The scientific nomenclature for the ten Y-chromosome marker sites, in the order shown in the Table of Results, were
DYS19 - DYS388 - DYS390 - DYS 391 - DYS392 - DYS393 - DYS389i - DYS389ii - DYS425 - DYS426
Of the seven samples provided, six of the Y-chromosome
signatures were identical, and one differed
by just one point. This shows a common ancestry
for Kays from Yorkshire, Lancashire, Virginia
and Arkansas. Hence Project 50. We wanted to
pick up as many Kays as we could from all parts
of the world to see if the same results still
applied.
This came at an opportune time for us as we
had for some time been considering the possibility
of mounting a DNA project. Of the seven members
from the UK and USA who took part in Project
Marcus, name spellings were Key, Kay and Kaye.
DNA testing was carried out by the UK firm of
Oxford Ancestors. The results were remarkable
in that they were, for all intents and purposes,
identical. The Y-Line chromosome were, at that
time, all determined to be of Norse Viking origin.
However, advances in genetic research over the
last 18 months has changed this assessment and
today the group is recognized as being more
accurately described as Danish Viking / Anglo
Saxon origin with a possible Middle Eastern
connection. It is possible by utilising a mathematical
procedure advised by Oxford Ancestors, to calculate
the era of a Common Parental Ancestor (CPA).
The result obtained for the small group of seven
members in the Marcus group yielded such a wide
span of years that no firm conclusions could
be made. A larger sample was needed in order
to improve the accuracy and to determine if
all Kays belonged to this group.
What is a Chromosome?
Chromosomes are packets of DNA contained within
the nucleus of your body's cells. Most of them
come in pairs, with one of each pair being inherited
from your father and the other from your mother.
We all of us have a host of chromosomes that
govern how we look and how we act. For example,
we have chromosomes that dictate how tall we
are, what colour our eyes are, and what colour
our hair is. For any of these aspects, our parents
each have a pair of chromosomes. When we were
conceived, each of our parents passed on to
us (randomly) one of the two of their chromosomes
for each of these aspects.
Chromosomes are either 'dominant' or 'recessive'.
If we inherit a dominant chromosome from one
parent and a recessive chromosome from the other,
then it's the dominant one that will dictate
what happens. For example, when it comes to
eye colour, the brown-eyed chromosome is dominant
and the blue-eyed chromosome is recessive. So,
if I happen to inherit a brown-eyed chromosome
from one of my parents, then I will have brown
eyes. It is, however, equally possible that
my parents have brown eyes, but that the other
half of their chromosome pairings are blue-eyed;
if they both happen to pass me a blue-eyed chromosome,
then I'll end up blue-eyed, and the milkman
will be asked some very searching questions.
What is a Y-Chromosome?
The X and Y chromosomes dictate your sex when
you're born. The X chromosome says you're a
woman, the Y chromosome says you're a man. The
Y chromosome is dominant. That means that if
you inherit an X from your father and an X from
your mother, you'll be a girl child. If you
inherit an X from your mother and a Y from your
father, the Y will be dominant, and you'll be
a boy child. Your mother, by definition, is
a woman. That means that her sex-determining
chromosomes have to be a pair of X's (if she
had a Y, she'd be a man). Your father, on the
other hand, has to have a Y chromosome, to make
him a man. He couldn't have inherited that Y
from his mother, because she's got two X's.
Therefore his Y chromosome came from his father.
From a genealogical viewpoint, this is incredibly
important, because we've got this Y chromosome
being passed down from father to son, from generation
to generation.
The Y-Chromosome Signature
Fortunately for us, not all Y-chromosomes are
built in the same way. The four chemicals that
make up DNA can be abbreviated to the letters
A, C, G and T. DNA itself can be pictured as
a chain of these chemicals, part of which might
look like:
-CTG-CTG-CTG-CTG-CTG-CTG-CTG-CTG-
On one Y-chromosome, the sequence CTG might
be repeated 15 times, but on another Y-chromosome
there might be only 14 repeats, while in another
there could be 16. By measuring the number of
repeats at a number of different locations on
the Y-chromosome, you can begin to build a Y-chromosome
signature. This signature is a set of ten numbers
that count the number of repeats at these locations,
and is written as, for example:
14.14.22.10.11.12.09.16.12.11
Not all Y-chromosome signatures are the same,
but the signature that a man inherits from his
father is almost certainly going to be the same.
There is a gradual process of mutation that
makes the signature change from time to time,
but if the inherited signature has changed at
all, it will almost certainly be in only one
of the ten numbers. It is this that makes the
Y-chromosome such an important tool in genealogy.
If two men with the same surname find that they
have identical or very similar signatures, then
they can be sure that they are both descended
from the same man, from whom their ancestors
inherited that signature.
Professor Sykes, who founded Oxford Ancestors,
showed that over half the men in a random sample
of present day Mr Sykes' had inherited the same
Y-chromosome from their common ancestor, the
first Mr Sykes, who lived near the village of
Flockton in West Yorkshire in the late 13th
century. Other surnames that have been researched
also have similar patterns. This common ancestor
is known as the Common Parental Ancestor, or
CPA for short.
Project 50
The second project was started early in 2003,
aiming at a sample of about 50 participants.
It was an ambitious target as, at that time,
we did not have 50 male Kay members in our Association!
All our male members and one or two interested
non-members, were invited to participate and
30 joined in with enthusiasm.
Our American cousins in the Kay Family Association
USA (www.RobertKayFamily.org)
were invited to participate. The KFA-USA has
over 600 members and is largely composed of
descendants of Robert Kay, who was born in Virginia
c1725 and died in South Carolina in 1801. The
second edition of the book 'Descendants of Robert
Kay' published in 1999, weighs six pounds and
lists over 4000 Kays! This Robert was believed
(but had not been proven) to be the great grandson
of the immigrant James Kay of Bury UK, who left
Lancashire in the 1660s and settled in Virginia.
The family home in Lancashire was a small cottage
called Birdhole in the attractive Irwell valley
just to the north of Bury. The cottage can be
visited today and is now known as Birdhall cottage.
The owner occupants are always pleased to show
visitors around. It is a 'Mecca' for KFA-USA
members visiting the UK.
In 1999, a party of over 40 from the KFA-USA
spent the first week of a holiday in the UK,
staying at a hotel in Bury, accompanied by the
committee and members of the KFA-UK. A good
time was had by all, visiting Kay ancestral
homes, etc., including of course Birdhall cottage.
The week concluded with dinners attended by
Lord and Lady Shuttleworth and the Mayor and
Mayoress of Bury.
It was realised that this new project could
provide an ideal opportunity to confirm a genetic
link with the Kays of Lancashire. The KFA-USA
decided to fund 10 participants for this Y-Line
study, selecting two widely separated men from
descendants of each of the five sons of Robert
Kay. Included also were several others who wanted
to participate and paid their own fee. Needless
to say, the results were awaited by our American
cousins with much apprehension.
The KFA-UK contribution was made up of 26 members
and 4 non-members, located throughout the UK
and as far afield as New Zealand, Australia,
Belgium and several in the USA. Two non-Kays
were included for comparison, one who had originally
thought he was a Kay but whose family history
research had suggested that there was a paternity
problem and it was very likely that genetically
he was not a Kay. The other was our chairman,
David Kay Phillips. The Kay in his name is a
legacy from his maternal line and therefore
his Y-Line signature should be different to
the Kays. He was interested to confirm this.
The results from the original 7 man 'Marcus'
project were merged as well, bringing the overall
total for assessment to 52. Surname spellings
include KEY (3), KAYE (12) and KAY (36), plus
one non-Kay.
We really had no idea what to expect. The findings
of the original 'Marcus' project had been remarkable.
The results of this project were equally remarkable
and held some surprises. Watching the results
as they came in, it was clear that, instead
of all being identical, as in the Marcus project,
the tribal origins were separating into five
groups, identified by Oxford Ancestors as follows:
Danish Viking/Anglo Saxon or Middle Eastern
Origin
This was by far the largest group comprising
60% of the total. The all important 10 marker
base-line signature for this group was 15.13.22.10.11.14.09.17.14.11
or 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11. Some points
of interest are:
The first seven results in the table that Peter
Cameron sent out in the summer come from the
'Marcus' project. It is a coincidence that the
participants chosen for the project should all
come from this group. All their samples had
originally been assessed as being of Norse Viking
origin. An explanation for the change to Danish
Viking/Anglo Saxon or Middle Eastern origin
has been provided by Oxford Ancestors in response
to an enquiry by Dr Marcus Key, and is available
on request
The close genetic link between Lancashire Kays
and Yorkshire Kayes found in the Marcus project
has been confirmed. The table of results again
show remarkable similarities, and sometime identical
results between 7 Lancashire Kays and 10 Yorkshire
Kayes
The remaining entries in this group are from
the KFA-USA. They are nearly all identical to
each other, and to the Lancashire and Yorkshire
signatures, and confirmed a genetic link to
the Lancashire Kays, much to the relief of the
KFA-USA who were able to start breathing again!
Significantly among the Lancashire Kays was
one whose family history is well documented
back to the early 1600s at Baldingstone in the
Walmersley area of the Irwell valley, only 20
minutes walk from Birdhall cottage!
All members in this group shared identical
or very similar DNA Y-Line signatures (now including
the KFA-USA group) and, with one exception had
traced their ancestors, either by research or
DNA-linking, to either Lancashire or Yorkshire.
The one exception had only researched his family
in the USA back to 1900 so far. This is quite
remarkable and means that 97%, and possibly
100% of the whole group possess ancestors traceable
to either Lancashire or Yorkshire in the UK
All members with the surname spelling KAY,
and we can now include the KFA-USA group, had
ancestors researched or DNA linked to Lancashire.
All members with the surname spelling KAYE,
with one exception, had ancestors researched
to Yorkshire. This county link by surname spelling
has been frequently observed when studying members'
family history
Danish Viking/Anglo Saxon Origin
We had three members in this group. This classification
was similar to the main group but without a
possible Middle Eastern connection. It is interesting
too that one of the members concerned had traced
his family history back to the 1740s in the
Isle of Man. This far to the west of the British
Isles one might possibly have expected to find
a Norse Viking connection from the many who
invaded and settled in Ireland.
Ancient Celtic tribes pre-dating the 8th
century Vikings
This is a rather unusual group to say the least,
where the DNA might have originated as far back
as the last ice age 9000 years ago! We had 11
results listed. It was the second largest grouping
and formed 21% of the total results. Some points
of interest are:
The group ancestors, as researched by family
history, were not so closely linked to Lancashire
and Yorkshire as the main group, but instead
to various locations such as Norfolk, Derbyshire,
Scotland and Belgium, as well as Lancashire
and Yorkshire For comparison purposes, we had
included the two entries mentioned earlier in
the project who were not Kays. One of them,
our chairman David Kay Plillips, was certain
that he was a Phillips, not a Kay and therefore
his his Y-Line signature should be different
from the Kays, as was our other plant whose
research indicated there were paternity issues
up the line. It was confidently expected that
we could use these two participants as 'controls'
and that their DNA Y-Line signatures would stick
out like a sore thumb.
We were astonished to find that if the group
signatures were mixed, it was not possible to
identify who were the non-Kays! There was only
one marker one digit difference between them,
and also between them and other entries in the
group. How could this be? The question was referred
to Oxford Ancestors at a time when only the
first 7 entries in this group had come in. Oxford
Ancestors' reply is available on request, but
in essence states:
The average Y-Line for the group is 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.16.12.12.
On the OA database there are 153 matches to
this modal haplotype - with over 100 different
surnames! It is sometimes the case that individuals
with different surnames do share a common Y-Line
signature, without there being a recent CPA.
Conversely, individuals with the same surname
may have different Y-Line signatures. It is
unusual for a Y-Line signature to be exclusive
to one surname only
For David Kay Phillips, the DNA evidence alone
does not strongly support a Kay connection on
the parental side, given that there are many
other surnames who also share the same average
signature and also given that he is two mutations
away from this signature For the Celtic group,
you have the fact that the remainder share the
surname of Kay and we know that there is a connection
between Y-Lines and surnames. Also for this
group, no one differs from the average Y-Line
by more than one mutation. Therefor, looking
at the DNA evidence alone, on the balance of
probability these individuals did share a CAP
For the other sample, family history research
had suggested a possible paternity problem,
but his surname was Kay and his DNA matched
the others closely. It might just be worth while
having another look at the family history for
this member - he may be a Kay after all!
Anglo Saxon or Middle Eastern Origin
This contained only three entries and was classified
as a 'rare' Y-Chromosome group, with only 2%
of individuals native to the British Isles being
within this group. Family history research had
traced their ancestors to Cheshire, Yorkshire
and Lancashire.
Middle Eastern or North African Origin.
We had five members in this group, also classed
as a 'rare' group, with only 2% of the Y-chromosomes
of individuals native to the British Isles being
within this haplogroup. Interestingly, all five
had ancestral connections in Lancashire.
A clearer appreciation of our results becomes
apparent when we take into account that Oxford
Ancestors ever-growing database is showing that,
in the modern male population of the British
Isles, just three ancestral tribal groups account
for the origins of 95% of all Y-chromosomes:
| Ancient Celts |
65% |
| Anglo/Saxon/Danish Viking |
22% |
| Norse Viking |
8% |
Project Marcus
The seven people who took part
in Project Marcus had the following signatures:
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11
15.13.22.10.11.14.09.17.14.11
Six of these are the same, and one, the last,
differs by just one point. This makes it certain
that these seven people are descended from the
same CPA. It also proves once and for all, what
many have believed for a long time, that the
Lancashire Kays and the Yorkshire Kayes share
common ancestry. Admittedly a contentious point,
and one that adherents of the two roses might
find difficult to swallow, but sometimes facts
have to be faced.
Dating the CPA
Because the Y-chromosome's signature does occasionally
change, it also allows us to make a guess at
the time when the CPA lived. Geneticists work
on the theory that there is a 98% chance of
the signature staying unchanged as it's passed
from father to son, and a 2% chance of it changing.
As probabilities, these are expressed as a probability
of 0.98 that it stays unchanged, and probability
of 0.02 that it changes.
What this means is that there is a probability
of 0.98 that my Y-chromosome has the same signature
as my father's. There is also a probability
of 0.98 that my father's Y-chromosome has the
same signature as that of his father (my grandfather).
That means that there is a probability of 0.9604
(0.98 multiplied by 0.98) that my signature
is the same as my grandfather's.
We can carry on in this way back through the
generations. There is a probability of 0.941192
(0.98 multiplied by 0.98 multiplied by 0.98)
that my Y-chromosome's signature is the same
as my great-grandfather's, and so on. As we
carry on back through the generations, continuing
to multiply by 0.98, we get a gradually reducing
probability of the signature remaining unchanged,
which can be seen from the graph below:
On this graph, the probability is shown up
the left hand side, and the number of generations
is shown across the bottom. It can be seen from
this that even after 33 generations, there's
still a 50% chance that the Y-chromosome signature
won't have changed. If we assume an average
of 25 years per generation, that means that
there is still a 50% chance that the signature
won't have changed after 825 years.
What is more significant to us, however, are
the cases where the signature has changed. There
is a 2% chance that my signature will be different
to my father's, or a probability of 0.02. But
what is the probability of my signature being
different from my grandfather's? There are two
possible scenarios here; either the change happened
between me and my father, or it happened between
my father and his father. The probability of
this happening is 0.0392 (2 multiplied by 0.02
multiplied by 0.98).
In the same way, if my signature is different
from my great-grandfather's, there are three
ways this could have happened; between me and
my father, or between my father and my grandfather,
or between my grandfather and his father. The
probability of this is 0.057624 (3 multiplied
by 0.02 multiplied by 0.98 multiplied by 0.98).
As before we can carry on with this process,
and get the following graph:
The shape of this graph is known as a Poisson
distribution. This is not because it looks like
a fish, but because it's named after the French
mathematician Poisson. It's the typical shape
that occurs when you are examining the likely
distribution of events that have a very low
probability, as we have here. He originally
developed it when conducting a study of the
likelihood of soldiers in the Prussian army
being kicked by a horse!
