Y-DNA – Page 2 – Griffis Family

June 27, 2026September 6, 2026

The Significance of Haplogroup G-Z6748 and its Descendants: Bottlenecks, Migration, Founder Effects and Star-Like Expansion (Part One)

The most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of the G-Z6748 haplogroup [1] and its descendants presents a compelling case study in the interplay between population bottlenecks, migration and the proliferation of generations. Specifically, the ancestor of G-Z6748 and his descendents provide examples of historic demographic bottlenecks, the migration across the North Sea to the English Island in the early medieval Northwestern Europe, and the subsequent founder-effect population expansion of this YDNA genetic lineage around the time of the Norman invasion.

This story focuses on this YDNA path through the view of the changes in the phylogenetic tree structure [2] of the paternal descendants, the subcludes or branches of this haplogroup and its connection with the Griff(is)(es)(ith) lineage. [3] This is a challenging but intellectually productive story — one that requires integrating Y-DNA phylogenetics, population genetics theory, medieval social history, and landscape archaeology. Because this YDNA genetic line is a deep subclade without dedicated academic research, the scenario developed below is explicitly inferential and heuristic, built from convergent lines of evidence. It should be treated as a working hypothesis amenable to refinement as more BigY-tested descendants are added to the FamilyTreeDNA G-Z6748 haplogroup project. [4]

The MRCA associated with this YDNA haplogroup has a special significance for the Griff(is)(es)(ith) genetic paternal line as a direct paternal ancestor. In addtion, a small group of roughly 150 FamilyTreeDNA (FTDNA) YDNA testers can trace their paternal lines to this ancestor. [5]

A Comment on Phylogenetic Trees and Explaining Social Context

While I introduce and discuss socio -historical information to provide context to the changes in the phylogenetic tree structure of the descendants of G-Z6748, this merely provides a descriptive historical association between the two; and not necessarily inferences of causation.

“(G)eneticists are interested in ancestry, while archaeologists are interested in ethnicity: it is the bones, not the burial rites, which are important in the present context.” [6]

Geneticists are tracking ancestry, while archaeologists and historians often talk about ethnicity or other types of social groups. The two do not map one‑to‑one, which makes the analysis of changing social groups and phylogenetic genetic trees over time particularly vulnerable to mis-interpretation when translated directly into population ‑ genetic models. While I attempt to provide historical social and cultural contexts and possible associations with the changing structure of phylogenetic trees, it is important not to assume causal relationships necessarily between the two.

Another significant fact associated with this most recent common ancestor of G-Z6748 is that one of his genetic descendants is the first to migrate from continental Europe to the eastern coast of East Angles on the British Isle (see illustration one). [7] This is a classic example of a founder effect for a lineage based on migration. Other descendants may have migrated to Denmark and possibly the coastal areas of what are now Belgium or France. [8]

Illustration One: Estimated Migratory Path for Most Recent Common Ancestors of G-Z6748, G-Y38335 and G-Z40857

Bottlenecks, Founder Effects, and Star Like Expansions

In Y-DNA phylogenetics, ‘bottlenecks‘, ‘founder effects‘, and ‘star-like expansions‘ are interconnected phenomena that describe how paternal lineages lose diversity and then rapidly multiply, often reflecting or coinciding with major social or demographic shifts. Table one below provides a comparison of defining aspects for each of these macroscopic demographic genetic patterns with examples associated with haplogroup G-Z6748.

Table One: Demographic Bottlenecks, Founder Effects and Star-Like Expansion

Defining Aspect	Demographic / Genetic Bottleneck	Founder Effect	Star-Like Expansion
What happens	Population groups or haplogroups sharply reduce in size.	New population founded by a few individuals from a larger population source.	It usually signals a “founder lineage,” where one man or a small group of related men had high reproductive success, with their descendants spreading through new subclades and geographical area.
Original population	Often reduced or partially destroyed; YDNA diversity is lost in the remaining population.	Source population usually continues to exist with its original diversity; only the offshoot has drifted.	A single ancestral male lineage branches out into numerous, closely related subclades (branches) within a very short period.
Genetic outcome	Lower diversity & altered allele frequencies in the post-bottleneck population as a whole. [9]	Lower diversity & altered allele frequencies primarily in the founded group & its descendants.	Descendants differ by small number of SNPs / STRs from the common ancestor; Short genetic branch lengths = recent, explosive expansion.
Examples	The enduring impact of migrating groups associated with the Corded Ware & Bell Beaker cultures (associated with the R haplogroup) on limiting the proliferation of the indigenous social groups associated with G2a haplogroup. (e.g. the descendants of G-L497).	‘Pockets’ of European G haplogroup descendants of G-L497 survive; either become socially assimlated in dominant (R haplogroup) social groups or migrate to isolated areas. (e.g. the MRCA of G-Z6748).	The descendants of the MRCA of G-Z40857, a descendant of G-Z6748, genetically branched into five haplogroup subcaldes G-Y132505, G-FT21948, G-Z480859, G-Y132507, & G-FT349294 before & after the Norman Invasion into an area now known as Wales.
Examples	The Roman occupation of northwestern continental Europe on limiting the proliferation of G haplogroup subclades in susequent European generations. (e.g. the ancestors of G-Z6748).	The MRCA of G-Y38335, a descendant of G-Z6748, migrating to British Isle, establishing a ‘founder effect’ from G-Z66748 YDNA lineage.

Genetic drift is the overarching evolutionary mechanism, while genetic bottlenecks and founder effects are specific scenarios that dramatically amplify its impact. The fundamental difference between these phenomena lies in their triggering mechanisms rather than their genetic consequences. Bottlenecks result from environmental, social or cultural causes that reduce an existing population while founder effects arise from migration, colonization or isolation events – separating a portion of a population from the main population..

Both create the small population conditions that make genetic drift a dominant evolutionary force, leading to reduced genetic diversity and the potential for greater vulnerability to extinction or genetic disorders. Demographic genetic bottlenecks and founder effect expansions are both situations where a population or genetic group passes through a phase of very small size, so chance (genetic drift) strongly reshapes its genetic variation, often leaving lasting, highly distinctive signatures in the descendant population. [10]

Genetic drift is a mechanism of evolution characterized by random, chance fluctuations in genetic composition (allele frequencies or base pairs in the YDNA chromosome) within a population over generations. [11] Unlike natural selection, it is not driven by environmental adaptation but by sampling error, often causing certain genes to become more common or disappear entirely. It affects all populations but has the strongest impact on small groups. [12]

A genetic bottleneck is a sharp reduction in the number of reproducing males in a population, drastically reducing YDNA diversity. [13] A founder effect occurs when a small subgroup or a male individual breaks off from a larger group to establish a new community, carrying only a fraction of the original genetic diversity. [14]

A genetic bottleneck reduces genetic haplotype diversity by drastically decreasing population size, leading to the random loss of rare haplotypes and fixing a small subset of the original genetic variation. This process increases genetic homogeneity and can result in a new population with unique haplotype frequencies compared to the original population. A Y-DNA haplotype is a set of numerical values (alleles or base pairs of chromosomes) representing specific markers on a male’s Y-chromosome—primarily Short Tandem Repeats (STRs)—that form a “genetic signature” inherited from father to son (see illustration two). [15]

A star-like expansion is a phylogenetic tree pattern where many descendant haplotypes ‘radiate’ from a single ancestor with very few mutations between them, thus forming a “star” shape on the phylogenetic tree. In reality, it may not look literally like a star shape when depicted as a phylogenetic tree and when adding geographical locations of the newly formed branches of the tree. These expansions often appear during or after bottlenecks, as the few surviving lineages rapidly multiply to fill ecological / social niches. (see illustration two below). [16]

The typical pattern of this process involves:

A bottleneck that reduces most or specific YDNA male lineages;
The few surviving males act as founders for subsequent populations or population subgroups;
If one founder or group of founders has a social/ reproductive advantage (e.g., elite status, territorial expansion, periods of prosperity), his lineage or specific lineages undergo a star-like expansion; and
This may result in the proliferation of closely related subclades radiating from a recent common ancestor.

Illustration Two: Process Outcomes of Genetic Bottleneck, Founder Effects and Statr-Like Expansion

This pattern may provide telltale evidence of cultural hitchhiking—where YDNA lineages spread not just through biology but through effects of social structures like patrilocality, polygyny, or warrior elites. Cultural hitchhiking in genetic research refers to the process by which culturally or genetically neutral traits — ones that offer no inherent advantage on their own — spread through a population simply because they are carried alongside advantageous traits or successful groups. An example of a ‘culltural neutral trait’ is a beneficial technology or a superior subsistence strategy (e.g. farming) or a powerful social organizational practice such as patrilineal marriage practices. [17]

G-Z6748: A Minority Lineage with an History of Successive Genetic Bottlenecks

Haplogroup G-Z6748 is a relatively rare, minority Y-DNA lineage characterized by a series of significant evolutionary bottlenecks. The haplogroup descends from the broader YDNA G-L497 branch. The Y-DNA haplogroup branch G-L497 (also known as G2a3b1c) is heavily concentrated in Central and Western Europe, with its deepest historical roots pointing to the Eastern Alps and the Danube Basin. Geneticists often associate G-L497 with the initial spread of agriculture from the Balkans into Central Europe, notably linked to the Linear Pottery culture (LBK). During the Bronze and Iron ages, the branch is strongly tied to Alpine and Central European populations. Ancient samples have been identified in the Hallstatt and La Tène Celtic cultures, as well as Etruscan and subsequent Germanic groups. [18]

“In Europe west of the Black Sea, Haplogroup G is found at about 5% of the population on average throughout most of the continent. The concentration of G falls below this average in Scandinavia, the westernmost former Soviet republics and Poland, as well as in Iceland and the British Isles. There are seeming pockets of unusual concentrations within Europe. In Wales, a distinctive G2a3b1 (Haplogroup G-P15) type (DYS388=13 and DYS594=11) dominates there and pushes the G percentage of the population higher than in England.” [19]

“Haplogroup G-P303 (G2a2b2a, formerly G2a3b1) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup. . . . This haplogroup represents the majority of haplogroup G men in most areas of Europe. . . .” [20]

The genetic descendants of Haplogroup G‑Z6748 are considered ‘rare’ or a minority genetic YDNA group because of their representation today and in the last 1,300 years. It represents a small, very geographically concentrated descendant cluster with a relatively few known sub-branches and YDNA testers. [21]

As discussed in prior stories, there is roughly a 2,850‑year phylogenetic gap (about 95 generations) between the MRCA of G-Z6748 and its most recent documented ancestor associated with haplogroup G-FGC7516. (See illustration three below). There are no documented surviving intermediate branches. The gap implies strong bottlenecking or loss of parallel lineages, leaving only a very narrow path into the present (see table one, rows 3 and four). [22]

Table One: YDNA Ancestral Path between G-PF3345 and G-Z40857

Haplogroup	Estimate of when MRCA was born	Time Passed from Prior Haplogroup	Immediate Documented Descendants	Number of FTDNA Tested Modern Descendants
G-Z40857	950 CE	250 years	4	60
G-Y38335	700 CE	<100 years	2	62
G-Z6748	650 CE	2,850 years	2	153
G-FGC7516	2200 BCE	<100 years	6	292
G-FGC447	2250 BCE	250 years	2	312
G-Z727	2500 BCE	550 years	3	5,478
G-Z1817	3050 BCE	900 Years	2	5,551
G-Z6901	3950 BCE	700 years	1	5,620
G-Z1900	4650 BCE	300 years	2	5,806
G-CTS9737	4950 BCE	600 years	1	5,906
G-L497	5550 BCE	3,500 years	2	6,063
G-PF3345	9050 BCE	<100 years	11	10,943

Source: Ancestral Path for G-Z40857, FamilyTreeDNA, accessed 4 May 2026, https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/G-Z40857/path

As reflected in table one, column four, the number of documented immediate genetic descendants for many of the haplogroups descending from the MRCA of G-L497 are few. With the exception of six documented haplogroup branches descending from G-FGC7526, the number of phylogenetic branches are limited to three or fewer descendants. Many of these haplogroups have gaps between them that are over 600 years or over 20 generations (see column four in table one).

The MRCA of haplogroup G-FGC7516 is estimated to have been born around 2200 BCE (row four in table one) with six documented genetic descendants. Around 2200 BCE, the Rhine River valley was dominated by communities of the Bell Beaker culture, which were rapidly transitioning into the early Únětice culture. This period marked a major shift across Europe, bringing an emphasis on bronze metallurgy and wide-ranging trade networks. It is an area that descendants of G-FGC7516 may have lived (see illustration three).

The Bell Beaker Culture operated as highly mobile networks rather than a single unified civilization, focusing heavily on the trade of copper, tin, and gold across the river valleys. Emerging around 2200 BCE, the Únětice culture represented the dawn of the Central European Early Bronze Age. The Únětice people were the first highly stratified societies in the region. They controlled highly profitable trade routes, using the Rhine to transport raw metals and manufactured goods across the continent. [23]

Ancient DNA studies in the Lower Rhine region have shown that this era featured a major shift in the population’s genetic makeup, with newcomers from the east bringing significant steppe ancestry (predominantly YDNA R- haplogroup influence) into local communities. [24]

Illustration Three: Estimated Migratory Path from G-FGC7516 to G-Z6748

The tail end of this 2,850‑year phylogenetic gap reflected the repressive effects of the subjugation of indigienous social groups by the Roman Empire. This undoubtably further impacted the limited growth of the YDNA generations associated with this lineage. [25]

In Y-DNA phylogenetics, a tree characterized by three or fewer subclades branching off in successive generations over long periods suggests a prolonged, severe population bottleneck or a prolonged period of extremely low effective population size for the direct patrilineal lineage. When a lineage survives but its population numbers collapse—or stay critically low for a millennia—the amount of surviving male-line diversity drops sharply. Instead of a bush-like tree (where one father has many sons who all leave surviving lineages), you get a “rake-like” or ladder-like structure. Only one or two surviving lines proceed into the next generation. This linear sequence rules out sudden, explosive population expansions, pointing instead to steady, isolated survival. [26]

Migration to East Anglia, Founder Effects and Continuation of Constrained YDNA Lineages

As indicated in a prior story, a plausible narrative is that a male individual and possibly his family, who was a most recent common ancestor associated with haplogroup G-Z6748, living in the Wadden Sea–Texel zone around the late seventh century, utilized established Anglo-Saxon-Frisian dominated North Sea trading networks to migrate to East Anglia. The individual or small group moved by sea along established routes from the Dutch/North Frisian islands to the eastern shoreline of the island and ultimately settled in East Angles. [27]

This most common recent ancestor associated with haplogroup G-Y38335 migrated from the continental coast or was born in East Anglia. His estimated birth date is at the turn of the 8th century (see table two). [28] His descendants represent virtually all of the presently known, discovered downstream haplogroups of G-Z6748 that are identified in Great Britain.

Table Two: Estimated Birth Dates of the MRCAs for G-Z6748, G-Y38335 and G-Z40857 [29]

Estimated Birth Date	G-Z6748 Frisian Area	G-Y38335 East Anglia Area	G-Z40857 Sourthern Wessex Area
Mean	668 CE	711 CE	971 CE
68% Confidence Interval	542 – 792 CE	570 – 832 CE	855 – 1070 CE
95 % Confidence Interval	380 – 908 CE	428 – 946 CE	739 – 1163 CE

This is a classic example of a founder effect based on migration. Various studies underscore that this single migratory path for the G-Z6748 lineage was part of a larger continuing migratory population movement of people from across the North Sea to Britain that spanned centuries.

