By Hellerick (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons.  Modified by Paul Brooker.

I've created this distribution map of known Y haplogroup L, L1b2c or L-SK1414. This is my Y-DNA haplotype.  Not a lot of dots there are there?  This is how rare that this clade is.  L1a and L1b most likely (in my opinion) originated during the last Ice Age circa 18,000 years ago, south of the Caucasus, and west of the Caspian Sea in Western Asia.  In other words, in the area of present day Armenia, Azerbaijan, and North-west Iran.  Again, I emphasise, that is just my opinion, looking at present-time evidence.

Y haplogroup L itself may have diverged between L1 and L2, not so much earlier, or so far away from this region.  Again, just my present opinion.

My sub clade of L1b, is so rare, that it is impossible to say.  As can be seen from the map.  However, this is my blog, so I'm going to push out on this one.  My very best guess would be further to the East than it's parent.  I suspect South East of the Caspian Sea, in what is now Eastern Iran.  I could well be wrong.  We have so few tests from nearby Afghanistan for example.  So far, the SNP SK1414 has only been reported twice.  1) in Makran, SW Pakistan, in a Balochi speaking man.  Balochi is an Iranian language, closely related to North-West Iranian languages.  Researchers suggest that the Balochi people of Makran, largely migrated from south west of the Caspian.

The only other guy in the world so far confirmed is little old me, an Englishman.  I trace my surname (direct paternal) line back to the Thames Valley of Oxfordshire / Berkshire 270 years ago.  If my biological line follows that.  A number of STR testers of English descent appear connected to me by STR analysis.  They all descend from Thomas Chandler, who lived around the same time as my earliest recorded ancestor - only 32 miles away at Basingstoke.

From all of the evidence, I conclude that my Y ancestral line moved, probably in one generation, from Western Asia, perhaps from he edge of Persia, to Southern England conservatively between 2,000 and 400 years ago.  Although I would speculate between 1,600 and 600 years ago - during the Medieval or close by.

By Crates (Own work) [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC BY-SA 4.0-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.  Unmodified.

Introduction - Y-DNA, Haplogroups, SNPs, Haplotypes

The Y chromosome, and it's Y-DNA, are copied from father to son, down a strictly paternal lineage.  If I were to trace my entire direct ancestry back, I have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents, sixteen great great grandparents.  Yet out of those sixteen great great grandparents (generation 5), who were born only circa 160 years ago, only one carried the Y-DNA that was passed down to me.  My eight great great grandmothers did not not inherit a Y chromosome from their fathers.  Most likely, my other seven great great grandfathers, carried distinctive differently marked Y-DNA.  Yet all sixteen biological great great grandparents have contributed to my overall atDNA (autosomal DNA).  Only one gave me my Y-DNA.  So you can see that Y-DNA represents only one narrow lineage.

Y-DNA, may on the face of it, appear to offer a limited understanding of total biological ancestry.  All sixteen of my great great grandparents were direct ancestors, not just the Y great great grandfather.  However, this lineage offers us evidence that can be genetically tracked, then mapped into relationship.  It could be done to ascertain parental, or non parental events.  It can be used to check the biological validity of relationship to cousins.  As more people investigate and record their haplogroups, haplotypes, STR markers, and SNPs, so we can for example, start to use them to map biological relationship further back.  Y-DNA is particularly useful, not only because of it's markers, but also because it can be plotted to surname studies.  In Western societies, the surname often follows the Y lineage for several generations.

However, Y-DNA (nor the maternal mtDNA) evidence doesn't just stop there.  As more people investigate, submit, and record their data from around the World - and as anthropologists and archaeologists add ancient DNA data from ancient and provenanced human remains to that record, so we can build and plot a world map of the human family, how it relates, how it was distributed globally throughout prehistory.

Both Y and mt DNA carries mutation markers, that define a Haplogroup. A haplogroup is a family of shared descent.  These haplogroups are ancient.  The paternal Y-DNA haplogroup that this resource page is dedicated to has been designated as L.

