5/18/2002
Revised 5/14/2003
ANCESTRY
BY DNA ANALYSIS
BY
Dannie Lee
Craycraft
INTRODUCTION
Very recently, the subject of using DNA testing to do “reconstruction” genealogy has been in the news. From the basic genealogy work that I have done on the first two books on the various Cracroft lines (includes all spellings), DNA testing had an obvious appeal. I will use the England surname Cracroft in this work to include all the various spellings of our surname: Cracraft, Craycraft, Craycroft and Creacraft
I work with a small group of dedicated Cracroft genealogists on the Internet. I especially wish to thank Robert Lynn Craycroft for his assistance on this report. Our group has tremendous exposure on the Internet hosting several websites. We have been working as a group for several years now. No one can do a Cracroft search on the Internet without finding one of our member’s postings or websites. With this group as a base, we selected a number of male volunteers to participate in a DNA study to help verify our “documented” family genealogy. There were some surprises!
Our belief has always been that regardless of the spelling of our surname, we all descend from the England Cracroft line. From the work of a highly respected and well- known heraldry authority, Stephen Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA, Ragemar circa 1050 is the oldest identified Cracroft ancestor. Stephen has done extensive work documenting the Cracroft genealogy.
The desire to identify and discover our roots is an increasingly popular American pursuit. We came here from England for many reasons: religion, freedom, and a chance to have a new beginning. However, some 200 plus years later, Americans of all heritages are striving to uncover their roots. We Craycrafts are no exception.
The basic goal of our DNA program was to verify that all the various spellings of our surname in this country actually descend from a common English ancestor. We have proven this in part. The lines tested were: Cracraft, Craycraft, Craycroft and finally Cracroft. John Cracroft with wife Ann, is listed in the ship passenger list as Creacroft. His line here in America is mostly spelled Craycroft. However, we have not tested all the descendents of each of these lines. I am sure that there are descendents of these lines who would refute our conclusion. Also, we have not tested any Creacraft, Crecraft, Creacroft or Creacraft lines.
To understand the test program and its results, one must
understand the basics of DNA testing and what it can tell us. For this
explanation, I have used, with the permission of Bennett Greenspan, the work
done by FamilyTreeDNA. This is the DNA testing lab we used to perform the testing for us.
However, before getting into the technical discussion, I should explain circumstances that might affect the results of the DNA testing:
DNA testing can only be done on the male descendent line for purposes of establishing a common ancestor between two males. By this I mean the Y Chromosome DNA that is passed from father to son is used to determine if two males share a common ancestor. It cannot be done on the female line. This is explained later.
There are several things that can cause problems when testing the male descendent line. First, at times a non-Cracroft individual may be adopted into the family line and assume the family surname. This means he is not a blood relation. Second, a female Cracroft may have a male child out of wedlock and the male child assumes the family name. Although technically this male child is a Cracroft, he has broken the male descendent Y Chromosome DNA chain since he descended from a female Cracroft. Third, and finally, the male does not descend from any of Ragemar’s line! This could happen, perhaps, if there were other Cracroft (non-Ragemar) lines. Another male someplace back in time adopted the Cracroft surname.
We know that the use of surnames did not begin in England until the 1200’s. It is conceivable that the name Cracroft had variations even back in those early times with non-Ragemar descendents adopting variations of the Cracroft name (Creacroft, Craycraft and Craycroft). Records exits in England that show the surname Craycraft existed in England as a totally distinctive surname as recent as the 1600’s. We have been in communication with English Craycrafts this past year. Where or how the Craycraft surname originated in England is unknown. It is unknown if it connects to Ragemar’s line. It may simply be a variation of the Ragemar surname Cracroft and connect to this line. Actually, it was a descendent of Ragemar who first adopted the Cracroft family name in about the 11th century.
The subject of DNA is highly complex. I will attempt to present information here to help you with the basics. If it gets too complex, don’t worry about it. The most important concept is that fathers pass on their genetic code to their sons and their sons to their sons and this goes on for hundreds of generations. Because of this trait, we can determine if a modern day Craycraft is related to our most distant ancestor, Ragemar.
I will only be discussing Y-Chromosome DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) testing. This means I will only be discussing the male DNA that is passed from father to his sons. The mother does not pass the Y-Chromosome to her children. That is why only males can participate in such a program. Variations in the Y-Chromosome allele passed from father to son do occur but the occurance is estimated at 0.2% per generation or once in every 500 generations (about 10,000 years). See Chris Pomery notes in the Reference section.
FamilyTreeDNA, our testing lab, tests 12 allele (markers on the DNA chain). These allele are sometimes referred to as “systems”, loci, “microsatellite loci” or markers. The 12 markers tested are: DYS 385a, 385b, 388, 389-1, 389-2, 390, 391,392, 393, 394, 426 and 439). Marker DYS394 is sometimes referred to as DYS19. See Reference notes on the choice of markers for testing.
A computer is used to read the DNA scans. It measures the size of the allele result and assigns a weighted number to it. These are the numbers that are compared between individuals being tested. If, for instance, the DYS 388 allele result is off by one between two individuals and all the other numbers are equal, then it is called an 11/12 match. It means that the two individuals are related but the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) is further back in time.
To back track briefly, based upon all DNA testing to date on thousands of participants, on an SNP basis, there appears to be 18 haplogroups for men and approxamately 25-30 for women. This means that for every man, woman and child alive today, they will fall into one of these haplogroups. Some of the markers used in the DNA testing determine in which group an individual belongs. I will not go into this subject in this report. I only mention it here for those that might be interested.
We wish thank the following individuals representing the indicated family linesfor participating in this research program. Close to a hundred emails and letters were sent out here and in England. Dozens of messages were posted to numerous genealogy bulletin boards on the Internet. In some cases we even offered free testing. There were few positive responses. Those currently researching our family surname and our future descendents will always be grateful for their assistance.
The following lines were tested as part of our project:
Dannie Lee Craycraft
DANNIE LEE9 CRAYCRAFT (DONALD BRANT8, CHARLES ABNER7, WILLIAM HARRISON6, JOHN5, JOHN4, CHARLES3, SAMUEL2, JOSEPH 1?) ( author's line)
Kelly Dean Cracraft
KELLY DEAN8 CRACRAFT (DON CLIFFORD7, FRANCIS RICHARD6, ELI LEONARD5, DAVID4, JOSEPH3, JOSEPH2, JOSEPH ?1) ( Holly Dianne
Cracraft line)
Sherman Miller Cracraft
SHERMAN MILLER8 CRACRAFT (GENE CARY7, SHERMAN COOPER6, WILLIAM COOPER5, ANDREW HENDERSON4, WILLIAM C.3, JOSEPH2, JOSEPH ?1) ( Nancy Stull line)
Robert Lynn Craycroft
ROBERT LYNN7 CRAYCROFT (WILLIAM CLIFTON6, WILLIAM CLIFTON5, WILLIAM THOMAS4, WILLIAM BENJAMIN3, EDWARD, SCOTT2, BENJAMIN, JOSEPH1 ) (See Warren's line below)
Warren Craycroft
WARREN6 CRAYCROFT (ROBERT NEWTON5, JOHN HENRY4, BENJAMIN3, BENJAMIN2, BENJAMIN JOSEPH1 )
Matthew Charles Craycraft
MATTHEW CHARLES6 CRAYCRAFT (CHARLES THEODORE5, CHESTER REUBEN4, CHARLES REUBEN3, REUBEN (RUBEN)2, CHARLES C.1) (Dianne Hume, Denise
Miller and Jeff Craycraft line)
Glen Woodrow Craycraft
GLEN WOODROW8 CRAYCRAFT (OLIVER MUIR7, RICHARD6, ENOCH5, WILLIAM4, WILLIAM3 CRACRAFT,
JR., WILLIAM2, JOSEPH ?1) (Nancy Stull's line)
Timothy Craycraft
TIMOTHY8 CRAYCRAFT (WILBUR7, JOHN EDGAR6, ZEDEKIAH5, WILLIAM4, WILLIAM3 CRACRAFT,
JR., WILLIAM2, JOSEPH ?1) (Nancy Stull line)
Rev. Bernard Leo
Craycroft
BERNARD LEO9 CRAYCROFT,
REV. (GEORGE HIX8, THOMAS FRANCIS7, CHARLES ALEXIUS6, THOMAS ALEXIUS5, THOMAS4, IGNATIUS3, IGNATIUS2, JOHN1) (John&Ann
Craycroft line)
Peter Kenneth Cracroft
At this point, I need to explain briefly our present day understanding of our family line.
Accoring to the few documents available, a Joseph Cracraft or Cracroft came here circa 1702 from Lincolnshire, England. He came here with his wife Ann or Nancy Ann Stanton. He may have even married her here in America. We don't know. He had six children: Joseph Jr., William, Samuel, Charles, Sarah and Thomas. What is well documented is that there was a John Cracroft (ship manifest spelling:Creacraft or Creacroft) who arrived here circa 1665 with his wife Ann from Lincolnshire, England. We have recently traced this John (see iv below) back to the following line in England. I must state, however, that we do not have conclusive proof on this connection to Robert's son John. Circumstantial evidence looks very good.
Children of Robert Cracroft:
(i) Robert b.1610 d. before 8/23/1647. Married Margaret Remington
(ii) Mary b. before 3/28/1611. d. aft 1667. Married John Shelton
(iii) Mary b. about 1614
(iv) John b. about 1616 d. 1697. Married Ann Unknown (this is not verified from records).
(v) Elizabeth b. before 3/17/1615/16. Married William Bedell
(vi) Richard b. before 11/3/1617 d. about 1684. Married Susannah Unknown
(vii) Jane b. before 11/3/1623. Married Francis Fland
(viii) Martha b. bef 1/8/1624/25. Married Edward Barker
(ix) Thomas b. before 4/8/1628 d. about 1680. Married Mary Whelpdale
(x) Henry b. before 8/15/1631
Where this narrative becomes less certain is the true origin of Joseph and Nancy Ann Stanton. It is possible that our Joseph line actually may descend from one of John and Ann's descendants. However, this uncertainty does not interfere with our DNA project. In either case, we know that we descend from the Hackthorn, Lincolnshire Cracrofts-either through Joseph/Nancy or John/Ann.
If you examin the lines tested, you can see that we have covered almost all of the family lines involved:
Dannie Lee descends from Joseph's son Samuel
Kelly Dean descends from Joseph's son Joseph Jr.
Sherman Miller descends Joseph's son Joseph Jr.
Mathew Charles descends from Joseph but we are don't know exactly how
Glen Woodrow is from a broken line connection to Joseph's son William (1)
Timothy descends from Joseph's son William
Robert Lynn is from a broken line connection to his ancestor Benjamin Joseph (2)
Warren descends from Benjamin Joseph (3)
The only male children of Joseph's line not covered in the above group are his sons Thomas and Charles. We have been unable to locate any descendants of these two lines.
Rev. Bernard Leo Craycroft
Rev. Leo is a direct documented descendant of John and Ann.
Peter Kenneth Craycroft
Peter is a direct documented descendant of Ragemar.
(1) It is suspected that Glen's line descends from a female Craycraft(2) It is suspected that Robert's line, back to at least Edward Craycroft, descends from an adopted male who assumed the Craycroft name.
(3) Warren's result confirmed our suspicions concerning Robert's immediate ancestors. Warren's DNA matches mine.
For the lines tested, the DNA testing has proven that the family surnames Cracraft, Craycraft, Craycroft all share a common ancestor. DNA testing alone cannot tell us who this common ancestor was or exactly how far back in time we connect with him. Based upon statistical models for a 12/12 match, we know that there is a 50% probability that this ancestor was no more than 14.5 generations ago. There is a 90% probability that this ancestor was no more than 48 generations ago. However, 48 generations is a huge period of time. The 90% probability figure for Peter, since his DNA result was off by one unit in one allele, is no more than 84.7 generations.
For selected volunteers, we did the 21 marker testing. For a 21/21 match (myself and Rev. Bernard Leo Craycroft), the 50% probability drops to no more than 8.3 generations ago and 90% drops to no more than 27.4 generations ago. This is still a long time ago. For information, we both matched Peter Cracroft in 20 of 21 markers. This might indicate that Rev. Leo and I share a common ancestor (John/Ann) but our relationship to Peter is further back in time (his connection to Robert Cracroft and Elizabeth and Martha Amcotts is back 10 generations). Peter's distant connection to our MRCA would explain why we only had a 20/21 match with him. Consideration the amount of time, there may have been a minor DNA mutation.
You can review the actual DNA results at the end of this report.
For all practical purposes, this does not really help in pinpointing who this common ancestor might be. Therefore, we have no plans to do any further testing. We have proven what we set out to prove and that is that the American families who share variations on the England Cracroft surname all descend from a common English ancestor. It proves that we are all one family regardless of how we spell our ancestral surname.
We did discover one disturbing piece of information in our testing which I have briefly touched upon. Robert Lynn Craycroft, who is a member of our Internet group, has not been able to tie his family line (Benjamin Joseph Craycroft) into our Joseph Cracraft line, the John and Ann Craycroft line or the English Ragemar Cracroft line. The results of his DNA testing indicate that he does not share our DNA. His results were off by more than one number in four markers. This result is way more than genetic mutation might account for.
To resolve the issue, Robert recruited another member of his family line, Warren Craycroft. Warren branches off from Robert's line at Edward Scrott Craycroft born 1809. As you can see from the DNA results, Warren's results matched mine. This result confirms that Robert Lynn's line had a brake in the male DNA Y-chromosome chain, most probably due to an adopted son.
We encountered a similar problem when we tested Glen Woodrow. His DNA totally did not match any of the other tested volunteers. This has been explained by descendants of this line that claim that family "history" believes that a female Craycraft in that line had a son who assumed the Craycraft name.
Family
Tree DNA (http://www.familytreedna.com/)
Website owned by ----- Bennett Greenspan
Family
Tree DNA
Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
1919 North Loop
West, Suite 685
Houston, Texas 77008, USA
Fax: (713) 316-0648
info@FamilyTreeDNA.com
All of the following information was copied, with the permission of Bennett Greenspan, from the website referenced above.
It is known that all male DNA (Y Chromosome) can be traced back to a single individual as female (MtDNA) can be traced to a single female. The thrust and importance of Family Tree DNA is our ability to help find the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) based upon comparing the results of testing 2 people.
|
Number
of matching markers |
50%
probability that the MRCA was no longer than this number of generations |
90%
probability that the MRCA was no longer than this number of generations |
95%
probability that the MRCA was no longer than this number of generations |
|
10 of 10 |
16.5 |
56 |
72 |
|
12 of 12 |
14.5 |
48 |
62 |
|
21 of 21 |
8.3 |
27.4 |
35.7 |
FamilyTreeDNA's 21 marker test points to a much lower number of generations to the most recent common ancestor than other commercially available tests. We use exacting statistics appropriate for the non-independent transfer of genetic material on the Y Chromosome.
|
Situation |
Control Code |
Locus # |
|
Result |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California-Same
Surname |
GbG24 |
1 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
11/11 |
Match
A |
Match |
|
|
Argentina-Same
Surname |
GbG23 |
1 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
11/11 |
Match
A |
Confirmed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family
from Germany |
GbG6 |
2 |
7 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
9/11 |
**Note |
Random |
|
|
Family
from Galicia |
GbG13 |
2 |
7 |
6 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
6 |
9/11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
Generations in US |
GbG14 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
8 |
0 |
6 |
1 |
4 |
11/11 |
Cohen* |
Match |
|
|
Family
from Russia (1989) |
GbG12 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
8 |
0 |
6 |
1 |
4 |
11/11 |
Cohen* |
Confirmed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Houston-Same
Surname |
GbG3 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
4 | |||||||||