A growing body of bioarchaeological and archaeological work now emphasizes that migration into England from across the North Sea and wider north‑west Europe was a persistent feature of the period from the later Roman empire through the eleventh century. Recent large‑scale enamel‑isotope analysis of more than 700 individuals buried in England between the fourth and eleventh centuries has demonstrated continuous in‑migration from continental and extra‑local regions, with a notable increase in mobility in the seventh–eighth centuries, and has explicitly argued that “migration was a consistent feature of England between the 4th and the 11th centuries.” [30]

This isotopic work dovetails with wider projects on the medieval migrants of the North Sea world, which frame the North Sea basin as a long‑term zone of demographic and cultural connectivity from the post‑Roman period into the later Middle Ages, and builds on more traditional accounts of the Migration Period that already recognize substantial fifth‑ and sixth‑century crossings of the North Sea by Germanic‑speaking groups into Britain. [31]

A study by Leggett, Hakenbeck, and O’Connell push Anglo-Saxon “settlement” history away from what had traditionally been viewed as a short, fifth‑century ethnic migratory event and towards a long, regionally varied, gendered process of mobility and community formation. By extending well beyond the usual “Migration Period” associated with the Anglo-Saxon influx [32] , they show that migration remains substantial into the seventh–eighth centuries and through the Viking and Norman eras, reframing early medieval England as a persistently mobile society. [33]

Migration into East Anglia in this period overwhelmingly involved sea or coastal riverine movement rather than long overland treks. Modelling of early medieval migration routes and the broader archaeological pattern point to repeated crossings in relatively small vessels, not single armadas: groups of warriors, traders, craftsmen, dependants and some families moving along familiar seaways. [34]

In addition to the limiting founder effects of migration on the genetic diversity for subsequent generations, several interacting social processes during this time period could have created strong successive genetic bottlenecks on particular Y‑DNA lineages that migrated into Britain, especially in eastern and southern England. These processes could have sharply magnified a few male lines while eliminating many others, even when total population size is not tiny. [35]

The following are possible social processes that may have contributed to continued bottlenecks associated with the G-Y38335 lineage:

1. Founder effects in small kin‑based groups

Migration was often organized around extended families or warbands, not random samples of whole source populations. If a settlement is founded by a handful of related males (for example, several brothers and their close agnates), their Y lineages can rapidly dominate the local male pool purely by descent over a few generations. Repeated “patchy” colonization along river valleys and coasts (Thames, Humber, East Anglia, etc.) means many local founder events in different micro‑regions, each amplifying a narrow subset of continental Y lineages. [36]

2. Inter-group conflict, elite success, and differential male survival

The period was marked by endemic local conflicts, struggles between indigenous and incoming groups, and later inter‑kingdom competition. If certain male lineages were over‑represented in militarily successful groups (early royal/elite kindreds, successful warbands), those lines would experience higher survival of male offspring, more captured land, and greater reproductive opportunity, while defeated lineages could be reduced or wiped out. Over time, repeated “winners keep reproducing” episodes generate classic male‑line bottlenecks: a few successful patrilines expand, many others contract or vanish, even if autosomal diversity remains quite high.

Several interacting processes in the fifth–ninth centuries could create strong genetic bottlenecks in particular Y‑DNA lineages that migrated into Britain, especially in eastern and southern England. These processes can sharply magnify a few male lines while eliminating many others, even when total population size is not tiny. [37]

Early medieval Germanic societies were strongly patrilineal and patrilocal: inheritance, identity, and land passed mainly through male lines, and wives often moved to the husband’s community. High‑status males could support more surviving children, so their Y lineages disproportionately increase in frequency. Low‑status or land‑poor males might delay marriage, remain celibate, or lose children at higher rates, leading to gradual loss of their lines. [38]

4. Serial admixture but constrained male lines

Early medieval England shows repeated waves of gene flow: North Sea migrants, plus later streams of ancestry related to Iron Age France and continued continental contacts. Admixture, the process by which individuals or populations acquire genetic material from different ancestral sources, can increase autosomal diversity but actually tighten Y bottlenecks if the incoming men are few but highly successful, or if later waves intermarry into already dominant male lineages rather than introducing many new patrilines. Over centuries, this creates a pattern where autosomal DNA records complex mixing, but Y‑DNA is dominated by a limited set of “survivor” lineages (for example, I1 and R1a lines rising in early medieval England amid decline of older R1b‑L21 lines in the east). [39]

5. Genetic drift in small small open populations

Early medieval settlement was highly local: villages and estates functioned as semi‑isolated groups where most marriages occurred within a short radius. In such small male breeding populations, random genetic drift is strong; a Y lineage can fix or disappear in a few dozen generations purely by chance, especially after prior founder events. Limited long‑range male mobility (outside warfare and elite networks) allows each micro‑region to drift in its own direction, producing sharp local peaks of specific subclades that look like bottlenecks when sampled later. [40]

Continued Bottleneck and Migration: East Anglia to South Wessex

As depicted in illustration four below, between approximately 700 CE and 950 CE, descendants of G-Y38335 migrated from the East Anglia area to the south-central area of Wessex.

Illustration Four: General Migratory Path of MRCA of G-38335 and G-Z40857 (Contemporary Boundaries)

This migratory path is only documented by the two endpoint haplogroups. The approximate 250-year gap, or roughly eight generations, spans the period when East Anglia went from an independent Anglo-Saxon kingdom to a Mercian vassal and then to a Danish Danelaw, while Wessex emerged as the safe, dominant kingdom.

Between 700 CE and 970 CE, the map of England transformed from a fragmented collection of rival Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (the Heptarchy) into a largely unified kingdom under the House of Wessex. This transformation was driven by the rise of Mercian, then West Saxon dominance, combined with the catastrophic impact of Viking invasions, which redrew the map of the isle by creating a distinct “Danelaw” region before it was eventually reconquered and consolidated (see illustrations five through ten below). [41]

One useful way to think about this gap is nothing “genetic” has gone missing, but the combination of demography, sampling, and social history has produced a long, straight branch with no surviving, sampled offshoots. Several kinds of processes during the East Anglia to Wessex / Danelaw transition could have produced this result. A 250‑year, eight generation stretch with no known sub-branches usually means that parallel male lines either died out or have not yet been sampled, not that they never existed. In a volatile period, several potential causes increase that extinction risk per generation. Because this involves one narrow migratory channel, the genetic signature between origin and destination will look like a long, unbranched trunk: all other “local” cousins either stayed put, died out, or remain unsampled.

The endpoints of this gap hint at a story of migration from an East Anglian origin context on one side and later survival in a Wessex-connected setting on the other. The historical record fits a landscape where East Anglia was an early magnet for continental settlers and remained heavily “north continental” in genetic profile, but then came under Mercian influence, then Scandinavian conquest, and finally West Saxon hegemony. Wessex, relatively safer from direct Scandinavian settlement, became the consolidating power and a refuge/attractor for various displaced or mobile families.

Historical Reasons for Migration from East Anglia

Multiple generations could have migrated gradually, or a single family or family member could have fled the Viking conquest of 869–870 and settled in Wessex within a few decades. This migration may have reflected and was influenced by the political shift of the center of power westward to Wessex, which eventually unified the English kingdoms.

Illustrations Five Through Ten: The Changing Political Boundaries of the Britsh Isle

Illustrations Five and Six: British Isles 719 CE and 800 CE (see Note [42] for numbered areas in maps)

Illustration Seven and Eight: British Isles 899 CE and 950 CE

Illustration Nine and Ten: British Isles: 975 CE and 1066 CE

By the mid-seventh century, the eastern region of Anglia was often under pressure from the growing power of the kingdom of Mercia. While the initial settlement of the G-Z6748 lineage was focused on the east, pressure from Mercian hegemony and later the Danish Great Heathen Army in the late ninth century caused shifts in population movement and loyalty and may have influenced the migration to the south central area of the island. This pattern is reflected in the changing political boundaries in the maps in illustration five through ten. [43]

In 825 CE, East Anglia, seeking independence from Mercia, acknowledged the overlordship of Ecgberht of Wessex. By the late ninth century, Alfred the Great of Wessex secured the region against the Danes, and Edward the Elder later fully integrated East Anglia into the growing Kingdom of England in 918 CE. [44]

Several major historical events between 700–950 CE provide plausible explanations why a G-Y38335 ancestor or series of generations would migrate from East Anglia to south-central Wessex, the area where the G-Z40857 MRCA is estimated to have lived.

Table Three: Key Historical Drivers for Migrating from East Anglia to Wessex

Period	Event	Why it would drive migration south to Wessex
7th–8th century	Mercian hegemony over East Anglia – Mercia (under Æthelbald, then Offa 757–796) dominated East Anglia, killing King Æthelbert (794) and taking complete control by the 780s [45]	Political subordination, land confiscation, or elite displacement could push East Anglians to seek refuge in the independent kingdom of Wessex [46]
865–870	‘Great Heathen Army’ arrives – Danish Vikings land in East Anglia (865), in the winter at Thetford, kill King Edmund (869), and make East Anglia Danish [47]	Catastrophic conquest—East Anglia became part of the Danelaw. Many Anglo-Saxons fled south to unoccupied Wessex to escape Viking rule, slavery, or death [48]
871–899	Alfred the Great’s resistance – Alfred defeats Guthrum at Edington (878); treaty divides England (Wessex free, East Anglia Danish) [49]	Wessex became the primary refuge for Anglo-Saxons fleeing the Danelaw. Alfred actively welcomed refugees and rebuilt society, attracting migrants from occupied territories [50]
910–950	Wessex’s reconquest of the Danelaw – Edward the Elder and Æthelflæd conquer eastern Midlands; East Anglia comes under Wessex control by 918 [51]	Continued population movement as Wessex consolidated power; some East Anglians may have moved to the political heartland (south-central Wessex: Hampshire/Wiltshire) for economic or administrative reasons

The south-central Wessex (Hampshire, Wiltshire) area was the core royal territory of the House of Wessex—the heartland where Alfred, Edward the Elder, and later Æthelstan built their power. This area offered:

Safety from Viking control (unlike East Anglia after 869);
Economic opportunity in Alfred’s fortified burhs and revived trade; and
Political centrality as Wessex became the nucleus of unified England.

The Social Context Associated with the MRCA of G-Z40857 and Immediate Generations

After a 250 year phylogenetic gap, the most recent common ancestor of G-Z40857 appears in south central Wessex. As indicated in table two above, it is estimated that this ancestor was born around 971 CE. There is a sixty-eight percent chance that the MRCA of haplogrop G-Z40857 was born between 855 – 1070 CE [see note 29] .

The most likely scenario is a descendant of G-Y38335 fled East Anglia after 869–878, seeking safety in Wessex’s south-central core (Hampshire/Wiltshire), where King Alfred’s reforms created stability. Within two to three generations, the lineage, represented by the MRCA of G-Z04857, became established there by approximately the mid to late 900s CE.

Around the time of this ancestor’s birth, southern Wessex was in a phase of relative internal consolidation and monastic reform under King Edgar’s regime, with no major recorded battles within a kingdom that dominated most of England. By the mid–tenth century the royal house of Wessex had effectively become the royal dynasty of a unified English kingdom, with Wessex forming its southern core. After Æthelstan’s reign and subsequent consolidation, Wessex rulers controlled almost all territory south of the Danelaw. By Edgar’s time (959–975 CE) this was taken as a settled political fact rather than a frontier in crisis. Southern Wessex in the 960s–970s functioned more as the heartland of the realm than a contested border zone. [52]

Edgar’s reign is often interpreted as a high point of tenth‑century royal authority, with later tradition remembering him as “Edgar the Peaceful” because large‑scale warfare in England is not recorded for these years. Royal administration built on Alfredian and Edwardian foundations such as the fortified network of the burh system and fiscal structures of the hidage‑based taxation system still shaped local life in southern Wessex around 970. Lawgiving and royal assemblies in this period tend to be associated with the royal heartlands, which included key southern Wessex centers. The tenth century saw ongoing monetization and urban development in southern England, with burh‑towns evolving into more permanent commercial centers integrated into a kingdom‑wide economy. [53]

In southern Wessex, ports and market towns created or reinforced under Alfred and his successors continued to facilitate trade, tax collection, and royal presence by the 970s. For rural communities, the picture is of continuity under consolidated royal and ecclesiastical landlords, framed by older defensive and fiscal structures but with relatively few recorded disruptive events.

Illustration Elevin: Map of Hildage-Based Taxation

Hidage-based taxation was a historical land tax system in Anglo-Saxon and Norman England. It was assessed on the “hide,” a traditional unit of land theoretically capable of supporting a single household. This primitive but highly effective framework laid the groundwork for England’s early centralized tax state. [54]

Illustration Twelve: Medieval Tenth Century Bur-towns

Burh-towns (or burhs) were a network of fortified settlements established across early medieval England by King Alfred the Great and his successors (like Edward the Elder). Designed primarily to defend against Viking invasions, they also served as commercial and administrative centers that laid the foundation for English urban centers. [55]

Continuation of the Story: Part Two

Part two of the story discusses the Star-Like expansion of the phylogenetic tree. After roughly an eight generational gap in the phylogenetic tree, the ‘first wave’ of a star-like expansion of haplogroup branches start to emerge. It appears that descendants migrated westward from south central Wessex into the contested border line areas that were controlled by Anglo-Saxon and Celtic-Briton (nascent Welsh) areas.

The rapid diversification of haplogroup branches is evident between 1000–1500 CE. The clustering of haplogroups can be described as a single founding individual or small kin-group that achieved reproductive success just before the time of the Norman invasion and the continued proliferation of subclade branches through what is known as the Welsh Marches era.

Sources

Feature Image: “Every picture tells a story”. This banner visualy captures the essence of this story. The feature image consistes of two images. The image on the left is a modifed version of a Phylogenetic Tree created by Rolf Langland and Maurício Catelli (see reference below). The tree shows the relative sequential position of each of the haplogroups discussed in the story. The image on the left is a map I have created that illustrates the estimated migratory path and location of the MRCAs of G-Z6748 and G-Y38335 and G-Z40857.

Feature Image source for map: The source for creating the map is based on a variety of historical and archaeological studies as well as the estimates derived from the FTDNA Globetrekker tool, see Jim Griffis, Migrating to East Anglia, March 31, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/migrating-to-east-anglia/

Feature Image source for phylogenetic tree: Rolf Langland and Maurício Catelli, G-FGC477 / Chart D – v6 – 2 pages (Jan 26), G-L497 Y-DNA Work Project, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U_-FfascgkP2kS4nVPEPQVr0l6w8Qc7U/view

See a Larger version of the Feature Banner

[1] “A most recent common ancestor (MRCA), also known as a last common ancestor (LCA) . . . , is the most recent individual from which all organisms of a set are inferred to have descended.”

Most Recent Common Ancestor, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 29 September 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_recent_common_ancestor

[2] A Y-DNA phylogenetic tree structure is a branching diagram representing the patrilineal descent of human males based on Y-chromosome mutations. It is often called the YDNA Haplotree, it maps relationships from a common ancestor to modern lineages. Branches or subclades represent shared YDNA mutations, forming nested haplogroups.