This shows us that the most likely number of
generations over which a single change could
occur is about 50 - that's 1,250 years!
We can combine these now. Suppose we have two
men whose Y-chromosome signatures differ by
just one point. We can be sure that they have
a common ancestor, whose signature has passed
unchanged to one of our two men, and has changed
by that one point sometime in the generations
down to the second man. The chances of that
happening are based on two calculations - that
the signature hasn't changed for the first man
(that's 0.98 to the power of however many generations
we're looking at) - multiplied by the probability
that the second man's signature has changed
by one point (that's 0.02 multiplied by 0.98
to the power of one less generation, multipied
by the number of generations). The outcome of
that little bit of arithmetic is shown in this
graph:
This shows us that the most likely time for
our CPA is twenty five generations ago, but
there is still a very wide range of possible
answers. This is still a very imprecise science.
Oxford Ancestor's Rule of Thumb
The arithmetic involved when you are dealing
with a large group of people is horrendous.
Suppose you have a group of thirty people with
very similar signatures, so presumably having
the same CPA. Which CPA? Over the generations,
the CPA's descendants will have had their own
families, and the tree will have branched and
branched. Any group of our thirty will have
their own distinct CPA, somewhere nearer than
the common CPA. Take a simple example; I, my
brothers and my cousins share a CPA (our grandfather).
However, my brothers and myself also share a
CPA (our father). Likewise, my cousins share
a CPA (my uncle). Now wrap a wet towel round
your head and try applying those 0.98s to that
scenario. I tried for a while and then decided
that life's too short.
Fortunately, Oxford Ancestors have a rule of
thumb to locate the most likely CPA. If you
have a group of people, all with similar Y-chromosome
signatures, then count the signature that occurs
most. You can assume that's the one that's been
passed down unchanged from the CPA. Next count
the number of people that don't have that signature,
multiply that number by 50, and divide the answer
by the total number of people in the group.
The answer is the number of generations back
to the CPA. So how do we apply this here?
The Results
In our case, in the sample of 52 Kays, we had
a number of different signatures, most of them
very similar. The signatures, and the number
of times they occurred, were:
Signature |
Number |
Origins |
| 15.13.22.10.11.14.09.17.14.11 |
15 |
W Yorkshire (3), USA (1), Virginia (11) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
11 |
Yorkshire (4), Lancashire (5), E Yorkshire
(1), Virginia (1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.18.14.11 |
2 |
2 Lancashire (2) |
| 15.13.23.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
1 Lancashire (1) |
| 14.13.23.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
1 Lancashire (1) |
| 15.13.23.10.11.14.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
1 W Yorkshire (1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.16.13.11 |
1 |
1 Yorkshire (1) |
| 15.12.22.10.11.14.09.17.12.11 |
1 |
1 Virginia (1) |
| 15.13.23.10.12.14.10.18.12.11 |
1 |
1 Isle of Man (1) |
| 15.15.23.10.11.13.10.16.12.11 |
1 |
1 Lancashire (1) |
| 15.12.23.09.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
1 W. Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.12.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
1 Brabant, Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
1 Derbyshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
1 Lanarkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
USA (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.08.16.12.13 |
1 |
Palenge, Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.16.14.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
USA (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.11.13.09.16.12.12 |
1 |
Cheshire (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.09.15.12.12 |
1 |
Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.23.10.11.12.10.18.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.12.11 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.19.14.11 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.23.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Norfolk (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.17.12.12 |
1 |
N Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
The first thing that jumps at you from these
figures is that exactly half of the samples
fall into just two groups, the first two on
the list. A good job too, otherwise we'd have
wasted an awful lot of time and money to no
avail. The task now is to see what conclusions
can be drawn from this.
The Common Parental Ancestor (CPA)
In our sample, looking at the most common number
in each part of the signature, we get:
| Part 1 |
15 |
37 occurrences |
| Part 2 |
13 |
35 occurrences |
| Part 3 |
22 |
32 occurrences |
| Part 4 |
10 |
42 occurrences |
| Part 5 |
11 |
38 occurrences |
| Part 6 |
14 |
19 occurrences, though 15 occurred 18
times. |
| Part 7 |
09 |
38 occurrences |
| Part 8 |
17 |
33 occurrences |
| Part 9 |
14 |
32 occurrences |
| Part 10 |
11 |
38 occurrences |
This makes the most likely candidate for our
CPA to be the signature 15.13.22.10.11.14.09.17.14.11
- surprise, surprise, that's the one that occurred
most often in our sample. It is also noticeable
that in the sixth part of the signature, the
number 15 occurred only one less time than the
number 14, which gives the signature 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11,
which is the second most frequent occurrence
in the sample. In Oxford Ancestors' terminology,
a signature has changed by one point if just
one of the numbers has changed value by just
one; it has changed by two points if two of
the numbers have changed by just one, or one
number has changed by two, and so one. In our
sample the two main groups are just one point
apart, because just one number has changed.
Looking at our sample in this way, we get the
following (changes are shown in red):
Signature |
|
Origins |
| MAIN
GROUP |
| 15.13.22.10.11.14.09.17.14.11 |
15 |
W
Yorkshire (3), USA (1), Virginia (11) |
| 1
Point Different |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
11 |
W
Yorkshire (4), Lancashire (5), E Yorkshire
(1), Virginia (1) |
| 15.13.23.10.11.14.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
W Yorkshire (1) |
| 2
Points Different |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.18.14.11 |
2 |
Lancashire
(2) |
| 15.13.23.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 15.12.22.10.11.14.09.17.12.11 |
1 |
Virginia
(1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 3
Points Different |
| 14.13.23.10.11.15.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.09.17.12.11 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 15.13.22.10.11.15.15.16.13.11 |
1 |
Yorkshire
(1) |
| More
than 3 Points Different |
| 15.13.23.10.12.14.10.18.12.11 |
1 |
Isle
of Man (1) |
| 15.15.23.10.11.13.10.16.12.11 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 15.12.23.09.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
W.
Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.12.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Brabant,
Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Derbyshire
(1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lanarkshire
(1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
USA
(1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.08.16.12.13 |
1 |
Palenge,
Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.16.14.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
USA
(1) |
| 14.12.23.11.11.13.09.16.12.12 |
1 |
Cheshire
(1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.09.15.12.12 |
1 |
Yorkshire
(1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 14.12.23.10.11.12.10.18.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 14.12.23.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Norfolk
(1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.17.12.12 |
1 |
N
Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire
(1) |
Oxford Ancestors suggest that if a signature
differs by one point, the most likely date of
the CPA is 30 generations ago, but there is
a 50% chance it could have been anywhere between
10 and 70 generations; if a signature differs
by two points, the most likely date of the CPA
is 50 generations ago, but there is a 50% chance
it could have been anywhere between 30 and 90
generations; if a signature differs by three
points, the most likely date of the CPA is 90
generations ago, but there is a 50% chance it
could have been anywhere between 40 and 130
generations. The table above has 12 members
one point different from the main group, another
five members two points different, and another
three who were three points different. Interestingly,
the remaining members are massively different,
the nearest being six points different. Oxford's
Ancestors' words are that the chance of a CPA
when there are more than three points different
are “vanishingly small”. These last
seventeen members clearly do not have the same
CPA as the rest, but see below.
What we do have is a group of twenty seven
members who quite clearly have the same CPA.
We believed we must also include those two points
different, if only because one of them can trace
his ancestry back to the same point as the other
twelve originating from Virginia. Because of
that massive difference just mentioned, we were
also of the opinion that those who are three
points different should also be included.
That means we have thirty five of our original
sample of fifty two who share the same CPA
Ten originate from Yorkshire
Ten Originate from Lancashire
Thirteen can trace their origins to Robert Kay
of South Carolina, and thence to James Kay who
emigrated from Bury in Lancashire to Virginia
in the 1650s
One is from the USA, origin unknown. It is now!
What we have quite conclusively shown from
this group of thirty five is:
The legends of a common ancestry for Kayes/Kays
from Yorkshire and Lancashire are true.
The links between the Kays originating from
Virginia and Lancashire are also true.
