When the DNA results are not what was expected… The question came in again this past week, as it has so many times in recent years. A genealogist had asked others in the family to test to further the genealogist’s own research. When the results came in, well, they…
Understanding DNA results is very important to understanding who you are, your origins, and how you came to be. The results below do not tell the whole story but is the beginning. H1b1 or H1b1A is not the complete picture. There are more numbers trailing these numbers and letter.
H1 & H3
Haplogroup H1 is by far the most common subclade in Europe, representing approximately than half of the H lineages in Western Europe. Roostalu et al. (2006) estimate that H1 arose around 22,500 years ago. H1 is divided in 65 basal subclades. The largest, H1c, has over 20 more basal subclades of its own, most with deeper ramifications. H1 is found throughout Europe, North Africa, the Levant, Anatolia, the Caucasus, and as far as Central Asia and Siberia. The highest frequencies of H1 are observed in the Iberian peninsula, south-west France, and Sardinia. H3 has a very similar distribution to H1, but more confined to Europe and the Maghreb, and is generally two to three times less common than H1.
Distribution of mtDNA haplogroups H1 & H3 in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. African is the home of humanoids.
Conversation posted today that s worth placing this blog.
Does anyone know where the origin of my MtDNA is found: H1b1-T16362C according to FamilyTreeDNA, but H1b1A, according to Genographic Project of 2013. Which would be the correct haplogroup, Family Tree or Genographic Project? How old is this mtDNA type? And in what country or geographic region is this my mtDNA found in the highest numbers? Thanks for any info.
Jun 9, 2018, 6:21 PM
Name: Sandra Bailey
Comment: Recently received my ancestry DNA results, and now I’m totally hooked! On one of Henry Louis Gates programs, recently, he used the results from mtDNA to locate exactly where, Oprah, Chris Tucker and a few others originated. I would love to find that part of my DNA, which would clarify where the European percentages came from. When my brother finally gets his ancestryDNA done, will our mtDNA be evident, or should I get that test done separately. Which test would you recommend if that is the case?
I am also very, very interested in beginning the courses toward becoming a geneologist. What steps do you recommend?
Thanks for your help.
Time: June 10, 2018 at 1:21 am
IP Address: 18.104.22.168
Contact Form URL: https://
Sent by an unverified visitor to your site.
I was researching somewhere else and this is a partial response I received. Is this true? ” Native Americans no matter what Tribe they belong to would not be on a US Census until after 1924 when they were allowed to be US citizens. Each Tribe listed their own on their own Rolls. Cherokee have all listed back to 1817.”
Did people not lie to census takers or the census takers made his own determination?
What am I not understanding?
Thanks for educating me.
Response: Native Americans were treated in some cases worst than Africans in America. They were not allowed to vote or be educated until the 1900’s around 1922-1924. The Indian rolls (Dawnes Rolls) were created to register every Native American and can be found in the National Archives. Some Native Americans passed as white and therefore did not register. Most of those groups can be found in Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina insignificant groups. There are ofter states with this population. Seminole Nation ancestors went to Mexico along with Africans to avoid being sent to Oklahoma. Only a few came back after the Indians wars. They still can be found in Mexico today. You can find a large number of Native Americans now living in Canada who crossed over from Connecticut and New York.
Some reference for your research journey.
- American Indians Census Rolls 1885-1940
- Census records for Eastern Cherokee (Force march from SC to OK)
- 1857 Shawnee Census – Kansas Territory
- Yakima, Tulalip, and Swinomish – Washington Territory
There is a Native American Ancestry group on Facebook for further treatment of the subject. This is a valid conversation to have and to discuss.
Genealogy resource rarely used in ancestry research
1880 Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Schedules
The 1880 census is the mother lode of questions pertaining to physical condition, criminal status, and poverty. In addition to the basic questions on the population schedule, additional questions were posed in the ‘Supplemental Schedules for the Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Classes’, commonly called the Defective Schedule or DDD Schedule.
When a person was noted as blind, deaf and dumb, idiotic, insane, ‘maimed, crippled, bedridden, or otherwise disabled’, or was enumerated in a prison, orphanage, or poorhouse, further information was to be gathered on one of seven special schedules:
- Idiots [defined as those ‘whose mental faculties was arrested in infancy or childhood before coming to maturity’]
- Homeless Children (in Institutions)
- Inhabitants in Prison
- Pauper and Indigent Inhabitants (in Institutions)
These special schedules are arranged in the same order as the population schedule. When you find someone on the 1880 census who is noted as insane, etc., make note of the enumeration district, page number, and line which that person appears. The special schedules should exist for each enumeration district; this information is listed at the top of each special schedule. Each person is listed in the order he or she appears on the population schedule; the page and line numbers are given before each person’s name.
