dare to propose that the common paternal ancestor of both lines, most likely had not been in England for very long.  Perhaps they could for have example, have carried the Y-DNA here as a 16th or 17th century protestant refugee?  Maybe not, they could have equally been a merchant, an artisan, a servant, a mercenary, or have arrived in another capacity - if indeed they did arrive here that recently.  There is no indication in neither the Brooker or Chandler surname of anything but a medieval English origin (unless originally Bruche, or Chandelier?).

If the common ancestor did arrive that late, where did he come from?  What modern population elsewhere most resembles his Y-DNA?  Hopefully, the Big Y test will help to answer that.  Meanwhile my untrained eyes see correlations within many of the STR markers of people that descend from the Pontic Greek community, that once lived in Eastern Anatolia, and around the Black Sea area of Western Asia.  Of course, the Y-DNA might not have been carried to Southern England from such a homeland within one generation.  It could have been?  There is no sign of any West Asian, Balkan, or Caucasus ancestry within my autosomal DNA.  However, even six to eight generations ago - that could be washed out through recombination - leaving only the Y-DNA to tell what would have otherwise remained a lost untold story.  However, it could have moved across via a number of generations.  It will be worth looking out for any evidence of this on results across the Continent.

See also my earlier posts: