Jesse Horne 1854-1934

Among my matches at 67 markers is a Mr Horne (removing his first name for privacy, as I’ve sent him email but haven’t heard from him as of yet), whose terminal relative is Jesse Horne 1854-1934. I didn’t pay much attention to this match, in part because it was a lesser match at 37 markers, with a diff of 3 at 37. At 67 markers, though, the diff is 4 and the match is thus closer.  So, I sent the man an email and then looked up what I could on Ancestry.

Jesse Horne 1854-1934 is matched to a man in the 1880 census in Shelby County, Tennessee. He is married at this time. In 1900 he is in the same county and state and now has several children. Unlike the previous census, they note that he can read and write and he says he was born in Kentucky. He claims his mother and father were born in Kentucky as well.

The same Ancestry source has a 1850 US Census entry for a possible father. This ‘Jessee Hornes’ is living in Perry County, TN, but a closer read of the census data shows that this Jessee Hornes claims to have been born in TN, about 1820.

In 1820 there are a fair number of Myers in Tennessee. By 1840 most of them are gone, to Missouri for the most part. But I can’t eliminate the possibility that a Cove Creek Myers (or close relative) fathered this Jessee Hornes, or alternatively, was the parent of Jessee Hornes’s father. In fact the few times I’ve looked at a TIP calculation of these possibilities, those odds were substantial.

And if the father is actually born in Kentucky, I’ll note, as just one example, that David Crockett’s autobiography speak of various traveling Myers selling wares out of Greene County, Tennessee.

To note, this match may be a product of luck. If I had any advice for a male Horne who is a direct descendant of Jesse 1854-1934, it would be to get an accurate YDNA haplotype. A P312 test at YSEQ is pretty cheap. Z39300+ tests don’t exist in isolation, and someone would have to decide if the $600 or so for a BIGY would be worth it. And if the Horne males are P312+, they can join the P312 project at ftDNA, and then let the experts there guide the search. I will note that my line of Myers YDNA is rare. If we are matched, it will stick out like a sore thumb on the BIGY test.

Update: While I didn’t initially realize it, ‘Horn’ can be a German name. Horn and variants of Horn (Hornung, Hornberger, etc) can be parsed from Pennsylvania German Pioneers. My first try picked up about 92 males with ‘Horn’ or some variant thereof. So one possibility, which I hadn’t initially considered, is that a common ancestor, if he exists, would be found on the other side of the Atlantic. A German Horn would come to the states in the 18th century, and migrate to Kentucky in the late 18th, early 19th century.

Y111 results. The meaning of laborer in the 1772 tax rolls.

Both Rayedene Graves, who manages Artie Myers DNA samples, and I extended our YDNA STR markers to 111 markers, and the results are that we match each other to 107/111 markers. We both match to Ross in 107/111 markers. The ftDNA TIP calculator can get us some indication of how close we are. To make things simple, I’ll note that the odds for being William Myers Sr’s son or grandson is somewhere between 44 and 52% and the odds of being his first cousin once removed, or closer, is between 74 and 79%. This is closer than the 50% per first 4 possible matches we were assuming before. If I recall right, the odds that John Myers b 1742 is Charles Sr’s father is about 30%, that being his father’s brother or closer is 60%, and that being the father’s first cousin or thereabouts is also in the 70s. This is a fairly closely knit group.

At this point, I suspect that both John Myers b 1742 and William Sr come from Germany, perhaps on the same boat and as part of the same group. Again, they could have come separately, but both would have been minors during the peak of German immigration and likely bound (indentured) after arrival, to pay for the trip.

The book “Beyond Philadelphia” has a section on the Lehigh Valley, which discusses the 1772 tax rolls in Northampton. They note that the occupation lab’r is most likely a farm hand. This now leads to the question of who in Tennessee (or perhaps Philadelphia, if Charles was the son of a cousin that stayed behind) trained Charles in smithing. I notice a number of apprenticeships were starting at the ages of 9 and 11 in those days, so looking in the Greene County minutes during the time span 1798-1800 would not hurt.

NC Myers and TN Myers. Weaving it together into a speculative whole.

I was looking through my Dad’s autosomal records, looking for Myers to ask to do a YDNA test, if they were not exactly in our line. I was hoping to find another Ross David Myers or Artie Myers, because DNA analysis doesn’t act vertically on the known relatives, it acts horizontally, it parallelizes the search because you find close relatives you never expected.

Neil O. Myers is a distant autosomal match of my Dad’s, a 7 cM segment of DNA shared with him. Not shared with me. But vastly important is that he is a direct descendant of John Myers 1712 who married Ann Bruce, and even more so, had a defined haplotype.

Neil’s haplotype is R-YP639, which is significant as it’s a subclade of R1a. I’m R-By15581, a subclade of R1b. R1a and R1b do not mix. So we now have definitive DNA evidence that John Myers of NC born 1942 (maybe) died 1826 in Mississippi is not part of the John Myers/Ann Bruce tree.

Neil, btw, has a book on the SC Myers, which Ross has purchased and looks pretty good.

In the meantime I heard from Rayedene Graves, Artie Myers’s relative and guardian of his DNA data, and it was really great stuff she had to say.

Artie is a descendant of George Myers. George Myers is the link to NC, and his father is, by her telling of the tale, the son of Captain William Myers, the one who dies in 1923 in Greene Co TN. That makes him the William Myers Sr so often spoken of in Green Co lore (see comments on this article). Charles Myers is thus related to George Myers who is on record as saying his dad was Captain William Myers. And the William Myers’s are all in Greene Co. And comments by other folks that they moved most likely as a family group are perhaps more realistic now.

If you try to look up William Myers d 1823 on Ancestry trees, you find a ton of folks who mention a William Myers b 1770 Somerset Co (that county again) and have him die in 1823. I guess they missed the 1815 death notice.  If the 1770 figure is correct, it’s not for William Sr, but rather for William Jr.

So please indulge me a little bit. Let’s suggest that “our” Charles is literally the Charles Jr mentioned in William Myers Jr’s will, and that he is born in 1789 in Somerset County PA. That would make the putative father, William jr, about 19 years old. Charles Myers Sr would be a brother of William Jr, who because of 1840 US census data (Van Buren Co, MO), had to be born between 1781 and 1788.  Then Charles Jr is the one who marries Rebecca, in this telling. What isn’t clear is the relationship between William Sr and Jr, and it is possible that a brother of William Sr is the father of William Jr.

And if this is all true, then the connection between the Williamses is proven by the Y37 match between Artie, myself, and my dad.

This isn’t the only way these data can be interpreted, but with more facts, the story just seems to get better and better.

Update – my assumption, that “our” Charles is Charles Myers Jr,  can be disproved by data from Pleasant Hill Cemetery in Cass County Missouri.

Big Y tested. R-BY15581. Z38300+

I had decided that if my work gave me a bonus, I’d have the BIG Y done. It was frustrating not having a known terminal SNP, and I wasn’t sure what else I could do to get there. Just, BIG Y is expensive. In this case, I’d say it was worth it.

Turns out the TX Myers Y-DNA is rare. We were the first family with a BIG-Y test that was Z39300 positive that claimed continental European origins. All others were from the Britain/Scotland/Ireland cluster. So that means we’re pretty unique, and that we changed, in a small way, the Y-DNA tree. The data are here. And that small portion of the tree changed when our data were added.

We’re not the only family with this cluster. There are close STR matches on familytree that likely have it as well. Some are found in the Feichts of Pennsylvania, and perhaps other families as well.

That’s the good news. The bad news is that genetic genealogy is illegal in France and Germany, and so we’re not going to be given help from overseas. It’s going to require more grunt work on our side of the Atlantic.

Y assignment BY-1551. Probably wrong again.

This is my latest assignment from Family Tree DNA:


BY-1551. This was an assignment from the National Geographic Geno 2.0+ data set. If you look at Big Tree ( go to link. Search for BY1551. click on it) and also the BY-1551 test at YSeq, they both say the normal base at this location is Cytosine.  But the raw data for my DNA says this base is Cytosine and yet also a mutation. This is an error in the assignment of the data.


Y assignment R-FGC11678. Probably wrong.

This is my latest assignment.


Very hard to believe a haplogroup where I am U106-, Z381-, and Z156-. This SNP is a Nat Geo 2.0 Next Gen SNP and the raw assignment is Cytosine. I need to know if X-> C is the actual mutation folks look  for. This could easily be another random mutation on our part.

Update: the U106 spreadsheet of Raymond Wing shows that this change should be G -> A, not a cytosine. So this is another natural mutation, not a diagnostic marker.

