Happy New Year!

Happy 2013 to all Swinfields or those who are part of the wider “Swinfield family”. I hope that it brings all that you would wish for.

As we enter yet another New Year, we all tend to look back on the past and especially what we have done over the last twelve months. We should also look forward to the future and set ourselves goals to be achieved. What have we learned through our work on the Swinfields and what more is there still to do?

I hope that I have both informed and entertained you with the Swinfield Blog. It will have been successful if you look forward to receiving each issue and enjoy reading it. I have tried to produce articles as regularly and often as I can so that there has been something new for you to learn about our family. I will endeavour to keep you informed of new developments and discoveries this year too. As I have already dealt with the history of the main lines of the family in the 19th and 20th centuries, my contributions will mainly centre on the earlier story of the family. I aim to tell you about what is known of the Swinfields of the 17th and 18th centuries. In addition, if any of you would be willing to contribute stories about your relatives, just send me the copy and I will “put it up”.

Through Andrew Swinfield's efforts, a mailshot was dispatched to all Australian Swinfields listed in White Pages. Although not inundated with replies, we did receive some very valuable responses and significant new information from previously unknown branches. A worthwhile project.

Indeed, that has resulted in one new male, Maxwell Henry Swinfield, commissioning a DNA test. We await, with great anticipation, the test results when they have been processed. It would great if other Swinfield men would join in. There are some families from which we have no participants. I contacted about 20 men in December 2012 who I had “targetted” as those who I would dearly love to contribute samples (purely for valid genealogical research reasons). Sadly, none responded by paying for a test, despite there being a much reduced rate available through the FTDNA Christmas sale. Perhaps they will in 2013!

I would also love to collect as many photographs as possible of anyone who is, or has ever been, named Swinfield. The written records will probably always be with us but the faces of our ancestors and relatives are far less durable. We need to gather them together before they are lost or thrown away. These could be pictures of those who are living or those who are no longer with us. If you have any images that you are willing to share with us all, please send them to me now, telling me who they are, how they are related to you and, if possible, when and where it was taken. You could start me off by e-mailing me a group photo of yourself, your brothers and sisters (if you had any) and your parents. I will happily become custodian of the new massive Swinfield family album.

Geoff  Swinfield (born 1951), Tom Swinfield (born 1984),
Ben Swinfield (born 1985) & Reg Swinfield (born 11th January 1925) 

As an example, on 11th January, we celebrated my Dad's 88th birthday. Reg Swinfield was born in 1925. Here he is with his me, his son, Geoff Swinfield and two of his three grandsons, Tom and Ben Swinfield, taken in the Half Moon at Sherborne, Dorset. Very rarely do four Swinfields gather together in one place which sells beer! It was something to record and commemorate!

My sincere wish for this New Year would be to have a Swinfield family gathering. I have long been hoping to organise an event where anyone and everyone who has our surname or has used it in the past (or may do so in the future?) can convene. There we could meet up with long-lost cousins and exchange information. Just think of the photo opportunity too! It would clearly attract most people if it took place close to Leicester where the majority of Swinfields still live. To get it off the ground, I do need help from those who live in that area. Where and when could we hold it? Do you know of a venue which would accommodate up to 100 Swinfields? Would you be willing to help me to fulfil my New Year's resolution?   

DNA Tests for Christmas?

I have talked a lot in this Blog about the use of DNA tests to answer questions about the relationships between the various branches of the Swinfield family. They can be a great tool to supplement the paper and parchment documents for our ancestors which we, as genealogists, use to put together a family tree.

My grandparents' grave - St Michael's churchyard,
Yorktown, Surrey

Genealogical records such as birth, marriage and death certificates, census returns, parish registers, wills and gravestones provide us with the “facts” about our ancestors' lives but they often do not tell the whole story! As has been discovered and illustrated during this series of the articles, to be read here, although they are documents which purport to provide a record of the important events in the lives (and deaths) of our relatives, they are often far from truthful. Every time one of our forebears provided information to the relevant authorities, whether the state or the church, he or she may have “bent” the facts or just lied. They often altered their ages, invented names for errant fathers, or hid illegitimacy.