However, mutations do not stop with the formation of a new haplogroup.  They continue through the generations.  As lineages divide between different sons, across many generations, so these mutations in the Y-DNA for example, continue to accumulate down the diverging lineages that once shared common descent.  We are all unique.  The sub clade of L that this page focuses on is L1b.  All male carriers of L1b will carry a SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) on their Y-DNA that has been designated as M317. This SNP will be downstream of another SNP that has been designated as M22.  Finally, a Y-DNA can be said to have a terminal SNP.  A terminal, refers not to the Haplogroup (in this case L), but can be used to define right down to the last SNP on the Y-DNA, that is shared with others on a record.  If someone for example, carries Y-DNA that is proven (or predicted by comparison) to be Y Haplogroup L, and to carry M317, then their Y terminal could be designated as L-M317, or alternatively, as L1b.  This is also sometimes referred to as a haplotype.  However, a haplotype can also refer to a particular STR.

Y Haplogroup L M20

The above image illustrates a modern day distribution of Y Haplogroup L (M20) as proposed and created by Anthropogenica user Passa.

Y Haplogroup K formed from Y Haplogroup IJK in the Y-DNA 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 these Y ancestors live at that time?  We think that they lived in Western or Southern Asia.  Iran is a favourite proposal. 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 modern humans were arriving in Australia.  The Ice Age was in a flux, but glaciation was advancing.

The 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 Syria, Iraq, Iran or Pakistan.  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.  Some of these Upper Palaeolithic, Ice Age hunter-gatherer refuges may have been close to the Black Sea, others close to the Caspian Sea, but they were most likely located somewhere between Eastern Anatolia, and Eastern Iran, south of the Caucasus.

L1 / L2 Divergence - the Odd L2's

The oldest divergence within Y Haplogroup L.  L1, as characterised by the SNP M22, diverged from L2, as characterised by the SNP L595.  L2 was only recently discovered, and forced an ISOGG revision of Y Haplogroup L and it's nomenclature that is still causing problems.  In this article, unless stated otherwise, I am using 2017 Nomenclature.  L2 or L-L595 is very rare, but has so far cropped up sporadically across Western Eurasia, including in Azeribaijan, Turkey, Sardinia, England, and Tartaristan.

That is L2 dealt with.  However, most Y Haplogroup L falls into L1. Let us start to look at the main branches of L1.  Remember, L1 is defined by the SNP M22:

Proposed Migration Map of L-M22 (L1) by Phylogeographer at https://phylographer.com/mygrations/?

The Big L1 Split - L1a and L1b

As can be seen above, this split occurred around 18,400 years ago, possibly somewhere between what is now Iran and Pakistan.  The L1a branches inherit the SNP M2481, and the L1b branches inherited M317.

First of all, let's look at L1a, because although it is not my sub clade, in terms of modern day population size, it appears to greatly outnumber any other L sub clade.

Pakistan and India - Present Day Home of L1a1 and L1a2

L1a splits again into two sub clades.  The split occurred around 17,400 years ago.  L1a1 (L-M27) and L1a2 (L-M357)

L1a1 (L-M27)

Defined by SNP M27 (on older nomenclature as still used by 23andMe, this was formerly L1*) is mainly found in India, particularly South West India, and in Sri Lanka. This is perhaps the most populous modern day L sub clade, found in 15% of Indian males.  However, it is not restricted to India, and has also been found in 20% of Balochi in Pakistan, and has also been reported in Kirghiz, Pashtun, Tajik, Uzbek, and Turkmen males across Central Asia.

L1a2 (L-M357)

Has defined by SNP M357 (on older nomenclature as still used by 23andMe, this was formerly L3*).  This sub clade is mainly found in Pakistan, but also Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, The Chechen Republic, Tajikistan, India, and Afghanistan.  It has been found at 15% in Burusho populations, and at 25% in Kalash populations.  It is much more common in Pakistan than in India.

So, the L1a sub clades - spreading down into Southern Asia, and accounting for potentially millions of Y Men there.  Far more than any other branches of Y Haplogroup L.  However, Southern Asia is unlikely to be the origin of L.  That origin is more likely, as stated earlier, to be the place with the most diversity in branches.  That points more towards again towards Western Asia.  It's just that ancient carriers of L, appear to have been particularly successful in Southern Asia, and to have fathered more sons there.

L-M317 or L1b of Western Asia

We now move onto the branches of particular interest to myself, because I carry a Y Haplotype that belongs here.  L1b is defined by the SNP M317, that formed circa 18,400 years ago, most likely in the area of modern day Iran, or elsewhere in Western Asia.

Phylogenetic tree of L1b by Anthrogenica user Caspian (with permission):

Click on above hyperlink for full sized image

L1b is mainly distributed across Western Asia, from modern day Turkey, across to Pakistan.  However, as we will see, it also spreads in low densities across parts of Europe.  it is very much, the "Western L".

The Next split - L1b1 or L-M349.  The Levant, and Europe!

Around 14,000 years ago, another split occurred in the L1b (M317) branch. A new SNP, M349, defined L1b1.  Today, L1b1, or L-M349, is found in Western Asia, in Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Armenia, etc.  However, it is also found scattered in low densities through parts of Europe.  It crops up in South Europe, often close the the Mediterranean Sea, including particularly in parts of Italy.  It also forms a light cluster in Central Europe.

Branching away from a common Y ancestor with L1b1 (M349), is another 14,000 year old line defined by SNP SK1412, L1b2.

L1b2 (L-SK1412) splits - Pontic Greeks, and the others...

13,000 years ago,, during a cold stage towards the end of the last Ice Age, the L1b2 (SK1412) Y branch divides again.  Very recent research suggests that it split into three lines: L-SK1415 (L1b2a), L-PH8 (L1b2b), and L-SK1414 (L1b2c).

L1b2a (L-SK1415), has as far as I know, only been detected in a Makrani Balochi survey in SW Pakistan.

L1b2b (PH8), is found in Turkey, Greece, Armenia, Chechen Republic, Iraq, etc.  It is associated particularly with the Pontic Greek ethnicity from Eastern Anatolia, and around the Black Sea.  A further division within PH8 has been detected at around 3,000 years ago.

Finally ... mine:

L1b2c (L-SK1414, FGC51074), has so far been SNP detected only in Makrani Balochi, in SW Pakistan, Gujarat, India, Turkey, Cyprus, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon (Druze), and in England. STR predictions for L-SK1414 have also been found in Goa, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Tartaristan, France, Italy, Iran, and Azores.  In addition to SK1414, I have with the assistance of Gareth Henson, a FT-DNA Big Y test, accompanied by further analysis of their raw data, by Yfull, and FullGenomes, ascertained 117 novel SNPs looking for first time matches.  As can be imagined, I'm very keen that further L Y-Men should test.

Distribution may be connected to the dispersal of the recently identified group known as the Iranian Neolithic Farmers after 10,000 BCE:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5113750/#:~:text=We%20sequenced%20Early%20Neolithic%20genomes,significantly%20to%20the%20ancestry%20of

In addition there would appear to be a potential link between this group, and the inhabitants of the Harappan or Indus Valley civilization. Below is my proposed distribution of L SK1414 / FGC51074:

Those tentative European Y haplogroup L links

We have seen above, that again, and again, Y haplogroup L (M20), and several of it's sub clades appear to have Western Asian origins, despite success of some of those sub clades today in India and Pakistan.  Y haplogroup L has not been linked to the Yamna hypothesis, that has taken credit for the origin of many haplogroups that are successful today in Europe.  Y-DNA L was located to the southern side of the Caucasus, between present day Turkey and Pakistan.  However, two particular Y-DNA L sub clades do make mysterious appearances across Europe.

1) L-L595 (L2) has only recently been discovered, so far, exclusively across Europe, in very low numbers.

2) L-M349 (L1b1), downstream of M317, also spreads across South Europe, and clusters at the Rhine-Danube.  I have on 23andMe forums, seen a number of testers that unfortunately have not tested their Y elsewhere, claim Ashkenazi paternal ancestry, but this is far from common to all European L-M349 samples. Although rarely forming much more than 1% of all Y along the Mediterranean coast of Southern Europe, this percentage does occasionally rise higher, for example, in parts of Italy.

When did L2 or even L1b1 enter Europe?  L2 has only so far been found in Europe.  There are some suggestions that some European L could be survivors from the Eurasian Neolithic.  However, ancient DNA has not yet been found to support this hypothesis. 

Prime resources

L Yfull Tree

https://www.yfull.com/tree/L/

Wikimedia entry for Y Haplogroup L-M20

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L-M20

FTDNA L The Y Haplogroup L Project

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Y-Haplogroup-L/

Marco Cagetti's Y Haplogroup L

http://www.cagetti.com/Genetics/L-haplogroup.html

Anthropogenica Y Haplogroup L Forum Board

http://www.anthrogenica.com/forumdisplay.php?37-L

ISOGG 2009 Y Haplogroup L (Useful for understanding 23andMe Y haplogroup result of L2*)

http://isogg.org/tree/2009/ISOGG_HapgrpL09.html

ISOGG 2017 Y Haplogroup L

http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpL.html

Other resources

Europedia Y-DNA Haplogroup L

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#L

23andMe users should note that the company in 2016, still used a very outdated ISOGG nomenclature system.  My 23andMe reported haplotype was L2*.  However, using ISOGG 2016, this is now L1b (L-M317).  NOT to be confused with modern day L2 (L-L595).

Facebook Y Haplogroup L Group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/773887796013634/

L-M317 STR Alpine cluster article

https://figshare.com/articles/L_M317_STR_marker_likelihood_tree_focuing_Alpine_cluster/105684

Familypedia Wiki for Haplogroup L

http://familypedia.wikia.com/wiki/Haplogroup_L_(Y-DNA)

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)

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.

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

Origins of the Chandler-Brooker L1b Y haplogroup

Family Tree DNA (ftDNA) is a commercial genetics genealogy company, with a reputation for cornering the market in Y-DNA testing, and in accumulating references for haplogroups.

That map above, that is the sum total of Y haplogroup L submissions on their database for the UK.  All four of them.  The two to the east are L2 and L2a.  The one in Oxfordshire represents my own pending results (expected L1b or L-M317).  Just to the south of that, the SW representative, is kit number 26369.

The cluster in Central Europe, is the "Rhine Danube Cluster", but that is L1a (L M349).

So you see, except for kit 26369, my Y haplogroup is way out here, like a distant satellite on it's own.  So what is Kit 26379?  Well, it is only a Y12 STR test result.  Predicted to M20, but it has been assigned to L-M317 un-clustered.  Up to now!  It's located only 32 miles south of my surname line during the 1740's.  Could it relate to our line?

STR:

The Parish Church of All Saints, in the South Oxfordshire village of Rotherfield Peppard.  Taken on my phone cam during a recent ancestor hunt in this area.  Rotherfield Peppard is the location of my earliest verified Brooker ancestors.

Background

Many years ago, perhaps nearly twenty years ago, I had traced my surname family line to a John & Elizabeth Brooker that lived in the South Oxfordshire village of Rotherfield Peppard during the 1841 census.  My trail came to a dead end with that John Brooker.  He was my G.G.G.G grandfather, and was born circa 1787.  John fathered another John, who fathered Henry, who fathered John Henry, who fathered Reginald John, who fathered my father.  My surname trail has been stuck there ever since.

Until perhaps very soon into the future.  I lost interest in genealogy around twelve years ago or so.  Really, my interest started to drift away perhaps soon after discovering the above dead end on my surname line.  Then an impulse buy of a 23andMe kit this January, and inspired by the new genetics side of the interest, I returned to genealogy a few months ago.  I discovered the advantages (and some of the downfalls) of 21st Century Internet Genealogy.  I've expanded my family tree in several directions using these new resources.  But that old surname, that continued to frustrate.

You see that 1841 census, it left me with a teaser.  Later censuses record the actual parish of birth, and actual age of each person in England & Wales.  The 1841 census however, merely asked people if they were born within the county of residence or not, and summarised their ages into five year round ups.  Elizabeth stated that yes, she was born in Oxfordshire.  John on the other hand said No!  He was born outside of Oxfordshire.  I remember the long drive home from the Oxfordshire County Record Office many years ago, and considering that answer.  I knew that the nearest other county was Berkshire, and that I kept seeing Brooker families in Berkshire.  I speculated that he most likely was from Berkshire.  It was a bit of a surprise, because my wife at that time, and the mother of my children had ancestors herself nearby in Berkshire.

The Y Factor

That 23andMe DNA test revealed a number of surprises.  One of them was that I had an incredibly rare Y-DNA haplogroup for North-West Europe.  As a Y haplogroup, "L" is mainly found in any percentages in South Asia, particularly in South India, and also around Pakistan.  My actual sub clade however, is rarer, and is mainly found south of the Caucasus in Western Asia, where Anatolia meets the Levant.  One ethnicity that it has been linked to are the Pontic Greeks that traditionally lived around the Black Sea.  I'm presently investigating it with a thorough ftDNA Y111 STR test, followed by an ftDNA Big Y test.  Yes, I've chucked too much money at it.

Okay, it's just a genetic signal, just a marker.  It doesn't have any value nor effect on who I am.  But it does link me to a part of the World in a kind of personal, measured way, that I never imagined.  I do want to know, so far as I can, how this Y haplogroup got into Europe, into North-West Europe, into Britain, and into my Brooker surname line.  Can I use it to link to any distant Y cousins, that live today or perhaps in the past (ancient DNA) in other ethnicities?  Will any Brookers directly descended from the same Oxfordshire cluster of Brookers, ever test, and record their haplogroup online?  If I don't test and record myself, then no, that will never happen.  I'm not expecting recent cousins.  I hope to merely find very distant cousins.  In a sense I already have.  I have many in India, Pakistan, Armenia, Syria, Chechnya, etc.  We all do.  However I know have a link that I can measure.

This has forced me to re-launch my investigation in my surname line.  Will I find any clues to how and when it entered the line?

"There aren't many Brookers around here"...

It should be easy right?  Even local genealogists have said to me "there aren't many Brookers around here".  Wrong. There are a lot in the Thames Valley, and they've been there quite some time.  Most researchers of the Brooker surname, end up in Kent/Sussex.  That is because Kent is the English county, with the highest density of the Brooker surname today in telephone directories etc.  At first, I thought that my Brooker line came out of Kent, because my great grandfather lived at Sidcup for many years.  However, I later discovered that his father actually originated in South Oxfordshire.  There are scatters of Brookers across England.  There's even one family established in Suffolk.  The Oxfordshire / Berkshire Brooker cluster however, is second only to the Kent/Sussex cluster.  They've been in the Thames Valley quite some time.

So, on returning to genealogy, I start to use the new Internet resources.  FamilySearch.org, Ancestry.co.uk, FindMyPast.com.  I search for John Brooker born circa 1787 anywhere, but particularly in Berkshire.  I narrowed it down to about three candidates, and then by a process of elimination down to one, my most likely candidate.  I check censuses to see if John Brooker of Berkshire disappears before my validated John Brooker of Oxfordshire emerges on the 1841 census, married to Elizabeth, with several kids.  Finally, I settled on my favourite.  He was born at Hurley, Berkshire.  Only four miles away from a major bridge over the Thames into Henley, Oxfordshire, and seven miles from Rotherfield Peppard.  I even travelled down to the area, to check it out.  It was all so plausible.  I'd cracked the puzzle after all of these years.  Noone else on Ancestry.com sharing my Brookers had come up with the same answer.  Most were stuck at 1841, or later.  One had a silly proposal to a highly improbable ancestor.  I had reached Hurley.

In Hurley, I took this new extension back to another John Brooker, before him a Richard Brooker, before that another Richard Brooker, as well as some of the maternal lines.  A cracking breakthrough.  I was back to G.G.G.G.G.G.G grandparents on my surname line.  I was chuffed, even announced it here and on Facebook.  Hurley was the ancient home of the Brookers.

And what a beautiful village!  The church at Hurley above.

But it was incorrect.  A nagging feeling that I really had not searched thoroughly enough, that this John Brooker of Hurley, totally disappeared before mine appeared in Rotherfield Peppard.  I want all of my genealogy to be well validated and properly sourced.  But particularly for my surname line.  I'm spending a lot of money on those Y chromosome tests.  I don't want to tag it to a bad, untrue ancestry.

So I took another look.  I found a doppelganger in the Hurley area.  He had children there, in the parish next to Hurley.  He fit the John Brooker born in Hurley during 1789 even better than my ancestor.  I had rushed, messed up.  I was too quick to accept the link.  I made another mistake.  It meant deleting a whole bunch of ancestors from my family tree.  But it had to be done.

So many Johns and Elizabeths

I kept looking online.  I kept seeing other John Brookers.  I even kept seeing more John and Elizabeth Brooker families!  Everything that I checked out on Ancestry.com and FindMyPast.com fails tests.  I need good evidence.  It was the free LDS service at FamilySearch.org though that provided the next candidate.  I see references to a number of children born to a John and Elizabeth Brooker at Sonning, Berkshire.  The children were all slightly older, and had different names to any of those later at Rotherfield.  I looked up Sonning.  Sonning Common was actually north of the Thames, right next to Rotherfield Peppard!  I even discover that my G.G.G grandfather John Brooker (Junior) was living there in 1841!  Eureka (again)!