Update 2 6/25/2017: for the folks in the L21 Yahoo groups hitting this page repeatedly, thank you. I didn’t realize that my issue was more common than realized. The issue is pretty simple. Nat Geo Geno 2.0 transfers have a data issue in that any point mutation at a site is classed as a “true”, even though the odds of it being the mutation ‘on the books’ is one in three. These classifications wreak havoc with ftDNA terminal haplotype software (crufty stuff, not smart enough to double check the mutation) and so if you do not eventually do a Big Y, your life will become dominated by ftDNA mistakes that you will have to check manually. 

Phasing DNA. Pros and Cons.

I had my dad get an Autosomal test at ftDNA (whatever their merits or demerits, Family Tree DNA keeps your DNA sample for 25 years, so you can update testing anytime you want), and I have transferred that test to Gedmatch. His kit number is posted on Wikitree ( which is another genealogical resource you might find useful). But to repeat them here, Ysearch kit is MMB63. His autosomal kit on gedmatch is T141705. Anyone who has a gedmatch login can do ‘one to many’ comparisons with his gedmatch kit.

That said, with my Dad’s kit there, I can phase my own DNA kits, splitting them into a maternal and paternal side. Using these, I can now tell whether a DNA match is matching from the maternal side or paternal side. So, when trying to dig up dimly understood ancestors, this is quite valuable.

On the other hand, the admixture of my maternal side is a bit fanciful..


And the answer is, no I don’t believe it. The sanest of the admixtures so far seems to be 50% Scots/Irish/British, 30% Scandinavian, and 20% Southern Europe. That’s what I tend to believe, as of the moment.

And yes, they do warn you that phased data and admixture are not the best of ideas. Compare with my admixtures in previous posts.

R-S7123 haplotype.

That’s what Family Tree DNA now says. It’s a subtree of P312, perhaps the largest branch of R1b..


familytreeDNA hasn’t said they completed the M343 backbone testing, but the results look as if they have.

I’m looking to see if anyone else matches this, and so far, no hits.

Update 9/27/2016: working on the assumption that ftDNA has tested P311, P312, L21, Z2542 (DF13 alike), and L513, then L21 on down are all negative, and we get this positive S7123 test, derived from the Nat Geo array. It’s kind of a tree busting result.

Update 2 — Mystery Solved.

From this link, we note that the normal S7123 mutation is an Adenine to Guanine replacement. Raw data from my Nat Geo data set shows I have a Cytosine there.


So, it’s not a diagnostic S7123 change, but a random mutation that popped into the picture and causes some noise. There is a DF27 test upcoming, one ftDNA ordered and I didn’t pay for. Much appreciative of that. We’ll see what that brings. Perhaps a DF27+ and another test. At this point, it’s fair to say I’m not S7123 but P312 and need to wait a bit more.



So you’re mostly Micronesian and want to know how Asian and European you are?

My wife is half Chamorro and half Japanese, so on her side of the family they generally have two questions. Is the paternal ancestor European or Chamorro, and how much European blood do they have? On top of that, a sane admixture result (how much Japanese, how much Chamorro, how much European) was desired, so that reasonable guesses could be made as to how far back the European blood was introduced.

We ran into the issue first with Ancestry DNA. They had her mostly Asian, and a hodge podge of other assignments. Dissatisfaction with the admixture results from Ancestry led us to export the data from Ancestry and put a copy of this data up on gedmatch. Testing different Admixtures with the gedmatch tools made it clear that without a reference population of Southeast Asians/Oceania, then any real attempts to separate these two was not going to work. Ancestry DNA evidently has a Polynesian reference but not really a true Austronesian reference, which really is needed for any people populated by the Austronesian expansion.

Nat Geo Genographic was pretty excellent. They have a Southeast Asia/Oceania reference population, and it has my wife with about 53% Asian, 36% Oceania, and 9% European.

Upon transferring that data to Family Tree DNA, that separation has been lost. She’s now 80+% Asian, 9% European, and 1% Native American.

So, in short:

Ancestry – probably OK if you’re Polynesian. If you’re Melanesian, Micronesian, Filipino, Vietnamese, from New Guinea, Ceylon, or Madagascar, probably not.

Net Geo Genographic – the best of the three, with a sane reference population

Family Tree DNA – in terms of admixture percentages, not worth it if you’re descended from Austronesian people.

Note: my wife, in various gedmatch tests, often turns up substantial percentages of Siberian blood. The Siberians are the population from which Native Americans came, so the 1% Native American says that there are still traces of genes found in Native American populations.