Genetic inheritance cannot lie to us. It provides an accurate account of the real ancestors who donated the code which makes us who we are. If we can read the blueprint, we sometimes find clues, especially in the male line (like mine), which tells us that a branch contains hidden illegitimacy. After all, we only have our female ancestor's word for who was the true father of any of her children. We can compare men, using the Y-chromosome tests, to see how closely they are (or are not!) related. This has already told us a lot about the Swinfield lines from which we have samples. We were even included in an article, published in The Guardian last Saturday, about genetic tests which are being done on the possible body of Richard III.  

DNA Worldwide test kit

I have very recently “targeted” 18 male Swinfields who are representatives of six major branches of the family from which no one has yet been tested or where more samples are needed. I have sought their participation to see if any are prepared to take advantage of a seasonal cut-price offer which is currently available through FamilyTree DNA. Until 31st December, the price of a 37-marker test is just £75 ($119), a saving of over £30 off the normal price. To date, only two have replied, wishing me well with the study, providing genealogical information, but declining to pay for a test.

So if you are still looking for that very special and personal present for your beloved Swinfield male for Christmas, what better gift could there be? What's more, if you test one member of a family, you will get a result for his father, brothers, sons and even his grandsons! They all have the same Y-chromosome. You would also contribute significantly to our knowledge of the wider family's history so it would be a much- appreciated present for me too!

Click here to order now

Happy Christmas and a great genealogical New Year!  

Geoff

Part 21: Swinfield DNA update

We have the result of another DNA test which adds significantly to our knowledge of the relationship between the larger branches of our family. Andrew Swinfield of Sydney, New South Wales, commissioned a 37 marker test through Family Tree DNA. The results are now in. You can see and compare the results that we now have on the Swinfield DNA &Genealogy page hosted by FTDNA. What do they tell us? I have discussed these results in detail there.

To summarise what we know, we now have three men who have been tested. They are:

Andrew John Swinfield                       born 1957   Sydney, NSW          Family 3A         
Derrick George Joseph Swinfield        born 1928   Leicester                  Family 5F
Paul Frederick Swinfield                     born 1957   Crayford, Kent         Family 4 & 13

Andrew & Derrick match at 29 of 32 markers

Paul & Derrick match at 31 of 32 markers

Andrew & Paul match at 34 of 37 markers

Wolvey church

Only two of them are known to be related through genealogical records. Andrew is the 4^th cousin, once removed, to Paul, both being part of the extensive family which is designated as Family 3 & 4. They both descend from Thomas Swinfield and Elizabeth Hackett who married in the parish church of Monks Kirby, Warwickshire, on 21^st August 1803. They named their children in the neighbouring church of Wolvey from 1804 to 1820 before moving on to Mancetter where they named their last three sons from 1822 to 1827.

Andrew’s ancestor was William (1804-1876) who emigrated to NSW in 1848. He is the forebear of all living Swinfields in Australia. Paul’s great-great-grandfather, George Swinfield (born 1825), remained in England after his two oldest brothers, William and John (1806-1874), travelled to the other side of the World.

Derrick is part of my branch of the Swinfields, Family 5, an equally large lineage. Unlike me, through the unfortunate illegitimacy which resulted in my great-grandfather, in 1841 (see Part 6 of the blog), he would appear to have a “typical” Swinfield Y-chromosome. He has inherited this from his direct male ancestors. His almost exact match with the two representatives of Family 3 & 4 strongly argues that the two largest pedigrees are branches of one much larger family tree. If only records had survived from that early, it would be possible to show that all those named Swinfield descend from a single ancestor who assumed our surname in about the 13^th century when names became hereditary. 