The Figure below shows Eliza Derickson enumerated in the 1880 census in the County Alms House, Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware (enumeration district 20, page 21, line 2). We can see that she is ‘maimed, crippled, bedridden, or otherwise disabled’. With the enumeration district, page and line numbers, we can go to the correct special schedule
Figure: Eliza Derickson enumerated in the 1880 Census
The Insane and Idiots schedules are similar in many regards. Both ask the age at onset. The Insane schedule asks for ‘Form of Disease’ [defined as mania, melancholia, paresis (general paralysis), dementia, epilepsy, or dipsomania.] The Idiots schedule asks for the supposed cause. The instructions to the enumerators give as examples, ‘scarlet fever, measles, meningitis and etc. Blow on head, fall, and etc. Fright, and etc. Both schedules ask for the names of any institutions the person had been in, the length of stay, and year discharged.
With many records of mental hospitals and asylums closed to the public, the Insane and Idiots schedules may be a researcher’s only record with medical information of those who were institutionalized. It must be remembered, however, that it is unknown who gave the information, especially if the person was not in an institution at the time of the census (when the enumerator was likely getting information from the institution records.)
Figure: Insane Schedule, District 36, Kent County, Delaware
Figure: Idiots Schedule, District 36, Kent County, Delaware
The Deaf-Mutes and Blind schedules are virtually identical. Both ask for the supposed cause, age of onset, whether the person was self-supporting, the name of institutions attended, length of time in that institution, and year discharged.
Figure: Deaf-Mutes Schedule, District 24, Fulton County, Ohio
Figure: Blind Schedule, District 24, Fulton County, Ohio
Genealogy Tools: Finding Ancestors
This is an acknowledgment of slaves who were married or given permission to marry. After the Civil War, they were required to register in their localities. Each state treated this differently in the records.
A perfect conversation to have with other family genealogist. Do you have a question on your own research?
I couldn’t fully examine at the image you shared on my phone, and just had a chance to look at it on my desktop … this document does indicate the couple married in 1851 and were “slaves – emancipated”.
This did not quite make sense to me because they are recorded in a “colored” marriage record book which would not have been kept until after the Civil War. So I thumbed through this book and I see a number of entries in the “colored” marriage books under the “name and title of the person performing the marriage” column that just read “emancipated slaves” — the dates for all of them pre-date the Emancipation, some as early as the 1820s. This tells me that these entries were for former slaves (freed after the Civil War) who were recording the fact that they had married while in slavery. It is not common you get the date of their pre-Emancipation marriage in these records, so that is cool!
The page you shared is from the female colored marriage book (digital image https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89VS-4N2Y?i=205&cc=1726957&cat=325147). I looked at the male colored marriage book (FHL Film 236325 covers R-Z). Because of the odd way of indexing, you have to look at the first page of the T surnames to know on which page a surname is recorded (digital image https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89VS-4SXN?i=186&cc=1726957&cat=325147) — it indicates surnames starting with To… start on Page 19 (digital image https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89VS-4SZ1?i=198&cc=1726957&cat=325147), but I do not see any Todds on pp. 19-23. This is strange because we have that entry in the female colored book, so we would expect to find the groom’s entry here. So the entries may be mixed up, and you’ll have to hunt around to find the entry — if it is there.
I just searched Wake Co., NC Marriage Bonds and found only one marriage bond for a groom named George Todd , but he married in 1800 or 1806 (FHL 296870, digital images here: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-894X-9K2S?i=307&cc=1726957&cat=346106)
But if former slaves were recording their pre-Emancipation marriage, they would not have obtained a license or recorded a bond, so that’s moot.
There is another FHL Film for “Negro Cohabitations, 1866” (FHL Film 2447783), but it has not been digitized yet. That would be the record group where former slaves would have registered their pre-Emancipation marriages. But from the entries in the colored marriage books, it is obvious that the county clerk just started recording them in those records as well.
Correct, this is a typed marriage register. At some point the county clerk (or in this case the register of deeds) probably created this book from older records. But they may have done it because the old book was falling apart, and then destroyed it. So this is all we are left with. If you look at the FHL holdings for Wake County, NC (familysearch catalog https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/results?count=20&placeId=191392&query=%2Bplace%3A%22United+States%2C+North+Carolina%2C+Wake%22&subjectsOpen=471083-50), it doesn’t look like an “original” marriage register was filmed, suggesting it no longer exists. There could be licenses or bonds in other record groups for these same marriages, but former slaves who were recording their pre-Emancipation marriages would not have obtained a license or recorded a bond.
So helpful! Thank you.
Yes Nick! I actually cried I was so overwhelmed to see this. This entire branch of my family tree is a fairly recent discovery as my father didn’t help us to connect with our Todd family. I love these people like I was raised around them. They have a unique story to tell that is a part of my story i cherish every morsel I can find vim so grateful for this wonderful community of amateur professional genealogists.
|View All Comments|
Please clarify my understanding of this document. George and Lucinda Todd were my 2x great grandparents. This one page Marriage registry lists their marriage date and under who performed the marriage it states “Slaves emancipated”. What do I make of this? What can I infer from the dates and that statement? Thanks in advance family!