Y-chromosome haplogroup G2a (M201) originated in the Middle East/Caucasus, characterized by its role as the primary lineage of early Neolithic farmers who expanded into Europe 9,000–6,000 years ago. Phylogenetically, it splits into multiple subclades (e.g. G2a1, G2a2, G2a3), with high diversity in the Caucasus and Anatolia, while European populations show high ancestral G2a concentrations. The definition of G2a has been refined by subsequent multiple YDNA defining mutations, including G-P15, G-L30, and others that helped differentiate Caucasian, Anatolian, and European branches.

See for example:

Sims LM, Garvey D, Ballantyne J. Improved resolution haplogroup G phylogeny in the Y chromosome, revealed by a set of newly characterized SNPs. PLoS One. 2009 Jun 4; 4(6):e5792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005792. PMID: 19495413; PMCID: PMC2686153. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2686153/

Rootsi S, Myres NM, Lin AA, Järve M, King RJ, Kutuev I, Cabrera VM, Khusnutdinova EK, Varendi K, Sahakyan H, Behar DM, Khusainova R, Balanovsky O, Balanovska E, Rudan P, Yepiskoposyan L, Bahmanimehr A, Farjadian S, Kushniarevich A, Herrera RJ, Grugni V, Battaglia V, Nici C, Crobu F, Karachanak S, Hooshiar Kashani B, Houshmand M, Sanati MH, Toncheva D, Lisa A, Semino O, Chiaroni J, Di Cristofaro J, Villems R, Kivisild T, Underhill PA. Distinguishing the co-ancestries of haplogroup G Y-chromosomes in the populations of Europe and the Caucasus. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012 Dec;20(12):1275-82. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.86. Epub 2012 May 16. PMID: 22588667; PMCID: PMC3499744. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3499744/

Primorac D, Šarac J, Havaš Auguštin D, Novokmet N, Bego T, Pinhasi R, Šlaus M, Novak M, Marjanović D. Y Chromosome Story-Ancient Genetic Data as a Supplementary Tool for the Analysis of Modern Croatian Genetic Pool. Genes (Basel). 2024 Jun 6;15(6):748. doi: 10.3390/genes15060748. PMID: 38927684; PMCID: PMC11202852. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11202852/

Burkhard Berger, Harald Niederstätter, Daniel Erhart, Christoph Gassner, Harald Schennach, Walther Parson, High resolution mapping of Y haplogroup G in Tyrol (Austria), Forensic Science International: Genetics, Volume 7, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 529-536, ISSN 1872-4973,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2013.05.013 .
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497313001361 )

Hay, Maciamo, Haplogrup G2a (Y-DNA), May 2023, Eupedia, https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml#google_vignette

[3] Your Haplogroup Story: G-Z6748, FamilyTreeDNA, https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/G-Z6748/story

G-Z6748 Haprogroup Project, About US, FamilyTreeDNA, https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/g-z6748/about

Hay, Maciamo, Haplogroup G2a (Y-DNA), Jul 2023, Eudepia, https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml

G-M201, The Genetic Genealogy of the Marres family, https://www.marres.nl/EN/G-M201.htm

See the following stories as a prelude to this story:

The Ancestors of Haplogroup G-Z6748: A Frisian or Frank – Part Nine, February 11, 2026, https://griffis.org/the-ancestors-of-haplogroup-g-z6748-a-frisian-or-frank-part-nine/
The Ancestor of Haplogroup G-Z6748, the Terps, Transport Corridors and Landscape Archaeology – Part Eight, January 14, 2026, https://griffis.org/the-ancestor-of-haplogroup-g-z6748-the-terps-transport-corridors-and-landscape-archaeology-part-eight/
The Turbulent Roman Era – The Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed – Part Seven, November 30, 2025, https://griffis.org/the-turbulent-roman-era-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-part-seven/
Looking at the Tail End of the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed – Part Six, October 30, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-tail-end-of-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-part-six/
Looking at the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed from the Bronze Age Onward – Part Five, October 8, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-from-the-bronze-age-onward-part-five/
Looking at the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed from the Bronze Age Onward – Part Four, September 21, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-from-the-bronze-age-onward-part-four/
Looking at the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed – Part Three , August 29, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-part-three/
Looking at the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed – Part Two, July 29, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-part-two/
Looking at the Griff(is)(es)(ith) Y-DNA Phylogenetic Gap Associated with the Meuse and Rhine River Watershed – Part One, June 30, 2025, https://griffis.org/looking-at-the-griffisesith-y-dna-phylogenetic-gap-associated-with-the-meuse-and-rhine-river-watershed-part-one/

[4] The G-Z6748 Haplogroup Project is a dedicated Y-DNA research group on FamilyTreeDNA that explores the patrilineal descendants of an ancient Iron Age ancestor. This genetic lineage branched off from the rest of humankind roughly 2,200 years ago and sits downstream from the broader G-M201 >> L89 >> P15 >> L497 haplogroup tree.

The project is open to all participants who test positive for the Z6748 SNP. Because participants in the project often undergo advanced Y-DNA testing (such as Big Y), the group helps map a sprawling network of even more specific sub-clades (e.g., G-FT206737, G-Y132509, G-FTA94519). Descendants are primarily found throughout Europe. Members of this haplogroup often research surname lines connected to ancient or noble British and Scandinavian lineages (like Welsh patrons, Scottish/English gentry, and Norman ancestry).

Background, G-Z6748 Haplogroup Project. FamilyTreeDNA, Accessed 27 June, 2026, https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/g-z6748/about/background

[5] As of the writing of this story, there were 153 FamilyTreeDNA (FTDNA) DNA testers that could trace their YDNA back to G-Z6748. The following table provides a distribution of those 153 YDNA testers based on the testers’ self reported earliest known direct paternal countries of origin.

Your Haplogroup Story: G-Z6748, FamilyTreeDNA, Accessed 1 Apr 2026, https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/G-Z6748/story

[6] Pattison , John E. “Integration Versus Apartheid in Post-Roman Britain: A Response to Thomas et al. (2008),” Human Biology 83(6), 715-733, (1 December 2011). https://doi.org/10.3378/027.083.0604

[7] Griffis, Jim, Migrating to East Anglia, March 31, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/migrating-to-east-anglia/

Griffis, Jim The Ancestors of Haplogroup G-Z6748: A Frisian or Frank – Part Nine, February 11, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/the-ancestors-of-haplogroup-g-z6748-a-frisian-or-frank-part-nine/

[8] G-Z6748 Haplogroup Project, About Us, FamilyTreeDNA, accessed 4 May 2026, https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/g-z6748/about

Haplogroup G –L497 Chart D: FGC477 Branch, L-497 Haplogroup Project, 24 Jan 2026, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U_-FfascgkP2kS4nVPEPQVr0l6w8Qc7U/view

[9] In genetics, an allele is simply an alternative version of a DNA sequence of base pairs at a specific location on a chromosome. The definitions of alleles in the context of SNPs and STRs differ primarily in what type of genetic variation is being measured.

A SNP represents a change at a single “letter” (nucleotide) in the DNA sequence. An STR is a region of DNA where short sequences of 2 to 6 base pairs are repeated over and over.

Allele	Description
SNP Allele	A change in a single nucleotide base (e.g., A vs. T)
STR Allele	A difference in the number of times a short DNA motif repeats (e.g., a “GATA” sequence repeating 8 times vs. 11 times)

Phillips C, García-Magariños M, Salas A, Carracedo A, Lareu MV. SNPs as Supplements in Simple Kinship Analysis or as Core Markers in Distant Pairwise Relationship Tests: When Do SNPs Add Value or Replace Well-Established and Powerful STR Tests? Transfus Med Hemother. 2012 Jun;39(3):202-210. doi: 10.1159/000338857. Epub 2012 May 12. PMID: 22851936; PMCID: PMC3375139. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3375139/

[10] 20.9.2: Genetic Drift, Libre Texts, h10tps://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Map:_Raven_Biology_12th_Edition/20:_Genes_Within_Populations/20.09:_Interactions_Among_Evolutionary_Forces/20.9.2:_Genetic_Drift

Kirk, Maggie, Genetic Drift and Founder Effects: Implications for Population Genetics, Conservation, and Human Health, April 16, 2024, Genet.Mol.Res. 23(2), https://www.geneticsmr.org/articles/genetic-drift-and-founder-effects-implications-for-population-genetics-conservation-and-human-health-7748.html

[11] An allele is one of two or more alternative versions of a gene at a specific location on a chromosome. Allele frequency measures how common a gene variant (allele) is within a population, calculated by dividing the count of a specific allele by the total of all alleles for that gene in the population. It is used to study genetic diversity, evolution, and population structure, with frequencies ranging from 0 to 1.0 (or 0–100%).

See:

Allele, National Human Genome Research Insitute, https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Allele

Allele Frequency, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 31 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allele_frequency

Minor Allele Frequency, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 14 December 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_allele_frequency

Allele frequency & the gene pool, Khan Academy, https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/natural-selection/hardy-weinberg-equilibrium/a/allele-frequency-the-gene-pool

Gonzalez-Galarza FF, Christmas S, Middleton D, Jones AR. Allele frequency net: a database and online repository for immune gene frequencies in worldwide populations. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011 Jan;39(Database issue):D913-9. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq1128. Epub 2010 Nov 9. PMID: 21062830; PMCID: PMC3013710. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21062830/

allele frequency, Scitable, https://www.nature.com/scitable/definition/allele-frequency-298/

[12] Y-DNA genetic drift is the random change in frequencies of Y-chromosome lineages (haplogroups or subclades) over time, purely by chance rather than because they are biologically better or worse. Genetic drift is the random, unpredictable variations of allele or lineage frequencies from one generation to the next, caused by random sampling of which men leave surviving sons and which do not. On the Y chromosome, this means some Y lineages expand, others shrink, and some disappear entirely, even if they are selectively neutral.

See:

Genetic Drift, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 28 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift

Chiaroni J, Underhill PA, Cavalli-Sforza LL. Y chromosome diversity, human expansion, drift, and cultural evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 1;106(48):20174-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0910803106. Epub 2009 Nov 17. Erratum in: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jul 27;107(30):13556. PMID: 19920170; PMCID: PMC2787129. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2787129/

Slyman, Raleigh, How does Y chromosome variation happen?, 27 Feb 2024, The Tech Interactive, https://www.thetech.org/ask-a-geneticist/articles/2024/y-chromosome-variation/

[13] A population bottleneck is a sharp, drastic reduction in the size of a population due to environmental events (e.g. earthquakes, fires, famine) or human activities (e.g. impact of patrilineal systems on genetic diversity, the repressive practices of social groups on othersocial groups, etc ). Demographic bottlenecks cause massive losses of genetic diversity, leaving the surviving population with a limited gene pool and increased genetic drift.

Typical features of a demographic bottleneck are:

A large population is drastically reduced for at least one generation (e.g., by disease, famine, climate event, habitat loss, hunting).
The survivors are effectively a random sample of the original population, so rare alleles are likely to be lost and a few previously uncommon alleles can drift to higher frequency.
When the population later expands, all descendants trace back to that small set of survivors, so the whole population shows reduced heterozygosity and fewer alleles per locus. Heterozygosity is the presence of two different versions (alleles) of a specific gene in an individual, with one inherited from each parent.

See:

Population bottleneck, Wikipeda, This page was last edited on 31 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck

Bottlenecks and founder effects, Understanding Evolution, https://evolution.berkeley.edu/bottlenecks-and-founder-effects/

Klymkowski, Michael and Melanie M. Cooper, Population size, founder effects and population bottlenecks, LibreTexts, https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Cell_and_Molecular_Biology/Biofundamentals_1e_(Klymkowsky_and_Cooper)/03:_Evolutionary_mechanisms_and_the_diversity_of_life/3.14:_Population_size_founder_effects_and_population_bottlenecks

Widdows, Megan, Genetic bottlenecks and the Founder effect: lessons learnt from the Woolly Mammoth, Evolution Letters, https://evolutionletters.wordpress.com/evolution-learning-zone/evolution-explained/genetic-bottlenecks-and-the-founder-effect-lessons-learnt-from-the-woolly-mammoth/

Kirk, Maggie, Genetic Drift and Founder Effects: Implications for Population Genetics, Conservation, and Human Health, April 16, 2024 Genet.Mol.Res. 23(2): , https://www.geneticsmr.org/articles/genetic-drift-and-founder-effects-implications-for-population-genetics-conservation-and-human-health.pdf

[14] A founder effect is a loss of genetic variation occurring when a new population is established by a very small number of individuals from a larger population. It causes reduced genetic diversity, with the new group’s gene frequencies differing significantly from the original population.

A founder effect occurs when a new population (a “colony”) is established by a small number of individuals drawn from a larger source population. Because the founders are few, they carry a non-representative sample of the source gene pool, and this sampling distortion is then amplified as the new population grows.

Typical features of a founder effect are:

A small group separates from a larger population (e.g., colonizing an island, migrating to a new region, or becoming geographically/culturally isolated).
The founding group has reduced genetic variation relative to the source and may, by chance, carry some alleles at unusually high or low frequency.