It would appear that the "Swinfield haplotype" is:  

DYS	Value				DYS	Value
393	13				448	19
390	24				449	30
19	14				464a	15
391	10 or 11				464b	16
385a	11				464c	16 or 17
385b	14				464d	17
426	12				460	11
388	12				GATA-H4	11
439	11				YCAlla	19
389a	13				YCAllab	23
392	13				456	15
389b	29				607	14
458	17				576	19
459a	9				570	17
459b	9 or 10				CDYa	35
455	11				CDYb	36 or 37
454	11				442	12
447	24				438	12
437	14

We now need to test men from other branches to see if they have the same haplotype too. Volunteers please raise your hands! 

How can you learn about the Swinfields?

Happy Christmas to all those who follow the Swinfield Blog.

When you are together over the festive season, let us find some time to talk to other family members about our relatives and the ancestors from who we are descended. Now is a good time to collect those family stories. Let us remember where we came from and record all the family memories and tales before it is too late. Dig out all the old family photos and record the names, dates and places of the images from our past. Then make a New Year's resolution to share them with all of us who are part of the wider Swinfield clan. I would love to hear from you and to have new material and images to write about in 2012. Tell me what you have discovered so that we can pass the information to all who are interested. This Blog is a great medium for telling stories and illustrating them with documents and photographs.

If you have not done so, join the Swinfield Genealogy & DNA Group too. As of today, there are 58 members. 47 are called Swinfield or are members of one of its family trees. The other 11 members are friends and colleagues or are just interested in what we are trying to achieve and discover. I am grateful with all your support. If no-one reads it, what is the point of writing?

Of the 47 Swinfields, I can identify 37 of them with certainty on my pedigrees. The other 10 have yet to give me enough information to tell me exactly who they are. They can be categorised as:

Family 5:    20 members Family 3:    7 members Family 4:    8 members Family 33:  1 member Family 44:  1 member (Swinfield-Wells)

Of the eight major lines, on to which nearly all of us can be placed, we still have no representatives of the remaining three families which are now named as 1, 2 and 12.

If you want to look at the main family trees, albeit the male lines of ancestry and descent, these can be viewed on the Family Tree DNA Swinfield DNA & Genealogy website. There you should be able to link into your own Swinfield line. If not, let me know and I can consult my extensive records.

On the FTDNA site, you can also view the results of the limited number of DNAtests that we have done so far. More males are urgently needed to participate please so that we can learn so much more! Their sale price offer of just £80 is available until 31^st December. Any takers? Write to me at geoff@gsgs.co.uk .  

Part 8: The Australian branches

The two Swinfield brothers, William and John, born in Wolvey, Warwickshire, emigrated to New South Wales.

Marriage of William Swinfield in 1848 

William was the first to arrive right at the end of 1848. He and his new wife, Sarah Williamson, had married at Nuneaton parish church on 27th August 1848 just two weeks before they travelled down to Devon to sail from Plymouth. They took with them four of William’s children by his first wife, Sarah Ballard, who had died in 1845. The “Walmer Castle” was a comparatively small ship to make the arduous voyage of some 14 weeks to the other side of the world. Mastered by Joseph Thorne, it had a crew of about 50, 10 cabin passengers and just over 300 government emigrants. Two of the infants died en route.

Of the sons who went with William, John (William), born in 1837, had ten children. Four of the sons, Henry (1858-1923), Albert William (1866-1934), Arthur T. (1868-1917) and James E. (1871-1923) had many descendants between them (Family 3A). Linda, a member of the Swinfield Genealogy& DNA Group, is on this branch of the tree.

Daniel Swinfield (1842-1877)

His youngest son, Daniel (1842-1877), also has living representatives (Family 3B). One of his great-grandsons, Raymond Francis, has provided me with many documents and photographs including those for Daniel and his son, Daniel junior (1877-1905) who lived at Pymont in Sydney.

William produced a further seven issue by his second wife and their modern descendants still live in various parts of Australia (Family 3C).