I'm recording everything now.  I even buy some marriage and death certificates from the GRO, looking for any link whatsoever.  Any correlation.  Any new note or mention.  I also start to purchase CD-ROMS of transcripts of parish registers from the Oxfordshire FHS, and to consult them by email.  When I look closer, I can see that if this family really were mine, then the mother, Elizabeth, must have been incredibly young at marriage, around sixteen.  I'm starting to have doubts again.  A researcher from Oxfordshire FHS replied.  They explain the confusing situation with Sonning Common.  It belonged to a parish south of the river, in Berkshire.  They also doubted the connection.  The births just didn't fit.  My CD-ROMS start to arrive.  They didn't fit.

I'd chased the wrong connection again, for a second time.

If you don't succeed at first...

The latest attempts.  I'm not giving up yet.  Hurley was wrong.  Sonning was wrong.  I can still get this.  Then the other night, I played with some more online searches, and I see something on the 1861 census of Rotherfield Greys, that I hadn't spotted before!  There was an old couple living in another neighbouring parish by the name of John and Elizabeth Brooker.  Not only that, but the 1861 census recorded their parishes of birth.  This John Brooker was born at Long Wittenham, Berkshire.  Elizabeth was born at Drayton, Oxfordshire.  It fits.  Elizabeth Brooker born inside Oxfordshire, her husband John born outside of Oxfordshire!  And so close!  Have I done it this time?

There is a problem with the connection.  The ages are wrong.  According to the 1841 census, my ancestor John was born between 1787 and 1791.  The 1861 John was born 1781 - according to the enumerator.  Equally, in 1841 Elizabeth was recorded as being born between 1797 and 1801.  This 1861 Elizabeth was recorded as being born 1786.  They're too old.

However...  a search for a John Brooker baptised at Long Wittenham, produced two transcripts of a John, son of Edward and Elizabeth Brucker baptised 17th January 1789.  Wow, if this is the same guy at Rotherfield Grey in 1861, then his age is wildly out, and he fits into the age of my 1841 John after all.  It can happen.  They were old.  They could be deaf, or the person reporting to the enumerator could have had senile dementia.  A neighbour could have helped out, but got their ages wrong.  How many John & Elizabeth Brookers could be in the Rotherfield area?  I have yet another expensive Oxfordshire FHS parish register transcript CD-ROM on the way.  I feel increasingly pressured to spend a few days in the Oxfordshire and Berkshire record offices.  Long Wittenham has changed county.  It is near to Abingdon, on the south side of the Thames, and it was in Berkshire at that time.  It is now in Oxfordshire.  Drayton, is on the other side of the river, not far away.  The couple in must have met and married in that area of the Thames valley, and later, moved around twelve miles down river to the Rotherfield area.

Are they my 1841 couple though?  I have decided to add them to my tree - but subject to removal or verification, as I research them further.  If that baptism date pans out, with no earlier doppelganger being born in Long Wittenham, I'll start to feel happier.  If they do work out, then I have already found two new generations by the looks of it.  As I said above, this John, was the son of an Edward and Elizabeth Brucker.  He in turn, may have been the Edward Brooker baptised at Long Wittenham on 16th January 1757, to another earlier John and Mary Brooker.  It's taken me to a new and unexpected area of the Thames Valley.

Lessons to be learned

I doubt that anyone else ever reads these lengthy boring posts.  However should there be anyone out there, this is what I can pass to you:

• Internet Genealogy is hazardous.  Not just because of the forest of diseased, incorrect, badly researched, badly sourced trees out there, that Family History websites push into your face.  It is also hazardous because it is incomplete, but easy.  It is easy to believe that all paper records are online.  They are not by a long chalk.  Even the paper record is actually incomplete.  Many parish records have been damaged, lost, destroyed.  Some even evaded them.  Some have not been handed over to archives.  It is too easy with Internet Search to look for a Joe Bloggs, find a Joe Bloggs, any, and to grab them.  However, did you grab the right one?  Was it simply the only one on the Internet, in that particular database entered transcription?
• Don't be at a rush to grab your Joe Bloggs.  Take your time.  That is my weakness.
• Don't be afraid to have doubt.  Keep going back.  Check, verify, check again.

The above photo at A Capela dos Ossos (the bone chapel) in Évora, Portugal. The entire chapel is covered with human bones.  Every wall and pillar is decorated with skulls and bones.  On another wall hangs the mummified remains of a man and child, said to have been cursed. There is a sign at the entrance of the chapel which states "Nós ossos que aqui estamos, pelos vossos esperamos" (Our bones here, await yours).