See:

Bottlenecks and founder effects, Understanding Evolution, https://evolution.berkeley.edu/bottlenecks-and-founder-effects/

[15] Mustapha J A, How does the genetic bottleneck or population expansion affect the pattern of DNA polymorphisms?, 8 Jan 2016, ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/post/How-does-the-genetic-bottleneck-or-population-expansion-affect-the-pattern-of-DNA-polymorphisms

population bottleneck, scitable, https://www.nature.com/scitable/definition/population-bottleneck-300/

Bottlenecks and founder effects, Understanding Evolution, UC Museum of Paleontology, https://evolution.berkeley.edu/bottlenecks-and-founder-effects/

Lucena-Perez M, Kleinman-Ruiz D, Marmesat E, Saveljev AP, Schmidt K, Godoy JA. Bottleneck-associated changes in the genomic landscape of genetic diversity in wild lynx populations. Evol Appl. 2021 Oct 8;14(11):2664-2679. doi: 10.1111/eva.13302. PMID: 34815746; PMCID: PMC8591332. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8591332/

Population Bottleneck, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 31 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck

Haplotype, International Society of Genetic GenealologyWiki, This page was last edited on 1 July 2021, https://isogg.org/wiki/Haplotype

Haplotype, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 27 February 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplotype

What is the difference between a Y-DNA haplotype and Y-DNA haplogroup?, genebase, https://www.genebase.com/what-is-the-difference-between-a-y-dna-haplotype-and-y-dna-haplogroup/

[16] See for a discussion of the relationship between bottlenecks, founder effects and star phylogenies:

Karmin M, Saag L, Vicente M, Wilson Sayres MA, Järve M, Talas UG, Rootsi S, Ilumäe AM, Mägi R, Mitt M, Pagani L, Puurand T, Faltyskova Z, Clemente F, Cardona A, Metspalu E, Sahakyan H, Yunusbayev B, Hudjashov G, DeGiorgio M, Loogväli EL, Eichstaedt C, Eelmets M, Chaubey G, Tambets K, Litvinov S, Mormina M, Xue Y, Ayub Q, Zoraqi G, Korneliussen TS, Akhatova F, Lachance J, Tishkoff S, Momynaliev K, Ricaut FX, Kusuma P, Razafindrazaka H, Pierron D, Cox MP, Sultana GN, Willerslev R, Muller C, Westaway M, Lambert D, Skaro V, Kovačevic L, Turdikulova S, Dalimova D, Khusainova R, Trofimova N, Akhmetova V, Khidiyatova I, Lichman DV, Isakova J, Pocheshkhova E, Sabitov Z, Barashkov NA, Nymadawa P, Mihailov E, Seng JW, Evseeva I, Migliano AB, Abdullah S, Andriadze G, Primorac D, Atramentova L, Utevska O, Yepiskoposyan L, Marjanovic D, Kushniarevich A, Behar DM, Gilissen C, Vissers L, Veltman JA, Balanovska E, Derenko M, Malyarchuk B, Metspalu A, Fedorova S, Eriksson A, Manica A, Mendez FL, Karafet TM, Veeramah KR, Bradman N, Hammer MF, Osipova LP, Balanovsky O, Khusnutdinova EK, Johnsen K, Remm M, Thomas MG, Tyler-Smith C, Underhill PA, Willerslev E, Nielsen R, Metspalu M, Villems R, Kivisild T. A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture. Genome Res. 2015 Apr;25(4):459-66. doi: 10.1101/gr.186684.114. Epub 2015 Mar 13. PMID: 25770088; PMCID: PMC4381518. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4381518/

Zeng, T.C., Aw, A.J. & Feldman, M.W. Cultural hitchhiking and competition between patrilineal kin groups explain the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck. Nat Commun9, 2077 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04375-6 ,

Khan, Razib, Genghis Khan: they don’t make stars like they used to: Manspreading like the ancients: star phylogenies and the rise and fall of hyper-patriarchy, 26 Nov 2023, Razib Kan’s Unsupervised Learning, https://www.razibkhan.com/p/genghis-khan-manspreading-like-the

[17] Examples of studies that utilize the concept of cultural hitchiking:

Foody, M. George B. , Genetic Impact of the Bronze Age at the Fringes of Europe. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. 2021, https://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/35516/, https://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/35516/1/FINAL%20THESIS%20-%20Foody.pdf

Batini C, Hallast P, Vågene ÅJ, Zadik D, Eriksen HA, Pamjav H, Sajantila A, Wetton JH, Jobling MA. Population resequencing of European mitochondrial genomes highlights sex-bias in Bronze Age demographic expansions. Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 21;7(1):12086. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-11307-9. PMID: 28935946; PMCID: PMC5608872. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5608872/

Zeng, T.C., Aw, A.J. & Feldman, M.W. Cultural hitchhiking and competition between patrilineal kin groups explain the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck. Nat Commun, 9, 2077 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04375-6

Ackland GJ, Signitzer M, Stratford K, Cohen MH. Cultural hitchhiking on the wave of advance of beneficial technologies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 22;104(21):8714-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0702469104. Epub 2007 May 16. PMID: 17517663; PMCID: PMC1885568. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1885568/

Guyon, L., Guez, J., Toupance, B. et al. Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck. Nat Commun 15, 3243 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47618-5

S. Carrignon, E.R. Crema, A. Kandler, & S. Shennan, Postmarital residence rules and transmission pathways in cultural hitchhiking, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 121 (48) e2322888121, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2322888121 (2024).

[18] G-L497 Y-DNA Haplogroup Project, FamilyTreeDNA, About Us, https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/g-ydna/about?srsltid=AfmBOorfbKDPy0LJSW66_gQbGMyCX-0o7BUKA22BopSqeeXuGntPxzYU

Haplogroup G-P303, Wikipeda, This page was last edited on 26 January 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G-P303

[19] Quote: Haplogroup G-M201, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 20 February 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G-M201

The quote references the ISOGG haplogroup G2a3b1 which is G-P303 . Direct match to G2a3b1 not found, but it is 3 steps up the haplotree G2a = G-P15.

See also:

Griffis, Jim, Migrating to East Anglia, March 31, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/migrating-to-east-anglia/

Griffis, Jim, The Ancestors of Haplogroup G-Z6748: A Frisian or Frank – Part Nine, February 11, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/the-ancestors-of-haplogroup-g-z6748-a-frisian-or-frank-part-nine/

Griffis, Jim, The Ancestor of Haplogroup G-Z6748, the Terps, Transport Corridors and Landscape Archaeology – Part Eight , January 14, 2026, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/the-ancestor-of-haplogroup-g-z6748-the-terps-transport-corridors-and-landscape-archaeology-part-eight/

[28] Griffis, Jim, Migrating to East Anglia, 31 Mar 2026, Griffis Family, Selected Sotires from the Past, https://griffis.org/migrating-to-east-anglia/

[29] Scientific Details for G-Z6748

Scientific Details for G-Y38335

Click for Larger View | Source: Scientific Details for Haplogroup G-Y38335, FamilyTreeDNA, Accessed 12 Feb 2026, https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/G-Y38335/scientific?section=tmrca

Scientific Details for G-Z40857:

[30] Leggett, S., Hakenbeck, S., & C O’Connell, T. (2025). Large-Scale Isotopic Data Reveal Gendered Migration into Early Medieval England 400–1100. Medieval Archaeology, 69(2), 280–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00766097.2025.2583016

Gretzinger, J., Sayer, D., Justeau, P. et al. The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool. Nature 610, 112–119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2

Roots of medieval migration into England uncovered in new study, Press Release, 5 Jan 2026, Univesrity of Edinburgh, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1111454

Roots of medieval migration into England uncovered in new study, 8 Jan 2026, Archaeology Department, University of Cambridge, https://www.arch.cam.ac.uk/news/roots-of-medieval-migration-into-england-uncovered-in-new-study

Migration Period, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 27 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

McIntosh, Matthew, The Migration Period in Ancient Europe, 300-568 CE, 15 May 2020, Brewminate, https://brewminate.com/the-migration-period-in-ancient-europe-300-568-ce/

[31] See Jim Griffis, Migrating to East Anglia, 31 Mar 2026, Griffis Family,: Stories from the Past, https://griffis.org/migrating-to-east-anglia/

[32] The fifth-century Migration Period (or Völkerwanderung) was a transformative era of mass population movements and tribal incursions that permanently reshaped Europe. Driven by Hunnish expansion, climate shifts, and tribal conflicts, this wave of migration precipitated the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and laid the foundation for medieval European states.

Key Migrations of the fifth Century

The Franks (Fifth century): Moving into Roman Gaul more gradually, these western Germanic tribes integrated with the local Roman-Gaulish populace. They fended off rival tribes like the Visigoths and the Alemanni, forming the nucleus of the future French and German states

Visigoths (410 CE ): Having migrated from the Balkans, they sacked Rome in 410 CE. They subsequently settled in southern Gaul (France) and established a powerful kingdom spanning nearly all of Hispania (Spain).

Vandals, Alans, and Suebi (406–409 CE): In a massive flight from the Huns, these groups crossed the frozen Rhine on December 31, 406. They swept through Gaul and into Spain before the Vandals crossed into North Africa in 429 to establish an independent state at Carthage.

Angles, Saxons, and Jutes (Mid-fifth century): With the Roman military withdrawing from Britain, these Germanic tribes from the Jutland Peninsula migrated across the North Sea, pushing native Britons west and establishing their own kingdoms.

See:

Migration Perod, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 27 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

van der Crabben, Jan, Migration Age, 10 Jun 2010, World History Encyclopedia, https://www.worldhistory.org/Migration_Age/

Britannica Editors. “Migration period”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 23 Mar. 2018, https://www.britannica.com/event/Dark-Ages

[33] Leggett, S., Hakenbeck, S., & C O’Connell, T. (2025). Large-Scale Isotopic Data Reveal Gendered Migration into Early Medieval England 400–1100. Medieval Archaeology, 69(2), 280–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00766097.2025.2583016

Anastasi, Luciano, Migration into Medieval England: New Evidence Shakes Old Narratives, 12 Jan 2026, History Medieval, https://historymedieval.com/migration-into-medieval-england-new-evidence-shakes-old-narratives/

[34] Leggett, S., Hakenbeck, S., & C O’Connell, T. (2025). Large-Scale Isotopic Data Reveal Gendered Migration into Early Medieval England 400–1100. Medieval Archaeology, 69(2), 280–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00766097.2025.2583016

[35] Ashworth, James, Early English Anglo-Saxons descended from mass European migration, 21 Sep 2022, Science News, Natural History Museum London, https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2022/september/early-english-anglo-saxons-descended-from-mass-european-migration.html

Genetic history of the British Isles, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 11 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_British_Isles

Leggett, S., Hakenbeck, S., & C O’Connell, T. (2025). Large-Scale Isotopic Data Reveal Gendered Migration into Early Medieval England c 400–1100. Medieval Archaeology, 69(2), 280–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00766097.2025.2583016

Anastasi, L., Migration into Medieval England: New Evidence Shakes Old Narratives – Medieval History. Medieval History – Yesterday in a Nutshell. 12 Jan 2026 https://historymedieval.com/migration-into-medieval-england-new-evidence-shakes-old-narratives/

McIntosh, Matthew, The Migration Period in Ancient Europe, 300-568 CE, 15 May 2020, Brewminate, https://brewminate.com/the-migration-period-in-ancient-europe-300-568-ce/

Gretzinger, J., Sayer, D., Justeau, P. et al. The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool. Nature 610, 112–119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2

J.F. Wilson, D.A. Weiss, M. Richards, M.G. Thomas, N. Bradman, & D.B. Goldstein, Genetic evidence for different male and female roles during cultural transitions in the British Isles, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 98 (9) 5078-5083, 2001, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.071036898

Flavio De Angelis, Elizabeth A. Nelson, Sam Leggett, Kalina Kassadjikova, Tanya R.Pelayo, Rob Poulton, Todd C. Rae, Lars Fehren-Schmitz, Lia Betti, Carlos Eduardo G.Amorim, The Genomic Legacy of the Norman Conquest in Rural England, bioRxiv 2026.04.10.716983; doi: https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.04.10.716983

[36] Modern genetic studies of early medieval Britain support a model of fifth-seventh century Anglo-Saxon migration that was not a uniform, monolithic invasion. It was a patchy, sustained movement of Germanic peoples from the continental North Sea zone (modern-day Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark). This migration involved localized settlements or “founder events,” particularly along accessible coasts and river valleys like the Thames, Humber, and across East Anglia.

The genetic impact and “patchy” colonization resulted in:

Localized Founder Events: The arrival was characterized by smaller groups settling in specific areas, where they often remained separate from local British populations in the immediate post-Roman period.
Narrow Subset of Lineages: These localized communities allowed specific male lineages to thrive and dominate through local, generational growth.
Regional Differences: This created distinct regional genetic landscapes—for example, higher concentrations of continental DNA in the east/southeast (30–40 percent or more) and significantly less in the west and north, where the local, pre-existing population remained more dominant.

Specific Y-Lineage Evidence:

Male Dominance: The colonization was heavily driven by men, with Y-chromosomal DNA in early Anglo-Saxon England showing up to 50–100 percentontinental ancestry in some central areas.
Continental Markers: The specific lineages linked to this, which amplified through these local, patchy events, include R1b-U106, R1a-M420, and I1-M253, which are common in northern and central Europe.
Survival Rates: While subsequent Viking, Norman, and other influences occurred, the foundational 5th–7th century settlements provided the “patchy” genetic base that still shows high continental input in regions like East Anglia.

This process resulted in an early English population where the first settlers’ origins were tightly linked to specific areas of the continent, later modified by local admixture with the local Romano-British population.

See:

Roberston, Lauren, Combined genetics and archaeology data reveal origins of the early English gene pool, 27 Sep 2022, Front Line Genomics, https://frontlinegenomics.com/combined-genetics-and-archaeology-data-reveal-origins-of-the-early-english-gene-pool/

Gretzinger, J., Sayer, D., Justeau, P. et al. The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool. Nature 610, 112–119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2

Michael E. Weale, Deborah A. Weiss, Rolf F. Jager, Neil Bradman, Mark G. Thomas, Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 19, Issue 7, July 2002, Pages 1008–1021, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004160, https://www.csueastbay.edu/museum/files/docs/exhibit/dna/dna-chrom-migration.pdf

Ashworth, James, Early English Anglo-Saxons descended from mass European migration, 21 Sept 2022, Natural History Museum London, https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2022/september/early-english-anglo-saxons-descended-from-mass-european-migration.html

[37] Based on the historical context of the British Isles between 700 and 950 CE, the era, characterized by Anglo-Saxon migration and Viking raids/settlement, saw significant, often violent, population turnover, particularly in eastern and central England.

Male-Line Bottlenecks (Y-DNA): Modern genetic studies show that a few male lines dominate the Y-chromosome landscape of Europe and the British Isles, with these bottlenecks often reinforced by the success of specific patrilines associated with the Bronze Age Bell Beaker culture, and later, the Iron Age Celts and Germanic peoples.
The “Winner” Effect: The success of Viking and Anglo-Saxon invaders (associated with Y-haplogroups I1, R1a, and R1b-U106) likely accelerated this process, where successful warbands and elites in early medieval England replaced or absorbed existing populations, leading to high survival of their own patrilines.
Autosomal vs. Y-DNA Data: While Y-DNA shows strong, recent, and localized expansion (many men with the same ancestor), the autosomal DNA (total ancestry) remains much more diverse, revealing that these successful male lineages were mixing with the existing indigenous, mainly Celtic-like, population.

Consequently, while the appearance of the population (autosomal DNA) changed more gradually, the Y-chromosome data shows that the early medieval period exacerbated the “winners keep reproducing” dynamic, where a few elite male lineages expanded, and others (including native Romano-British or existing Northumbrian lineages) contracted or were destroyed.

See:

Hay, Maciamo, Genetic history of the British and the Irish, Oct 2016, Eupedia, https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/britain_ireland_dna.shtml

Pickrell, John, DNA Untangles Britain’s Past : Genetic survey reveals Viking blood in modern day Britain, 27 May 2003, Science.Org

Gretzinger J, Sayer D, Justeau P, Altena E, Pala M, Dulias K, Edwards CJ, Jodoin S, Lacher L, Sabin S, Vågene ÅJ, Haak W, Ebenesersdóttir SS, Moore KHS, Radzeviciute R, Schmidt K, Brace S, Bager MA, Patterson N, Papac L, Broomandkhoshbacht N, Callan K, Harney É, Iliev L, Lawson AM, Michel M, Stewardson K, Zalzala F, Rohland N, Kappelhoff-Beckmann S, Both F, Winger D, Neumann D, Saalow L, Krabath S, Beckett S, Van Twest M, Faulkner N, Read C, Barton T, Caruth J, Hines J, Krause-Kyora B, Warnke U, Schuenemann VJ, Barnes I, Dahlström H, Clausen JJ, Richardson A, Popescu E, Dodwell N, Ladd S, Phillips T, Mortimer R, Sayer F, Swales D, Stewart A, Powlesland D, Kenyon R, Ladle L, Peek C, Grefen-Peters S, Ponce P, Daniels R, Spall C, Woolcock J, Jones AM, Roberts AV, Symmons R, Rawden AC, Cooper A, Bos KI, Booth T, Schroeder H, Thomas MG, Helgason A, Richards MB, Reich D, Krause J, Schiffels S. The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool. Nature. 2022 Oct;610(7930):112-119. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2. Epub 2022 Sep 21. Erratum in: Nature. 2022 Nov;611(7934):E3. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05429-y. PMID: 36131019; PMCID: PMC9534755. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9534755/

[38] The migration of Germanic societies to England in the early medieval period, including Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Friesians, was characterized by social structures that influenced the genetic landscape. Evidence from studies suggest these societies operated with strong patrilineal customs, where inheritance and identity were passed through male lines.