Dating the CPA
With all that, we can now have a stab at dating
the CPA. If we apply Oxford Ancestors' rule
of thumb to just the first two groups (the main
group and the twelve who differ by one point)
we have twenty seven members altogether. Multiply
the number who differ from the main group (12)
by 50, and divide the result by the total number
in the group (27):
12 x 50 / 27
This gives the most likely date of the CPA
as being 22 generations ago - generations are
usually assumed to be twenty five or thirty
years, so we have somewhere between 550 and
660 years ago (somewhere between 1343 and 1453).
If we include the group of five who were two
points different, multiply the number who differ
from the main group (17) by 50, and divide the
result by the total number in the group (32):
17 x 50 / 32
In this case the most likely date of the CPA
is 27 generations ago, somewhere between 660
and 800 years ago (between 1223 and 1342).
Finally, add in the three who were three points
different. Multiply the number who differ from
the main group (20) by 50, and divide the result
by the total number in the group (35):
20 x 50 / 35
In this case the most likely date of the CPA
is 28 generations ago, somewhere between 685
and 830 years ago (between 1193 and 1327)
What About the Others?
Seventeen of those who took part in the project
were excluded from our main group because their
signatures were so different. Now is the time
to look at these people:
| Signature |
Number |
Origins |
| 15.13.23.10.12.14.10.18.12.11 |
1 |
Isle of Man (1) |
| 15.15.23.10.11.13.10.16.12.11 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 15.12.23.09.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
W. Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.12.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Brabant, Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Derbyshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lanarkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.09.17.14.11 |
1 |
USA (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.08.16.12.13 |
1 |
Palenge, Belgium (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.16.14.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
USA (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.11.13.09.16.12.12 |
1 |
Cheshire (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.09.15.12.12 |
1 |
Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.23.11.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.23.10.11.12.10.18.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.23.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Norfolk (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.11.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
| 14.12.24.11.13.13.10.17.12.12 |
1 |
N Yorkshire (1) |
| 14.12.24.10.13.13.10.16.12.12 |
1 |
Lancashire (1) |
Gut feeling says there's a family in there,
or rather two or more. A little puzzle for anyone
who feels like a bit of investigation.
And finally
The interpretation of genetic results is not an exact science and much use is made of probabilities. Many of our results were classified as being Anglo Saxon/Danish Viking in tribal origin, with a possible Middle East connection. Artefacts which have been identified as ninth century Danish Viking in origin have been excavated from settlements found on the eastern coast of England from Northumberland down to Norfolk. Tenth century artefacts from Norse Viking settlements have been found on the western coast of northern England from Cumbria down to Liverpool.
Anglos Saxons in the south of England moved north to repel the Scandinavian invaders spreading down the country. Eventually, stalemate was reached along an imaginary line extending northwest across country from the tributary of the Wash in the south east to Shropshire in the west. This was referred to as the Danelaw line and land to the north was Danelaw land. The line blurred over the years and finally disappeared as settlements on both sides became established and tribes intermingled to form relationships. Hence the difficult in separating Anglo Saxon and Danish Viking tribal origins in Y- chromosome research today. The possible Middle East connection arises as a result of the appearance from Africa of the first homo sapiens moving north into the middle East.
It is interesting to conjecture that participants with ancestors traceable to the south of England were more likely to have descended from the Anglo Saxon tribes living south of the Danelaw line. However, most of our participants had ancestors traceable to either Lancashire in the mid north or adjacent Yorkshire in the north east, and therefore were probably more likely descended from the Danish Vikings. None of our results have been identified as being of Norse Viking tribal origin.
The CPA calculations have suggested that the most likely date of a CPA lies between 1193 and 1327. This period lies in the aftermath of the violent Viking invasions, at a time when many were settling on these shores to farm and raise families. Their descendants are being found in our population today. Our 52-man project was still only a small sample compared with some national and international projects aimed at thousands of participants. A larger sample might well refine the results but up to now this is beyond our capability.
The project was partly funded by sponsorship. Our sponsors wish to remain anonymous but their generosity is recognised and very much appreciated. Without their help, the project would not have been possible. Finally, we would like to thank all our participants for taking part in our DNA project and allowing us such an intriguing glimpse into their past and providing some very interesting results to ponder over.
top of the page