Death of William Swinfield 1876

The extended Family 3C taken in about 1911
at Arthursleigh, Westbourne St, Kogarah, NSW

Sarah was to die in 1861 and William married for a third time to Louisa Tober. He finally died in 1876 at Petersham. Most Swinfields in this line descend from their son, George William (1854-1935), who had nine offspring. Vanessa Swinfield and Shirley Stott Despoja represent
this branch within the current Group members. Shirley has a wonderful photograph of George William, his wife, all of their children and four grandchildren taken in about 1911. 

John Swinfield, the younger brother, and his family had a far more hazardous passage to NSW on board the “Beejapore” in 1852/3. It was “home” to over a thousand passengers from all over England and Scotland, of whom 55 died during its 14 week voyage from Liverpool. On arrival, they were lodged at the infamous Quarantine Station which had been built for only 150. The majority were housed in tents where measles, scarlet fever and typhus claimed another 62 lives. Indeed, John’s wife, Mary Ann, and his youngest son, William, were amongst the victims. John married again to Eliza Hartley and died in 1874 at Waterloo but there are no living Swinfield lines from him that have been identified to date.

Refund of emigration fee for Edward Swinfield 

His branch, termed Family 4, has many representatives in England who originate from John’s oldest son, Edward, born in 1834, who chose not to emigrate. His £10 fee was refunded. He was very lucky not to go! Five members of the Swinfield Group can trace their ancestry back to him. These include Marie and Paul Frederick who are distant cousins to the Australians.

It would be great to do a DNA test on a male Australian to confirm once and for all the connection between Families 3,4,5 & 13.   

Part 6: It's all in the science!

So who was the real father of William Swinfield, my great-grandfather, who was born in 1841? Although, on paper, he was born legitimately to Thomas and Sarah Swinfield, who had married at Trowell in 1829, there was overwhelming evidence that Thomas had left his family behind by as early as 1839 and was living at Calverton. In that year, his new partner, Maria Cooper, had his child, whom they named Elizabeth Swinfield Cooper.

Sarah Swinfield remained in Earl Shilton and produced two illegitimate issue in 1843 and 1845, whom she named Joseph and Sarah. The evidence leads us to believe that the father was her long-term partner, Thomas Brown. Could genetic tests be used to determine if Thomas was also the father of my William?

My 37 marker haplotype certificate

By testing the Y-chromosome, which is passed from father to son and which makes children male, it is possible to produce a profile for any man. There are many marker sites along its length which can be “scored” for the number of meaningless repeats of very short sections of DNA known as short tandem repeats (STRs). By comparing the STR profile (called the haplotype) of two or more men, an assessment can be made of how closely they are related. Usually, this is done for men who share the same surname, adopted as a family name about 1300.

Graham's 37 marker haplotype 

Joseph Swinfield had three sons and from them there were many lines of male descent. His great-grandson, Graham Albert Swinfield, my 3^rd cousin, was traced. He kindly agreed to provide a sample of his DNA and that was compared with mine using Family Tree DNA (FTDNA). The results can be viewed on the Swinfield DNA & Genealogy Group page.Amazingly, we were identical at 35 of the 37 marker sites tested.  Not only that but we also had an extremely rare haplotype for English men. We certainly shared the same male ancestor. Whoever was the father of Sarah’s illegitimate child in 1843 was also the genetic father of my great-grandfather. The evidence put the ball very much in Thomas Brown’s court! 

Paul's 37 marker haplotype

We have also tested two other Swinfields, one of whom was “on paper” my 4^th cousin, Derrick George Joseph, the man I had met on my first day in a record office (see “My First Step in Genealogy” below).  He has a completely different haplotype which is almost identical to that of Paul Frederick Swinfield (of Family 3 & 4). They only differ at one marker out of the 32 for which they have both been tested.  This is a type of Y-chromosome which would be found frequently amongst over 70% of English men. They must have a common male ancestor and it proves that Families 3 & 4 and 5 must be related if only we can find the document that proves it!   

After nearly 40 years of collecting any information, that I could lay my hands on, relating to the surname of Swinfield, I had proved conclusively that I am not one. I should have been researching Brown instead!