Impact on Population Genetics and Y Lineages:

High-Status Male Reproductive Advantage: Early Anglo-Saxon elites, particularly those with higher social and economic standing, were able to support more surviving children, which allowed their Y-chromosome lineages to increase disproportionately.
Gradual Loss of Low-Status Lines: The reverse was true for low-status or land-poor males, who may have faced higher infant mortality, delayed marriage, or enforced celibacy, resulting in the gradual disappearance of their paternal lines.
Patrilocal Residence: The practice of patrilocality, where wives moved to the husband’s community, meant that Y-chromosome (paternal) signals often reflected the origin of the male, while mitochondrial DNA (maternal) might reflect a more local origin.
Cultural Hitchhiking: The social structure likely caused “cultural hitchhiking,” where Y-chromosomes became closely tied to social groups, enhancing the spread of specific “star-shaped” male lineages associated with elites.
Genetic Shift: Studies have indicated a substantial increase in continental Northern European ancestry in eastern England during this period—up to 76% in some areas—often linked to these Germanic populations.
Long-Term Impact: This structural, patrilineal-driven reproduction resulted in a lasting legacy on the English gene pool, with high-status male lineages having a greater influence on the modern population.

These societal patterns of inheritance, marriage, and social stratification, rather than just raw numbers of migrants, played a key role in the rapid expansion of Germanic ancestry in England.

See:

Gretzinger, J., Sayer, D., Justeau, P. et al. The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool. Nature 610, 112–119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2

Thomas MG, Stumpf MP, Härke H. Evidence for an apartheid-like social structure in early Anglo-Saxon England. Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Oct 22;273(1601):2651-7. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3627. PMID: 17002951; PMCID: PMC1635457. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1635457/

Blöcher, Jens & Vallini, Leonardo & Velte, Maren & Eckel, Raphael & Guyon, Léa & Winkelbach, Laura & Thomas, Mark & Gharehbaghi, Nadia & Mitchell, Cassandra & Schümann, Jonas & Köhler, Sophie & Seyr, Elsa & Krichel, Katharina & Rau, Sophie & Hirsch, Jana & Duras, Jana & Klement, Kristin & Wilkenhöner, Miriam & Vetterdietz, Lisa & Burger, Joachim. (2025). Historic Genomes Uncover Demographic Shifts and Kinship Structures in Post-Roman Central Europe. 10.1101/2025.03.01.640862. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389635889_Historic_Genomes_Uncover_Demographic_Shifts_and_Kinship_Structures_in_Post-Roman_Central_Europe/citation/download

Guyon L, Guez J, Toupance B, Heyer E, Chaix R. Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck. Nat Commun. 2024 Apr 24;15(1):3243. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-47618-5. PMID: 38658560; PMCID: PMC11043392. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11043392/

[39] Early medieval England (c. 450–850 CE) witnessed significant demographic shifts, with genetic evidence indicating that up to 76 percent of the ancestry of individuals in eastern and southern England originated from continental North Sea regions, such as modern-day Germany and Denmark. This influx was not a single event but a complex, multi-century process of migration and interaction.

Regional Differences: This process was not uniform; Eastern and Southern England show higher levels of North Sea/Germanic ancestry, while Western and Northern regions retained higher levels of indigenous Brythonic-related ancestry.

Autosomal Diversity & Admixture: The period was characterized by widespread mixing between incoming continental North Sea groups and local Romano-British populations. This resulted in an overall increase in genetic diversity in the autosomal (whole-genome) DNA, reflecting a patchwork of local and foreign ancestry, with higher levels of North Sea ancestry observed in eastern England.

Y-DNA Bottlenecks & “Survivor” Lineages: Despite the increased autosomal diversity, Y-chromosome DNA (paternal lines) tells a different story. The influx resulted in a severe, narrowed representation of certain paternal lineages. The early medieval period saw a decline in pre-existing insular R1b-L21 lines in the east.

Rise of New Male Lineages: In their place, Y-DNA haplogroups often associated with North Sea Germanic populations, such as I1 and R1a, increased significantly. These lineages, along with specific R1b sub-clades like U106, were often carried by highly successful, high-status males who successfully intermarried or replaced the older male population, reducing the overall diversity of male lines.

Continued Continental Contact: Later waves of migration, including those bringing ancestry related to Iron Age France and other continental zones, contributed further to the genetic landscape but often intermarried with these already established, dominant, Germanic-linked male lineages, reinforcing the Y-DNA bottleneck effect.

See:

Robertson, Lauren, Combined genetics and archaeology data reveal origins of the early English gene pool, 27 Sep 2022, Front Line Genomics, https://frontlinegenomics.com/combined-genetics-and-archaeology-data-reveal-origins-of-the-early-english-gene-pool/

Joscha Gretzinger and Stephan Schiffels, Transformations in early medieval England: the perspective from population genetics, 5 October 2022, Current Archaeology, Issue 392, https://the-past.com/feature/transformations-in-early-medieval-england/

Richards, Martin, The Anglo-Saxon migration and the formation of the early English gene pool, 17 Aug 2022, Nature, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05247-2 , https://www.academia.edu/111305156/The_Anglo_Saxon_migration_and_the_formation_of_the_early_English_gene_pool

Max Planck Institute, The Anglo-Saxon migration: new insights from genetics, 21 Sep 2021, Popular Archaeology, Spring 2026, https://popular-archaeology.com/article/the-anglo-saxon-migration-new-insights-from-genetics/

[40] The scenario described is a well-recognized pattern in population genetics and molecular anthropology, particularly when studying Y-chromosome haplogroups in mountainous, isolated, or formerly tribal regions. This phenomenon highlights the contrast between long-term continuity (resulting from regional drift) and short-term, explosive expansion (resulting from warfare or patrilineal elite dominance).

Dynamics of Micro-Regional Genetic Drift:

Isolation and Drift: When male mobility is limited—due to geography, social structure, or low population density—communities drift genetically, creating high concentrations of specific subclades that differ from neighboring valleys.
The “Bottleneck” Illusion: These high concentrations, or “local peaks,” are often misread in modern sampling as a sharp population bottleneck (a massive die-off). In reality, they are usually the result of a small founder population expanding over time, amplified by the fact that only a few men with specific lineages successfully reproduced (a “founder effect”).

See:

Lell JT, Wallace DC. The peopling of Europe from the maternal and paternal perspectives. Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Dec;67(6):1376-81. doi: 10.1086/316917. Epub 2000 Nov 9. PMID: 11078473; PMCID: PMC1287914. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1287914/

Cox MP, Hammer MF. A question of scale: Human migrations writ large and small. BMC Biol. 2010 Jul 21;8:98. doi: 10.1186/1741-7007-8-98. PMID: 20659353; PMCID: PMC2908064. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2908064/

Furlan E, Stoklosa J, Griffiths J, Gust N, Ellis R, Huggins RM, Weeks AR. Small population size and extremely low levels of genetic diversity in island populations of the platypus, Ornithorhynchus anatinus. Ecol Evol. 2012 Apr;2(4):844-57. doi: 10.1002/ece3.195. PMID: 22837830; PMCID: PMC3399204. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3399204/

[41] History of Anglo-Saxon England, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 28 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Anglo-Saxon_England

[42] Numbered Areas in Maps:

Number Areas	Numbered Areas
1. Ystrad Tywi 2. Ceredigion 3. Brycheiniog 4. Glywysing 5. Gwent 7. Buellt 9. Dogfeiling 10. Ergyng 11. Caer Gloui 12. Deywr 13. Suth Rig (Surrey) 14. Middle-Seaxe (Middlesex) 15. Spaldingas / Sweod Ora 16. Herstingas 17. North Engles 18. South Engles 20. Morgannwg 23. Buchan 24. Strathearn 33. Brecknock 34. Monmouth 35. Glamorgan	37. Pembroke 38. Montgomery 39. Uí Cahan (O’Cahan) 40. Fir Manach (Fermanagh) 41. Clandeboye 42. Iveagh 44. West Bréifne 45. East Bréifne 46. Uí Farrells (O’Farrell) 47. Uí Conchobhair (O’Connor) 48. Uí Ceallaigh (O’Kelly) 49. Uí Flaithbheartaigh (O’Flaherty) 50. Muineachán (Monaghan) 51. Iveragh 52. Dúiche Ealla (Duhallow) 53. Múscraí (Muskerry) 54. Bhéara (Beare) 55. Cairbrigh (Carbery)

Number Areas

Numbered Areas

1. Ystrad Tywi
2. Ceredigion
3. Brycheiniog
4. Glywysing
5. Gwent
7. Buellt
9. Dogfeiling
10. Ergyng
11. Caer Gloui
12. Deywr
13. Suth Rig (Surrey)
14. Middle-Seaxe (Middlesex)
15. Spaldingas / Sweod Ora
16. Herstingas
17. North Engles
18. South Engles
20. Morgannwg
23. Buchan
24. Strathearn
33. Brecknock
34. Monmouth
35. Glamorgan

37. Pembroke
38. Montgomery
39. Uí Cahan (O’Cahan)
40. Fir Manach (Fermanagh)
41. Clandeboye
42. Iveagh
44. West Bréifne
45. East Bréifne
46. Uí Farrells (O’Farrell)
47. Uí Conchobhair (O’Connor)
48. Uí Ceallaigh (O’Kelly)
49. Uí Flaithbheartaigh (O’Flaherty)
50. Muineachán (Monaghan)
51. Iveragh
52. Dúiche Ealla (Duhallow)
53. Múscraí (Muskerry)
54. Bhéara (Beare)
55. Cairbrigh (Carbery)

[43] By the mid-seventh century, the Kingdom of East Anglia frequently fell under the dominance of the expanding Kingdom of Mercia. While initially a powerful kingdom, East Anglia was under heavy pressure, with kings such as Sigeberht and Ecgric killed by the Mercian king Penda in the early 640s, and later under total control by Mercian rulers such as Offa.

This regional pressure and the subsequent devastation by the Danish Great Heathen Army in the late ninth century created significant shifts in population and loyalty:

Final Absorption: Eventually, these shifted loyalties saw many inhabitants in the region begin to identify as “English” and support the Wessex kings against the Danes, leading to its final incorporation into the kingdom of England under Edward the Elder in the early 10th century.

Mercian Hegemony (Seventh-Eighth Century): East Anglia was often reduced to a puppet state or client kingdom, with Mercian kings dominating the East Anglian political structure, culminating in direct control under Offa of Mercia in 794.

Danish Invasion (Ninth Century): ‘The Great Heathen Army’ landed in East Anglia in 865, and in 869, they defeated and killed the last native king, St. Edmund the Martyr.

Shifts in Loyalty and Population: The Viking conquest turned East Anglia into a central part of the Danelaw. This led to a significant Scandinavian, or Danish, settlement alongside the native Anglo-Saxon population.

See:

Kingdom of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 25 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_East_Anglia

List of monarchs of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 1 February 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_East_Anglia

Iles, Alex, The Great heathen Army ‘The Vaiking Invasion, YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsN3cGsnkDU

[44] Kingdom of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 25 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_East_Anglia

List of monarchs of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 1 February 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_East_Anglia

[45] Kingdom of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 25 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_East_Anglia

Abernathey, Susan, Offa, Anglo-Saxon King of Mercia, 18 Apr 2021, The Freelance History Writer, https://thefreelancehistorywriter.com/2014/04/18/offa-anglo-saxon-king-of-mercia/

[46] A brief history of Offa’s Dyke, 25, Apr 2015, History Extra, https://www.historyextra.com/period/anglo-saxon/a-brief-history-of-offas-dyke/

[47] McIntosh, Matthew A. , Vikings in East Anglia: Conquest and Impact , 24 APR 2017, Brewminate, https://brewminate.com/vikings-in-east-anglia-conquest-and-impact/

Johnson, Ben, Invaders! Angles, Saxons and Vikings, Historic UK, https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Invaders/

Kingdom of East Anglia, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 25 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_East_Anglia

Great Heathen Army, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 12 February 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Heathen_Army

Weiss, Daniel, The Viking Great Army, Mar/Apr 2018, Archaeology Magazine, https://archaeology.org/issues/march-april-2018/features/viking-great-army/

[48] McIntosh, Matthew A. , Vikings in East Anglia: Conquest and Impact , 24 APR 2017, Brewminate, https://brewminate.com/vikings-in-east-anglia-conquest-and-impact/

The Vikings in Britain, 13 Jan 2011, Historical Association, https://www.history.org.uk/primary/resource/3867/the-vikings-in-britain-a-brief-history

[49] Whitelock, Dorothy. “Alfred”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 24 Mar. 2026, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-king-of-Wessex .

McIntosh, Matthew A. , Vikings in East Anglia: Conquest and Impact , 24 APR 2017, Brewminate, https://brewminate.com/vikings-in-east-anglia-conquest-and-impact/

[50] By rebuilding society and creating a haven, King Alfred the Great laid the structural foundations for the eventual unification of England. Alfred’s rebuilding and defensive efforts created a magnetic pull for Anglo-Saxons looking to escape the Danelaw. His reforms transformed Wessex into a beacon of stability through several key initiatives:

The Burghal System: Alfred established a network of 33 fortified towns (burhs) across his kingdom. These ensured that no West Saxon was ever more than a day’s ride from safety. This defensive security allowed refugee populations to settle and rebuild their lives without constant fear of raiding.
Reforming the Military: He reorganized the Anglo-Saxon fyrd (military), splitting his forces so that one half was on duty guarding the kingdom while the other tended to their fields and homes. This allowed society and agriculture to thrive, which was essential to supporting the influx of migrants.
Literacy and Education: Recognizing the cultural toll of the Viking invasions, Alfred fostered a massive educational revival. He encouraged the translation of important Latin texts into Old English, creating a centralized administrative class and fostering a shared cultural and religious identity that unified native West Saxons and newcomers.

Refugees were not treated as outsiders; they were actively incorporated into the military and political structure. This influx of displaced peoples from Mercia and Northumbria helped pool vital resources, warriors, and scholars in Wessex. By unifying these disparate Anglo-Saxon groups under one banner, Alfred set the stage for his successors—like his grandson, Athelstan—to reconquer the Danelaw and forge a single, unified English state.

See:

Wessex, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 16 May 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessex

Lockett, Charles J., The Danelaw: Partition and Reconstruction in Early Medieval England, 6 Nov 2023, Medieval Ware, https://www.medievalware.com/blog/danelaw-england-partitioned/

Whitelock, Dorothy. “Alfred”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 24 Mar. 2026, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-king-of-Wessex

[51] The reconquest of the Danelaw (899–924) was a massive strategic expansion led by King Edward the Elder and his sister, Æthelflæd (Lady of the Mercians). By establishing heavily fortified frontier towns (burhs) and winning decisive battles, they systematically dismantled Viking rule in central and eastern England.