Genetic Genealogy

I was a sceptic of genetic genealogy, I'll admit it.  Now I'm hooked.  Not because I feel that it has been a way of hooking up with distant cousins, that can help me extend my family tree.  That's not the way that I've used it so far.  Instead, it has provided very different kind of information, that helps me understand who I am, and how I can link my ancestry to known heritage.

I might not have been so hooked, but I've had so many surprises with my 23andMe results.  If my results had been perhaps, dire and boring, then maybe I would have retreated to traditional genealogy and regarded the technique as predictable and uninteresting.  However, what ancestry related surprises did I have?

• I have a very rare Y haplogroup for NW Europe.  So far predicted to L1b M317.  It will be shared by my brother, my son, one cousin (and his son, and grandson).  Today I sent away a further FTDNA Y111 swab test.  The L haplogroup is mainly concentrated in Southern and Western Asia, from Afghanistan down to Southern India.  My L1b M317 sub clade is concentrated in Western Asia, including Eastern Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, the South Caucasus, and Western Iran. A faint trace of it along the length of the Med in Southern Europe, and across Italy, and a slight cluster in central Europe - which apparently, I don't belong to.
• Autosome Ancestry composition by 23andMe, gave me a very low percentage of "British & Irish", and high percentages of "French & German" and "Scandinavian".  I've explored the possibility that this could reflect early medieval admixture from across the North Sea.  I've looked at the typical Ancestry Compositions of people with a strong recorded English ancestry, and compared them to the results from people with strong Irish ancestry.  That SE English people typically sit somewhere between the Irish, and typical Dutch in Ancestry Composition reinforces my view that this is the case.
• My mtDNA was H6a1.  Not the most exciting haplogroup, but not the most boring neither.  It allows me to relate to the latest evidences for Eurasian Steppe admixture into Western Europe during the Early Bronze Age.

A Southern European Enigma

I captured the above photo at Cabo Espichel, Portugal.

There was a fourth, further surprise in my 23andme results.  It lay in the autosome.  23andMe AC (Ancestry Composition) on speculative mode, suggested 2.4% Southern Europe, including a prediction of 0.5% Iberian ancestry.  On speculative mode again, it falls on five pairs of chromosomes - but never on both sides.  On standard mode, 0.1% remains, just on one side of pair 21.  This suggests that all of it comes from just one of my parents.

I might think that this was just "background noise", an error in AC.  However, it keeps popping up.  Indeed when I upload my raw data to the program at DNA.land, they predict only 80% North/Central European, and a whopping 15% South European.  It doesn't stop there.  On GEDMATCH, the Eurogene calculators keep suggesting Iberian or South European admixture on their mixed population oracles.  Eurogenes K9 for example, gives me 61% North European, 29% Mediterranean, and 6% Caucasus.

Let's just refer back to my recorded paper ancestry.  I have 190 recorded ancestors, all in England, with English surnames.  No sign of any Roman Catholicism.  I have all sixteen of Generation 6 (G.G grandparents) named.  All born and named English.  No sign of any South European even in the 1,490 people on the entire family tree for my kids.

However, I think that all of the autosome ancestry calculators could be telling me a truth, that I can't see in my known family tree.  If I have a South European ancestor somewhere, whether Iberian or not, then either a) I have not yet found them, or b) they were the biological ancestor of a NPE (non-parental event), a cuckoo.  I have 3 out of my 32 Generation 7 ancestors unnamed - all absent fathers.  I have 15 missing ancestors in Generation 8.  Above that, the representation really starts to decline, although I have some ancestors named up to Generation 11.  Could a South European be in there?  23andMe in speculative mode suggested 2.4%.  That would seem "average" for an ancestor in Generations 7 or 8 (3 to 4 x G grandparent level)  Of course from around that point, "averages" become pointless, and subject to a randomness that can delete entire lineages further up from any surviving DNA.  None-the-less, I could have a South European from around that period - either one of the 18 "missing" ancestors, or a NPE cuckoo.

I'm commissioning a 23andme test for my mother.  Three reasons.  1) she wont be here for ever.  Recording her genome feels valuable and worthy.  2) I want to see how her very dense 100% recorded Norfolk ancestry projects on Ancestry Composition and on GEDMATCH.  3) I want to phase her results against mine.  It will tell me for example, where my "South European" DNA came from - which parent.  It will help me further understand my own genetic ancestry.