Key Campaigns and Timeline:

The Turning Point (910): Following the decisive defeat of a northern Viking army at the Battle of Tettenhall, Edward and Æthelflæd were able to go on the offensive.
Conquering the Midlands (917): Æthelflæd’s Mercian forces launched a massive assault, capturing major Danish strongholds including Derby and Leicester. Edward simultaneously advanced from the south, fortifying strategic sites and pushing into Essex and East Anglia.
Fall of East Anglia (917–918): Following a coordinated offensive in 917, the Danish army of East Anglia was overwhelmed. By 918, East Anglia formally submitted and came under the direct control of Wessex.
Absorption of Mercia (918): Upon Æthelflæd’s sudden death in June 918, Edward marched into Mercia, overthrew her daughter Ælfwynn, and consolidated the territory under direct West Saxon rule.

Long-Term Significance:

This aggressive campaign not only secured the eastern Midlands but effectively ended the independence of the Danelaw, giving the kings of Wessex dominion over all lands south of the Humber. This laid the essential political and military groundwork for Edward’s son, Æthelstan, to become the first King of all England

See:

History of Anglo-Saxon England, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 28 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Anglo-Saxon_England

Edward the Elder, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 23 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Elder

Crowther, David, 10 English Reconquest, 2011, The History of England, https://thehistoryofengland.co.uk/blog/2011/01/21/10-english-reconquest/

Wessex, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 16 May 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessex

[52] History of Anglo-Saxon England, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 28 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Anglo-Saxon_England

Wessex, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 16 May 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessex

Kingdon of Wessex, World History Encyclopedia, Accessed 1 May 2026, https://www.worldhistory.org/timeline/Kingdom_of_Wessex/

Britannica Editors. “Wessex”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 20 Jun. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/place/Wessex-historical-kingdom

[53] Edgar, King of England, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 8 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar,_King_of_England

[54] Taxation in medieval England, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 30 January 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_medieval_England

Hide (unit), Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 23 April 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hide_(unit)

Burghal Hidage, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 28 March 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burghal_Hidage

Britannica Editors. “hide”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 20 Jul. 1998, https://www.britannica.com/topic/hide-English-land-unit

Wareham, A., Fiscal policies and the institution of a tax state in Anglo-Saxon England within a comparative context1. The Economic History Review, 2012, 65: 910-931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0289.2011.00624.x

Hides and the Tribal Hidage, 13 Sep 2013, Medieval Histories, https://www.medieval.eu/hides-and-the-tribal-hidage/

[55] Burh, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 4 August 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burh

Hill, David; Rumble, Alexander R., eds. The Defence of Wessex: The Burghal Hidage and Anglo-Saxon Fortifications. Manchester: Manchester University Press 1996

Haslam, Jeremy, The Burghal Hidage and the West Saxon burhs: a reappraisal, Anglo-Saxon England, 45, 2017, 139-80, https://www.academia.edu/36005682/The_Burghal_Hidage_and_the_West_Saxon_burhs_a_reappraisal

Rumble, A. R. The Defence of Wessex: the Burghal Hidage and Anglo-Saxon Fortifications. Manchester University Press 1996

December 8, 2024December 8, 2024

Genealogical Facts and Evidence

Establishing accurate family histories requires the careful evaluation of multiple sources of information to document facts and to reach reliable conclusions. This story touches on the general methods in the field of genealogy for examining evidence. I provide a few practical examples and a simple approach from my research to make these general guidelines come to life.

“The process of genealogical research seeks information (facts about events) to answer questions (research objectives) about people. The records searched are the source of the information; therefore you must evaluate both the information you found and the record(s) in which you found it. When considering the record, evaluate its relevance, category, and format.

“When considering the information, compare it and corroborate it with information you have found in other independent sources … . Also, evaluate the information itself on its own merits taking into consideration: origin of the information, facts given in the records, events described, and directness of the evidence. ” [1]

Long before the concept of “alternative facts” entered the lexicon of modern everyday life [2], the American rock band, Talking Heads, explored the idea in a song “Crosseyed And Painless,” [3] which is written from the perspective of a someone that is not certain of what is real.

Well, facts do indeed matter and sometimes they are a delight or a revelation when discovered. Sometimes they do not conform to our expectations in genealogical research and there is a temptation to continue to look for other facts to support a different view.. Facts at times can be directly empirically verified. Other times facts are from derivative sources or the testimony of others. Facts also can be verified by absence of information. Facts often require a comparison with other facts to assess their reliability.

The fundamental issue is how facts relate as evidence to statements we might make about a family member or about other genealogical matters.

For such a small four letter word, there are many meanings of the word ‘fact‘. The term takes on different shades of meaning depending on its use. It has different, nuanced meanings in philosophical, scientific, historical, mathematical, legal and genealogical perspectives. Perhaps in ‘common’ language, a fact is something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which some form of proof exists, or about which there is information.

What is a fact? [4]

Source: James Freeman, Fact and Opinion, Wondershare | Draw, https://www.edrawsoft.com/fact-and-opinion.html

Here are a few definitions of the word ‘fact’:

A fact is something that has really occurred or is the case.
A fact is a piece of information that is indisputable and can be proven true or false.
It is a statement about reality that is supported by evidence and can be verified through observation or measurement.
Facts are objective and do not depend on personal opinions or beliefs. When you refer to something as a fact or fact , you mean that you think it is true or correct.
A fact is a statement that can be verified. It can be proven to be true or false through objective evidence.
A fact is the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.
A fact is something that actually existed or had existed or occurred.
A fact is a thing that is known or proved to be true. In a scientific view, a fact is an indisputable observation of a natural or social phenomenon. We can see it or demonstrate that it exists directly and show it to others.

From a ‘genealogist’s‘ point of view, it is safe to state that a fact is information associated with or about an individual family member, family, family object, property or action that is purported to be true.

Genealogical Facts and Evidence

These ‘facts’ or ‘events’ may be about a photo, an event, a period of time, a specific person, a couple, siblings, a branch of the family, or set of families. A genealogical story could be based on a multitude of possible organizing facts that define the boundary of a given story. That is the beauty of telling a story. Unless you are writing pure fiction, you need some facts that are reliable and can be documented.

Genealogical evidence is information used to document family relationships, life events, and historical facts about ancestors. It consists of evidence found in historical information (records, documents, and other sources) that help establish genealogical conclusions.

‘Evidence’ like ‘fact’ is also a word that has many meanings and interpretations. However, one might simply state that “evidence is an ‘assembly’ of facts indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or false”. [5]

Evidence is always gathered and presented either in support of or in opposition to an assertion about facts we have of an individual family member, family, a family object, property or action. When considering evidence, the most important aspect is whether the facts are relevant to the statement being examined. Facts in themselves have no purpose or agenda associated with them. [6]

For a genealogist, a fact is or facts are information used as evidence for substantiating the truthfulness of a something. Edward Hallett Carr, a British historian argued that ‘facts do not speak for themselves’. He argued that the historian can pick and decide which facts deserved to be shown, the order they are shown, and their context. Since the past is itself filled with facts, these facts are sifted, interpreted and analyzed for their relevance and value. [7]

(Facts) … “are like fish swimming about in a vast and sometimes inaccessible ocean; and what the historian catches will depend, partly on chance, but mainly on what part of the ocean he chooses to fish in and what tackle he chooses to use – these two factors being, of course, determined by the kind of fish he wants to catch. By and large, the historian will get the kind of facts he wants. History means interpretation.” [8]

Adapting Carr’s view on what is history and the role of the historian to the field of genealogy, genealogists are engaged in a continuous process of moulding their facts to their interpretation and their interpretation to facts. [9]

Genealogical facts never come to us or exist in a pure form. Genealogical facts are rarely ‘complete and unbiased’ to tell us something relevant to understanding the past. They usually need some corroboration from other sources. Facts do not care about our intended goals for their use, nor are they interested in our story.

“The reliability of any historical statement depends upon the perception of the participant who first reported or recorded it. The reliability of a genealogical conclusion, in turn, rests not just upon the accuracy of the original informant(s) but also upon the researcher’s understanding of what the informant(s) meant to say, as well as the researcher’s judgment in a number of other matters: the choice of sources, the thoroughness of the investigation, the analysis of information, the correlation of details, and the conclusions drawn—for starters.” [10]

Evidence always considers relevance. Evidence is a selected subset of all available facts chosen because they are deemed relevant to determining the validity of a genealogical assertion, similar to the fish simile in the Carr’s quote above.

Therein lies the rub. Who determines which facts are considered relevant? Who determines what evidence to use? What is the concluding assertion?

“No technique can be said to constitute the gold standard because there is no gold standard. … The common assertion of a gold standard of evidence is merely a rhetorical device. … The hard truth is that we have little choice but to adapt in creative ways to the kinds of evidence that social scientists confront.” [11]

“Revised” Birth Date of Rose Sperber [12]

I have found military records that misspell a great-great grand-uncle’s surname that died in a Confederate prison. [13] I have found family records that were ‘revised’ to hide an unwed birth. [14] I have found many sources that provide multiple ways in which my surname has been spelled for Griffis relatives. [15] The list goes on. All of these require alternative sources of facts to corroborate or refine evidence for statements about a genealogical fact.

The accuracy of any source is unknown until the one has accumulated enough evidence for ‘tests of correlation‘ —the comparison and contrasting of sources and information to reveal points or degrees of agreement. [16]

Evaluating Evidence in the Context of the Genealogical Proof Standard

The Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) is a guideline established by the Board for Certification of Genealogists for determining the reliability of genealogical conclusions with reasonable certainty. Evaluating genealogical evidence is two of the five parts of the overall genealogical proof process: analysis and resolution. [17]

The Genealogical Proof Standard: Highlighting the Analysis & Resolution Stages

The GPS serves as a benchmark for quality in genealogical research, helping both professional and amateur genealogists maintain credibility in their work. The GPS consists of five essential elements or standards:

1. Reasonably Exhaustive Research: Research should be systematic and broad in scope; and all relevant and available records should be identified and searched.

2. Complete and Accurate Source Citations: Each statement of fact requires proper documentation; and sources should be thoroughly documented for verification.

3. Analysis and Correlation of Information: Evidence should be analyzed, interpreted and correlated; and information from multiple sources must be compared and evaluated.

4. Resolution of Conflicting Evidence: Contradictory evidence should be addressed and resolved. Researchers should not ignore evidence that disagrees with their conclusions.

5. Soundly Reasoned Conclusion: Conclusions should be coherently written. Arguments or narratives should be based on the strongest evidence.

There is a wide range of written discourse on the “how to’s” of conducting genealogy research and assessing facts, evidence and their respective sources. Many of these written resources are highly informative and provide excellent ‘tips of the trade’. [18]

Many of these sources on conducting genealogical research start with distinguishing between primary and secondary sources of facts or evidence. Primary sources of information about facts or events are original, first-hand accounts of an event or time period. Secondary sources are interpretations and analyses of primary sources by someone other than the original author. [19]

The distinction between primary and secondary sources can vary depending on the context and the type of research being conducted. It is possible that some sources can function as both primary and secondary sources, depending on the research question and the interpretation of the researcher.

The distinction of primary, secondary or derivative sources of information are often times overlapping. Any source can offer both primary and secondary information. Original sources can also contain secondary information. Derivative sources of information can include primary information. The ambiguity of these categories of sources of information has led the governing body of accreditation for professional genealogists to avoid the use of the terms of primary and secondary sources. [20]

Evidence Analysis Process

In the late 1990’s, Elizabeth Shown Mills provided an ‘Evidence Analysis Process Map’ (EAP). The conceptual ‘map’ is a framework for evaluating genealogical information that follows a clear progression: sources provide information from which we select evidence for analysis, leading to sound conclusions that may be considered proof.

“Fulfilling a long-overdue need, a specific standard of proof has been crafted to cover the distinctive concerns of genealogical research. Terminology has been refined to eliminate conflicts between genealogical applications and usage common elsewhere.“ [21]

The Evidence Analysis Process (EAP) and the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) work together as complementary frameworks in genealogical research, with the Evidence Analysis Process supporting the achievement of GPS requirements. The EAP supports GPS’s requirement for soundly reasoned conclusions by providing a clear framework for: analyzing evidence strength, evaluating source reliability and assessing information quality.

The Evidence Analysis Process directly supports the third element of GPS by providing a structured method for analyzing and correlating collected information. The Evidence Analysis Process strengthens the fourth GPS element by providing a methodical way to evaluate and resolve contradictory evidence. Through careful source evaluation and information analysis, researchers can better address conflicting information.

There were a few modifications to the EAP map since 1999. [22] Presently the EAP map outlines three sources of information, three types of information and three types of evidence. [23]

The Evidence Analysis Process Map (EAP)

Source: Evidence Analysis Explained: Digging Into Genealogical Sources, Blog Post, June 2019, Legacy Tree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evidence-analysis-sources

The EAP is a framework for evaluating genealogical research that follows three main stages: Sources, Information, and Evidence. It provides a concetual approach to evaluating and analyzing information from various sources and the origin of the information. The EAP emphasizes the importance of assessing the reliability of each source. Researchers should carefully examine the origin and nature of each fact, and document their sources. This helps determine the weight to give to different pieces of information when conflicts arise regarding the reliability of information.

As reflected in the diagram above, the EAP Map consists of three main sequential steps that lead to a conclusion:

Sources: The process begins with gathering and evaluating source materials. This first step deals with the document or object itself, not the data the the source transmits. Examining the document is necessary because doing so will assist in determining the credibility of the information found in the document or object. [24]
Information: After the source (the document or object itself) has been examined, the next category to consider is the information is the facts or data recorded on the source. Sources provide information that must be assessed for credibility and reliability. [25]
Evidence: Information is analyzed to select relevant evidence that supports or contradicts the research question [26]

The Evidence Analysis Process Map encourages researchers to correlate details and compare information from multiple sources. This systematic approach helps identify patterns, dissimilarities, or conflicts that could strengthen or weaken a conclusion. This consideration is vital in assessing the strength of corroborating or conflicting evidence.

Practical Application: Levels of Certainty

While classifying a source or type of information is important, whether a source is original or derivative is not an indication of the reliability of the information it contains. To determine that, we need understand the source of the information or fact and how it was created.

In my attempt to document the events or specific facts associated with relatives, I utilize a wide range of primary and secondary genealogical and historical sources as well as original and derived sources of data when I am focused on a specific fact. I try to assess the reliability of those sources and then make decisions about how to use those facts. Sometimes a decision is made not to use a “fact”. I conclude that there is not enough documentation to use it as evidence. I may provide information on a particular dead end fact as ‘posted note’ for future research.

“Within sound genealogical studies, information statements about dates, identities, places, relationships, and similar matters are frequently prefaced by such terms as apparently, likely, possibly, or probably—all denoting that the stated “fact” is clouded by doubt. To date, these terms have no concrete definitions; practically speaking, they take on whatever shade each individual researcher provides with his or her supporting detail.” [27]

I have developed a rudimentary five point, ordinal scale that reflects how I evaluate the general evidence about a given genealogical statement. (See table one below.) It is not intended to be a rigorous scale to evaluate facts and evidence.. It is basically an heuristic construct to put things into perspective and to couch my assessments of various sources of facts when beset with conflicting information. [28]

Table One: Levels of Factual Reliability and Genealogical Evidence

Proof Level	Level of Certainty “Common Language Qualifiers”	Consistency Between Sources & Examples / Types of Sources of Evidence
ONE	Conclusive Convincing “Is /Was”	► Facts are consistent between all available record sources. ► Evidence supported by variety of independent records, direct and indirect sources.
TWO	“Very Likely” “With Noted Exceptions”	► Information is consistent between available records sources with few exceptions. ► Majority of evidence supported by information from a variety of independent record sources.
THREE	“Probable” “Most Likely”	► Evidence supported by variety of record sources.. ► A majority of various document sources provide similar information.
FOUR	“Likely”	► Limited sources of conflicting evidence. ► At least half of all types of various document sources provide similar information.
FIVE	“Possible”	► Limited sources of conflicting information. Indirect or negative evidence is relied upon to make a decision on available evidence.

The Spelling of Nathaniel’s Surname

An example of this research process can be demonstrated in my research on determining the surname spelling for Nathaniel Griffes, as discussed in a prior story. Nathaniel Griffes is my fourth great grand-uncle. He was the sixth child of twelve children of William Griffis and Abiah Gates Griffis – the last common documented ancestor of the Griffis family in America. Nathaniel and his descendants are the only family branch to spell their surname as such.

My research on the various branches of the family surname led me to the conclusion that there were three variants in the spelling of the surname: Griffis, Griffith and Griffes. In my attempt to document the different spellings of the surname within and across generations of the family, I have compared various genealogical sources for an individual person and assessed the reliability of those sources.

The ‘ordinal scale of proof’ can be used as a heuristic guide to determine how I assessed various sources of evidence for the spelling of Nathaniel’s surname and for a given individual in his family.

Headstone of Nathaniel’s wife Esther. Click for larger view.

In many cases, if I was able to find a family or individual headstone, I figured a headstone with a name carved into the stone reflected a convincing basis of how the surname was spelled in that time period. While mistakes have been made on head stones, the amount of effort put into creating a marker for an individual’s burial place is much more involved than simply transcribing a name on paper. Proof of a headstone and its spelling of the surname also may have influenced my views on how an individual’s immediate family may have spelled their surname since they were the ones that had the tomb stone made.

I have documented ‘conclusive’ evidence to support the statement that Nathaniel and his descendants spelled their surname as Griffes. There is evidence supported by variety of independent records that are either direct and indirect sources.

In the 1810 U.S. Census his name is spelled Griffis. [29]
In the 1820 census, it is spelled Griffies. [30]
In the 1840 census it is spelled Griffes. [31]
A Nathaniel Griffis is found as an enlisted Revolutionary soldier in Albany in 1776. [32] Church records indicate that his name was spelled as Griffes. [33]
His Will [34] and probate records also reflect that his name was spelled Griffes. [35]
Burial documentation reflects his name was spelled Griffes and there is a large family presence of Griffes family members in Vale cemetery in Schenectady, New York. 19 members of the Griffes family were buried in the cemetery. [36]

Table Two: Applying the Ordinal Scale in the Spelling of Nathaniel Griffes’ Name

Proof Level	Level of Certainty “Common Language Qualifiers”	Consistency Between Sources & Examples / Types of Sources of Evidence	Conclusion
ONE	Conclusive Convincing “Is /Was”	► Facts are consistent between all available direct record sources. ► Evidence supported by variety of independent records, direct and indirect sources.	“Nathanial and his descendants spelled their surname as Griffes”

How Old was John Sperber?

Another example determining the reliability of facts and evidence in family research is how I determined when my second great grandfather Johann Wolfgang Sperber was born. Table three provides information on facts and evidence using the EAP Mapping model.

Table Three: When was John Wolfgang Sperber Born

Source	Information	Evidence	Birth Year
Original: National Archive’s micro- publication M237 “Passenger Lists of Vessels Arriving at New York, 1850-1856 , Rolls 85.-169	Secondary: Three J. Sperber’s found: ▸ age 26, ar. 1952 ▸ age 26, ar. 1956 ▸ age 26, ar. 1955 One W. Sperber found: ▸ age 26, ar. 1953	Negative: The records provide variable information on a J. Sperber or W. Serber arriving from European ports between 1850 and 1856; do not know if it is John W Sperber.	Uncertain
Original: Marriage Certificate of John Wolfgang Sperber and Sophia Fliegel	Primary: John and Sophia were married on 2 Feb 1857 in Gloversville, N.Y.	Negative : The record does not mention his age. The record does not directly address the research question.	Uncertain
Orignal: 1865 N.Y. State Census, New York State Archives; Albany, New York, USA; Census of the State of New York, 1865, Page 387, Line 33	Secondary: Enumerator documented his age as 35. This would imply he was born in 1828	Direct: The record does directly address his age.	1828
Original: 1870 Federal Census; Johnstown, Fulton, New York; Roll: M593_938; Page: 183A	Secondary: Enumerator documented his age as 41. This would imply he was born in 1828	Direct: The record does directly address his age.	1828
Original: 1875 N.Y. State Census, Fulton, , Johnstown, E.D. 02,Page 428, Line 30, New York State Archives; Albany, NY, USA;	Secondary: Enumerator documented his age as 47. This would imply he was born in 1828	Negative: The record does directly address his age.	1828
Original: 1880 Federal Census, Gloversville, Fulton, New York; Roll: 834; Page: 95A, Line 30; Enumeration District: 006	Secondary: Enumerator documented his age as 51. This would imply he was born in 1829	Direct: The record does directly address his age.	1829
Original: 1900 U.S. Federal Census, National Archives & Records Administration, Gloversville Ward 1, Fulton, New York; Roll: 1036; Page: 5; Enumeration District: 0006, Page 5, Line 98.	Secondary: John Sperber reported as 72 years old,	Indirect: The record directly addresses age.	1828
Derivative: Find A Grave, Memorial ID: 158839082, Plot Section 8, Prospect Hill Cemetery, Gloversville, Fulton County, New York	Primary: Inscription on head stone: “Father”. Additional information in memorial states John was born 2 Jan 1828 in Baden, Germany.	Indirect: The record indicates his birth year.	2 Jan 1828

It appears that with few exceptions, available documentation on John Sperber suggests that he was born in 1828 and possibly on January 2nd.

Table Four: Applying the Ordinal Scale for Determining John Sperber’s Birth Year

Proof Level	Level of Certainty “Common Language Qualifiers”	Consistency Between Sources & Examples / Types of Sources of Evidence	Example
TWO	“Very Likely” “With Noted Exceptions”	► Information is consistent between available records sources with few exceptions. ► Majority of evidence supported by information from a variety of independent record sources.	“With noted exceptions, documentation indicates that John Sperber was born in 1828.”

Conclusion

In the end, the best combination of sources of proof involve first hand accounts along with objective, independent corroborating sources. Without that combination, it comes down to gradations of informed hunches. The key is providing a written explanation of how you reached your conclusions.

Indirect sources require corroboration. One thing I am certain is you cannot totally rely on how census or tax roll enumerators, or military pay rolls spelled names in their documents. I imagine the recorders of information relied on what they heard from who ever answered door or what they heard and spelled phonetically. How questions were phrased also play a part in the type of answers that are provided. You are also faced with deciphering their handwriting. [37]

Three Stooges Skit on a Census Taker: Are You Married or Happy?

If I was trying to pinpoint the birth of a given relative, I might have found a family or individual headstone in a cemetery.In addition. I may have discovered a number of conflicting references of date of birth in various state and Federal census tabulations. I might even have a birth certificate or a microfiche copy of a birth certificate. There might be a newspaper story about the person’s birth. All of these facts may or may not reflect the same birth date. The challenge becomes what to consider as more reliable than others to state, as evidence, a specific birthdate of a relative.

Something like a headstone may appear to be a source of solid facts. One might assume that a headstone with a name carved into the stone reflects a convincing argument of how the surname was spelled, when the person was born or died and perhaps who was their spouse. While mistakes have been made on head stones, the amount of effort put into creating a marker for an individual’s burial is much more involved than simply transcribing a name on paper. Proof of information on a headstone and its spelling of the surname may provide more weight on a given birth date than what might be found in a Federal census.

One assumes that a relative of or someone who knew the deceased provided correct information to be carved on the headstone. One is also assuming the individual who carved the inscriptions in the headstone completed the job without errors. If an error occurred, family members may decide to ignore the inaccuracy based on the cost of replacing the headstone. If you are looking at a very old headstone, deciphering the lettering and numbers can be challenging. [38]

Having additional documentation such as census records, birth certificates, or newspapers articles about the person may increase the veracity and reliability of information on the headstone. However, the additional information (e.g. birth certificate, newspaper obituary, etc) may cast doubt on the date chiseled on the tomb stone. Ultimately a decision is made, perhaps couched in terms of the probability on the vital statistics found on the headstone.

It is not a fool proof method. I may still have missed the target on establishing the reliability or trustworthiness of information associated with many statements found in the family stories. Hopefully my level of success is much better than a professional baseball player’s batting average.

Sources

Feature Image: An amalgam of stock photographs about facts and evidence, the sources of the original images are found at: Division of Property and Evidence, Caldwell Police, City of Caldwell, https://www.cityofcaldwell.org/departments/caldwell-police/divisions/evidence ; Electronic Evidence and Opinion No. 19, 7 Jul 2020, Digital evidence, European Committee on Legal Co-operation, https://www.coe.int/en/web/cdcj/digital-evidence/-/asset_publisher/7dbCE86mCocc/content/belarus-gender-equality-and-justice?; and Fact or opinion?, ChangeFactory, https://www.changefactory.com.au/our-thinking/articles/fact-or-opinion/

[1] Evaluate the Evidence, FamilySearch Wiki, This page was last edited on 30 April 2023, https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Evaluate_the_Evidence

[2] Alternative Facts, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 1 November 2023, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts

Susan Martinez-Conde and Stephen L. Macknick, Scientific American, Jan 27, 2017, The Delusion of Alternative Facts, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/illusion-chasers/the-delusion-of-alternative-facts/

[3] Brian Eno / Chris Frantz / David Byrne / Jerry Harrison / Tina Weymouth, Crosseyed and Painless lyrics © Universal Music Publishing Group, Warner Chappell Music, Inc

Crosseyed and Painless, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 8 April 2023, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosseyed_and_Painless

Talking Heads – Crosseyed and Painless – Official Original Video 1980, YouTube, https://youtu.be/_Zrkf65GmwE?si=n5i5GNG5BT5mmYTh

Lyrics of Cross Eyed andPainless, Talking Heads , SongFacts, https://www.songfacts.com/lyrics/talking-heads/crosseyed-and-painless

[4] The following are a few examples on ‘what are facts’.

Kevin Mulligan and Fabrice Correia, Facts, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, revised Oct 16, 2020, Edward N. Zalta (ed.) , https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/

Fact, Oxford Dictionary, Google Search of ‘Fact”

Fact, Dictionary.com, https://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact#

Fact, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 9 June 2023, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

Morgan Housel, The Difference Between a Statistic and a Fact, Nov 17, 2016, MorganHouse, https://collabfund.com/blog/the-difference-between-a-stat-and-a-fact/

Fact, Cambridge Dictionary, Pages accessed 10 Nov 2023, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fact#.

Fact, Merriam Webster, Page accessed 10 Nov 2023, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact

[5] See quote, for example, from:

The illusion of evidence based medicine, BMJ 16 Mar 2022; 376:702, doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o702

Evidence, Evaluation, and Learning, U.S. Department of State, https://www.state.gov/evidence-evaluation-and-learning/

[6] Here are a number of source references on the concept of ‘evidence’:

Evidence, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 10 November 2023, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence

Thomas, Kelley, Evidence, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), revision Mon Jul 28, 2014, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evidence/

Victor DiFate, Evidence, International Encyclopedia of Philosphy, https://iep.utm.edu/evidence/

Bryan L. Mulcahy, How to Evaluate Genealogical Evidence, November 15, 2016, Illinois Sons of American Revolution, https://www.illinois-sar.org/uploads/9/7/6/5/97654736/how_to_evaluate_genealogical_evidence.pdf

Evidence Analysis Explained Part III: Evaluating Genealogical Evidence, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogical-evidence

Thomas W. Jones, Using Indirect and Negative Evidence to Prove Unrecorded Events, 2021, https://familysearch.brightspotcdn.com/ef/f4/6f1e19da4506a2e177c6d22c1925/jones-indirectandnegative-rt.pdf

Elizabeth Shown Mills, in “QuickLesson 13: Classes of Evidence—Direct, Indirect & Negative,”Evidence Explained: Historical Analysis, Citation & Source Usage, Dec 11, 2020 ( https://www.evidenceexplained.com/content/quicklesson-13-classes-evidence—direct-indirect-negative

Genealogical Proof Standard, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 13 December 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

Tyler S. Stahle, Understanding the Genealogical Proof Standard, March 9, 2016, https://www.familysearch.org/en/blog/understanding-the-genealogical-proof-standard

Elizabeth Shown Mills, Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards, Vol 87, No. 3, Sep 1999, Evidence, A special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Pages 165 – 184, https://www.historicpathways.com/download/workwthhistevidence.pdf.

Genealogical Proof Standard, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 13 December 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

[7] Edward Hallett Carr, What is History?, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962. Page 23

See also: Kenneth Andres, Analysis of E. H. Carr’s “The Historian and His Facts”, 16 Sep 2016, Medium, https://medium.com/@kennethandres/analysis-of-e-h-carrs-the-historian-and-his-facts-d59e7ac687ee

[8] Ibid, Page 34

[9] ” “the historian is engaged on a continuous process of moulding his facts to his interpretation and his interpretation to his facts. It is impossible to assign primacy to one over the other”. Edward Hallett Carr, What is History?, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962. Page 34

[10] Elizabeth Shown Mills, Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards, Vol 87, No. 3, Sep 1999, Evidence, A special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Pages 165 – 166, https://www.historicpathways.com/download/workwthhistevidence.pdf

[11] This is a quote that was originally in Robert J. Sampson, Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012), 384. I found it in: Thomas W. Jones, Perils of Source Snobbery, OnBoard , Newsletter of the Board of Certified Genealogists, 18 (May 2012),9–10, 15 https://bcgcertification.org/skillbuilding-perils-of-source-snobbery

[12] This is a blown up portion of an old paper pamphlet that was used to record family births, deaths and marriages were part of the artifacts of Harold Griffis. The pamphlet originally was used to document the births, marriages and deaths of Sperber family members. It appears that the pamphlet in time came into the possession of Rose’s youngest sister, Ida Sperber. The names of Harold and Evelyn and their first three children were then added to the bottom of the list of the Sperber family. On another page, the birth dates, marriages and deaths of maternal relatives of Evelyn Griffis, The Platts family, were also added to the pamphlet. It became a living written family testament of vital statistics for the Sperber, Platts, and Griffis families.

Births of Sperber Family Members

Source: Griffis family document | Click for Larger View

A closer look at the change of Rose’s birth year suggests that it was originally written as ‘1855’, which would have accurately reported her birth year as stated by her mother Sophia Sperber in another document. Her mother Sophie was married in 1857. The birth year on this document was probably revised to hide the fact that Rose was born out of wedlock.

[13] Griffis, Jim, Daniel Griffis – Captured, Imprisoned, & Perished, March 13, 2021, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, Blog

[14] Griffis, Jim, The Art of Translation and Discovery, July 4, 2023 Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, Blog

[15] Griffis, Jim, Griff(is)(in)(ith)(iths)(es)(in)(ins)(ing) Surname and American Genealogies: Part One, February 17, 2022, Griffis Family: Selected Stories from the Past, Blog

[16] Stefani Evans, CG, “Evidence Correlation,” OnBoard 18 (September 2012), Newsletter of the Board of Certified Genealogists, https://bcgcertification.org/skillbuilding-evidence-correlation/

“Genealogists test their evidence by comparing and contrasting evidence items. They use such correlation to discover parallels, patterns and inconsistencies, including points at which evidence items agree, conflict or both. “

Board for Certification of Genealogists, Genealogy Standards Nashville: Turner Publishing Co., 2021

Melissa A. Johnson, The Importance of Genealogical Analysis and Correlation, April 2015, INGS Monthly, National Genealogical Society, https://www.ngsgenealogy.org/wp-content/uploads/Complimentary-NGS-Monthly-Articles/NGS-Monthly-Johnson-Analysis-Correlation-Apr2015.pdf

Thomas W. Jones, Assessing Genealogical Sources—Part 1, Jan 25, 2021, Genealogical Publishing, https://genealogical.com/2021/01/25/assessing-genealogical-sources-part-1/

How To Evaluate Sources For Confidence In Your Genealogy Research, Sep 28, 2023, https://www.heritagediscovered.com/blog/genealogy-brick-wall-how-to-evaluate-sources

[17] Genealogical Proof Standard, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 11 November 2024, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

The Genealogical Proof Standard – International Institute, This page was last edited on 27 April 2023, https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/The_Genealogical_Proof_Standard_-_International_Institute

Stahle, Tyler S., Understanding the Genealogical Proof Standard, 9 Mar 2016, FamilySearch Blog, https://www.familysearch.org/en/blog/understanding-the-genealogical-proof-standard

Genealogical Proof Standard, This page was last edited on 30 April 2023, FamilySearch Wiki, https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

Genealogical Proof Standard (GS), Board for Certification of Genealogists, https://bcgcertification.org/ethics-standards#genealogical-proof-standard-gps

[18] Evidence, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 10 November 2023, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence

Thomas, Kelley, Evidence, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), revision Mon Jul 28, 2014, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evidence/

Victor DiFate, Evidence, International Encyclopedia of Philosphy, https://iep.utm.edu/evidence/

Evidence Analysis Explained: Digging Into Genealogical Sources, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evidence-analysis-sources

Evidence Analysis Explained Part II: Evaluating Genealogy Information, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogy-information

Evidence Analysis Explained Part III: Evaluating Genealogical Evidence, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogical-evidence

Thomas W. Jones, Using Indirect and Negative Evidence to Prove Unrecorded Events, 2021, https://familysearch.brightspotcdn.com/ef/f4/6f1e19da4506a2e177c6d22c1925/jones-indirectandnegative-rt.pdf

Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence! Citation & Analysis for the Family Historian (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1997),

Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace, 2nd ed. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing, 2009)

Elizabeth Mills, “Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards,” in Evidence: A Special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, NGS Quarterly 87 (September 1999): 165–84

Elizabeth Mills, Helen F. M. Leary, and Christine Rose, “Evidence Analysis: Definitions, Principles, and Practices,” in Virginia: Where a Nation Began, National Genealogical Society 1999 Conference in the States Program Syllabus (Arlington: NGS, 1999), 41–48

Elizabeth Mills and Donn Devine, ”Evidence Analysis,” in Mills, ed., Professional Genealogy: A Manual for Researchers, Writers, Editors, Lecturers, and Librarians (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2001): 327–42

Genealogical Proof Standard, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 13 December 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

Tyler S. Stahle, Understanding the Genealogical Proof Standard, March 9, 2016, https://www.familysearch.org/en/blog/understanding-the-genealogical-proof-standard

Diane Haddad, 3 Tips to Analyze Genealogical Evidence , Family Tree Magazine, https://familytreemagazine.com/general-genealogy/3-tips-to-analyze-genealogy-evidence/

Genealogical Proof Standard, Wikipedia, This page was last edited on 13 December 2019, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

[19] Primary sources are documents, images or artifacts that provide first hand testimony or direct evidence concerning an historical topic. They are original documents created or experienced contemporaneously with the event being researched. They also enable researchers to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period.

Examples of primary sources include:

Letters, diaries, scrapbooks and journals;
Images or artifacts (e.g. clothing, furniture, material objects);
Photographs, audio recordings, video recordings, films
Government documents (e.g. census data, laws, regulations);
Interviews and oral histories;
Records of organizations
Autobiographies and memoirs
Printed ephemera (e.g. admission ticket, graduation ceremonies, a play, a movie, advertisements, etc.)
Historical newspapers and magazines; and
Works of literature or art created at the time.

Secondary sources are works that analyze, assess or interpret an historical event, era, or phenomenon, generally utilizing primary sources to do so. Secondary sources are generally written after the events that are being researched. However, if an individual wrote about events that he or she experienced first-hand many years after that event occurred, it is still considered a primary source because it is a direct account from a participant or witness to the event.

Examples of secondary sources include:

Historiographical works and textbooks;
Articles and book reviews;
Biographies and autobiographies; Newspaper editorials, journal articles, speeches, reviews, and research essays;
Documentaries and films about historical events; and
Encyclopedias and reference books about specific topics.

[20] Elizabeth Mills, “Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards,” in Evidence: A Special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, NGS Quarterly 87 (September 1999): 171-172 , https://www.historicpathways.com/download/workwthhistevidence.pdf

[21] Elizabeth Mills, “Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards,” in Evidence: A Special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, NGS Quarterly 87 (September 1999): 169 , https://www.historicpathways.com/download/workwthhistevidence.pdf

[22] The original source of the Evidence Analysis Process Map can be found in Mills, Elizabeth Shown. “Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards.” Evidence: A Special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly 87 (September 1999): 165–84.

See also: Elizabeth Shown Mills, “QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Model,” Evidence Explained: Historical Analysis, Citation & Source Usage (https://www.evidenceexplained.com/content/quicklesson-17-evidence-analysis-process-map

Mills, Elizabeth Shown , A Template for Evaluating Evidence, Genealogical Computing 24 (April–June 2004) [extracted from unpaginated archived copy, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library/article.aspx?article=9270 : 16 October 2011) also https://www.historicpathways.com/download/templateforee.pdf

The original map:

See: Seaver, Randy, Changes to the Evidence Analysis Process Map in GPS, 6 May 2013, Genea-Musings, https://www.geneamusings.com/2013/05/changes-to-evidence-analysis-process-map.html

[23] Evidence Analysis Explained: Digging Into Genealogical Sources, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evidence-analysis-sources

Evidence Analysis Explained Part II: Evaluating Genealogy Information, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogy-information

Evidence Analysis Explained Part III: Evaluating Genealogical Evidence, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogical-evidence

[24] There are three general sources of information: original , derivative and narrative.

Original: The actual record, document, or object;
Derivative: A record or object created at a later date which reports the same information as the original source.
Narrative: An original narrative with conclusions that is a product of original and derivative source research.

Evidence Analysis Explained: Digging Into Genealogical Sources, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evidence-analysis-sources

[25] This category is subdivided three ways:

Primary: Information was recorded at or near the time of the event by someone wo had first hand knowledge.
Secondary: Information was recordsed after the time of the event or by someone who did not have director or first hand knowedge.
Undetermined: Insufficient data is provided to accurately identify the informant.

Evidence Analysis Explained Part II: Evaluating Genealogy Information, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogy-information

[26] “The purpose of genealogy is to reach defensible conclusions about our ancestors. This is done through proper analysis of the evidence. When we consider the sources, the information, and the evidence we can reach conclusions which are reliable.“

“There are three types of evidence: Direct, Indirect, and Negative.

Direct: Conclusions about facts or information that were drawn from explicit sources appear to need no additional supporting documentation .
Indirect: Conclusions about facts or information that were drawn from mutliple sources because no single source directly answers the research question.
Negative: Conclusions about facts or information that were drawn because evidence fails to exist.

Evidence Analysis Explained Part III: Evaluating Genealogical Evidence, LegacyTree Genealogists, https://www.legacytree.com/blog/evaluating-genealogical-evidence

[27] Elizabeth Shown Mills, Working with Historical Evidence: Genealogical Principles and Standards, Vol 87, No. 3, Sep 1999, Evidence, A special Issue of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Page 181, https://www.historicpathways.com/download/workwthhistevidence.pdf

[28] My ordinal scale of certainty is similar to a three tier scale in Norman Ingham’s discussion of the processes involved in genealogical analysis:

(Reasonable) certainty, used at the “proof” stage—a term signifying a convincing degree that is comparable to the math/physics concept verification.
Possibility, used at the “speculation” stage—a term comparable to the math/physics concepts intuition and guess.
Probability, used at the “hypothesis” stage—a term comparable to the math/physics concepts proposal and conjecture.

Inghan, Norman W. , “Some Thoughts about Evidence and Proof in Genealogy,” The American Genealogist 72 (July–October 1997): 380–85

[29] Nathaniel Griffis, 1810 U.S. Census, New York, Albany, Watervliet, Line 20, Page 1312

[30] Nathaniel Griffes, 1820 U.S. Census, New York, Schenectady, Niskayuna, Line 16, Page 577

[31] National Griffes, 1840 U.S. Census, New York, Schenectady, Niskayuna, Line 15, Page 353

[32] Nathaniel Griffis, Albany County Militia (Land Bounty Rights) – Sixth Regiment Regiment, New York in the Revolution as Colony and State, Vol. I: The Militia, Compillation of Documents and Records from the Office of the State Comptroller, Albany: J.B. Lyon Company, 1904, page 227 See footnote 32 above for image.

[33] Nathaniel Griffes and family were members of the Dutch Reformed Church in Schenectady, New York. The church records indicate that Nathaniel Griffes and his wife Mary Ann Griffes, and Mary Esther Griffes became a members in 30 October 1834. The three are listed again as being received into the church on 1 November 1842. Nathaniel’s son James A. Griffis was received into the church congregation on 6 June 1853. His wife was received by ‘confession’ on 4 June 1869.

[34] Will of Nathaniel Griffes, U.S. Wills and Probate Records, 1659 – 1999, Schenectady Wills, Vol D – E, 1832 – 1845, date of Will 20 May 142, date of Probate 15 Apr 1842, Probate Place Schenectady NY, Image 325 – 327, Pages 386 – 390. See PDF copy of will.

[35] Nathaniel Griffes, Probate Date 15 Apr 1842, Probate Place Schenectady, New York, Inferred Death Date 1842 Letters Test, Vol 0004-0006, 1839-1863, image 68, Page 32, Ancestry.com. New York, U.S., Wills and Probate Records, 1659-1999 [database on-line]. Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2015. Original data: New York County, District and Probate Courts.

[36] Vale Cemetery Memorials for Individuals named Griffes, Find a Grave website, accessed 31 Mar 2022. There are nineteen individuals buried in the cemetery with the surname Griffes.

Griffes Family Members Buried in Vale Cemetery

Name	Dates	Plot information
Angelica K. Schermerhorn Griffes	1847-1930	Sect H lot 12
Anna R Griffes	4 Feb 1861 – 6 Nov 1885	Section M-3
Catherine Nichols Griffes	18 Feb 1838 – 28 Jan 1890	Section H
Catherine Maria Griffes	unknown – 1841
Esther Griffes	1778 – 3 Jun 1848
James A Griffes	3 Dec 1839 – 18 Jan 1898	Section M-3
Jane Viele Griffes	24 Oct 1832 – 25 Jul 1918	M-30
Joel Griffes	10 May 1799 – 24 Oct 1828
Julia Griffes	1815 – 1890
Julia A Griffes	10 Dec 1838 – 25 Sep 1864	M-3
Julie Ann Griffes	unknown – 1848
Maria Griffes	1817 – 9 Jul 1828
Mary Whitney Griffes	1808 – 1877
Nathaniel Griffes	unknown – 11 May 1956	H-12
Nathaniel Griffes	3 Oct 1763 – 3 Mar 1842
Sally Griffes	unknown – 1819
Stephen Griffes	1805 – 1850
William W Griffes	29 Oct 1870 – 22 Jul 1872
William Whitney Griffes	1835 – 17 Jan 1905

Source: Vale Cemetery Memorials for Griffes Family Members, Schenectady, Schenectady County, New York, USA, Find a Grave, https://www.findagrave.com/cemetery/66580/memorial-search?firstname=&middlename=&lastname=Griffes&cemeteryName=Vale+Cemetery&birthyear=&birthyearfilter=&deathyear=&deathyearfilter=&bio=&linkedToName=&plot=&memorialid=&mcid=&datefilter=&orderby=r&page=1#sr-128512151

[37] Early census records are often difficult to read and appear to have obvious errors. To what degree are these earlier records considered reliable when doing research?, Quora, https://www.quora.com/Early-census-records-are-often-difficult-to-read-and-appear-to-have-obvious-errors-To-what-degree-are-these-earlier-records-considered-reliable-when-doing-research

When evaluating any source, it is always wise to consider how, when, and under what conditions the record was made.

For example, by understanding some of the difficulties encountered by enumerators, it becomes easier to understand why some individuals cannot be found in the census schedules or their indexes.

From the first enumeration in 1790 to the most recent in 2000, the government has experienced difficulties in gathering precise information for a number of reasons. At least one of the problems experienced in extracting information from individuals for the first census continues to vex officials today: there were and still are many people who simply do not trust the government’s motives. Many citizens have worried that their answers to census questions might be used against them, particularly in regards to taxation, military service, and immigration. Some have simply refused to answer enumerators’ questions; others have lied.

https://wiki.rootsweb.com/wiki/index.php/Overview_of_the_U.S._Census

[38] 3 Methods for Reading Hard-to-Read Tombstones, March 7, 2019, Merkle Monuments, https://www.merklemonuments.com/reading-hard-to-read-tombstones ; Karen Miller Bennett, Five Tips for Safely Reading and Photographing Tombstones, Karen’s Chat, Blog, https://karenmillerbennett.com/tombstone/five-tips-for-safely-reading-and-photographing-tombstones/ ; Cemetery Conservators for United Standards, Reading Stones Basics, https://cemeteryconservatorsunitedstandards.org/reading-stones/

Bottlenecks, Founder Effects, and Star Like Expansions

G-Z6748: A Minority Lineage with an History of Successive Genetic Bottlenecks

Migration to East Anglia, Founder Effects and Continuation of Constrained YDNA Lineages

1. Founder effects in small kin‑based groups

2. Inter-group conflict, elite success, and differential male survival

3. Social structure and patrilineal reproduction bias

4. Serial admixture but constrained male lines

5. Genetic drift in small small open populations

Continued Bottleneck and Migration: East Anglia to South Wessex

Historical Reasons for Migration from East Anglia

The Social Context Associated with the MRCA of G-Z40857 and Immediate Generations

Continuation of the Story: Part Two

Sources

Genealogical Facts and Evidence

Evaluating Evidence in the Context of the Genealogical Proof Standard

Evidence Analysis Process

Practical Application: Levels of Certainty

The Spelling of Nathaniel’s Surname

How Old was John Sperber?

Conclusion

Sources