Clay Austin of 3/25/2012

Clay,

Thanks so much.  I ordered the kit.

Here is what I have:

John Ellison Austin’s

Parents are: Ellison Woodrow Austin and Kathrine Bell

Grandparents are: Jacob Ellison Austin and Jennie Long

Great-grandparents are: Unknown Stultz man and Sara/Sallie Austin

2^nd ggparents are: William Austin and Lucinda Lloyd (parents of Sara/Sallie and of Joseph Calvin Austin, Sr.)

Your tree:

Grandparents: Joseph Calvin Austin, Sr. and Annie Purnell

Great-grandparents: William Austin and Lucinda Lloyd

So Sara/Sallie is a sister of your Joseph Calvin Sr.  She is the mother of Jacob Ellison Austin (not a sister to him), in all likelihood. Therefore Jacob Ellison was a nephew of Joseph Calvin Sr. instead of a brother.

This being correct that makes John Ellison Austin your 2^nd cousin once removed instead of your 2^nd cousin as was thought before John Ellison took the Y-DNA test last year.

Letter to clay again... 3/14/2012

Clay,

I have attached a PDF that was written by Alvy Ray Smith, a Fellow in the American Genealogical Society and a Riggs expert. He summarizes the need for additional Y-DNA samples to answer  the question “Who is the Riggs man who is the progenitor of the Austin family headed by Archibald Austin, Sr.?”  On the 2^nd page he points out the importance of obtaining the Y-DNA from a descendant of Arch Jr., brother of Clisbe Sr.  That man is you.

If you take the test and match the Edwardian Riggs Y-DNA model, then you will prove:

1.      Archibald Austin, Sr. is a Riggs, genetically.

2.      Clisbe Riggs is not the progenitor (as on page 2 of Alvy discussion) since he was 2 years old when Arch Sr. was born.

3.      Your Y-DNA will potentially answer the question of Edward Riggs’ being the progenitor.

 

If you take the test and match the Austin Y-DNA model (from Southside VA), then you will prove:

4.      Clisbe Austin, Sr. is not a son of Archibald Austin, Sr.

5.      Archibald Austin Sr. was likely a son of Joseph Austin of Southside VA.

If you take the test and match neither the Riggs nor the Austin model (as is the case of your cousin John), then you will prove:

6.      Another total surprise which will need to be explained.

7.      My luck is unbelievably bad… and I’ll be looking for another descendant of Archibald Austin, Jr. to answer my Riggs question.

Of course you know that I’m betting that you will turn out to be a Riggs, genetically. I’ve been wrong before. Wouldn’t mind being wrong again. Just would like very much to know the answer. I’ve been working on this puzzle for about 1-1/2 years now. My co-author of the story of Wealthy Pruett and a cousin of yours, Nancy Austin Fatheree, has been working on this with me constantly for the 1-1/2 years also. She wants the answer as badly as I do.

 I thought you might like the see the Y-DNA certificates of a couple of men mentioned in Alvy’s discussion. I have attached the certificates of Robert Carter Austin, Jr. and Horace Lester Riggs, III.

Is there any way for me to convince you to participate?

John Clinard

9 or 10, there is a difference

Here is the Clay connection which probably by-passes the problem with John Ellison Austin.  This will tell us about the markers for Arch Sr., if I can get him to donate his Y-DNA.  Got any persuasive words?

Clay⁷ Austin (Joseph C. Jr.⁶, Joseph C Sr.⁵, William⁴, Archibald Jr.³, Arch Sr.² Austin, Edward Riggs¹).  Clay may be either a 9 or 10 at marker 47. I’m convinced that if Clay is a 9, then Arch Sr. is a 9; and if a 10, then Arch Sr. is a 10.  Is this right?

This will tell us 9 or 10 at marker 47 for Arch Sr.  Help me out here, please.  This seems easy; but it’s not easy to me.

If Arch Sr. is a 9, as you expect, then will that indicate/prove that the mutation to 9 occurred in Arch Sr. prior to his having sons Clisbe Sr. and Arch Jr.? Or will it prove he is not a son of Edward, who is surely a 10? Or, is it really that we can’t differentiate between these two distinctly different possibilities? Are the probabilities of the two quite different?

If Arch Sr. is a 10, then what would be proven? Will that prove that the mutation to 9 occurred in Clisbe Sr. prior to his having children?... cause we know Clisbe Sr. is a 9.

____________
Alvy answer:
 

If Clay7 (using your nomenclature) has a 9 at marker 47, then almost certainly Arch2 Sr. does too.

If Clay7 has a 10 there then we just don’t know whether Arch2 Sr. has a 9 or a 10 and would have to say it that way. In that case, it would be POSSIBLE (but not proved) that the 10 came from Edward5 and was (I’m just hypothesizing here) the same 10 passed down to Horace and Roy. That’s consistent story, but unfortunately unproved. It just doesn’t DISPROVE it, which is good.

There is no reason for two sons to have exactly the same YDNA as the father. A mutation has to happen somewhere, typically in a procreative event.

Letter to CLAY of3/8/12

153 Chuniloti Way

Loudon, TN

March 8, 2012

Clay Austin

291 Tipton LN

Blountville, TN 37617

Dear Clay,

Thought you might not be seeing all your e-mail, so I’m sending this to you in USPS. I’m hoping you are still considering participating in the Austin-Riggs Y-DNA study. The e-mails I have attached explain, as best I can, why it is important to Austin-Riggs family members and to me that you become a Y-DNA donor. You are the answer, about the only one available, as far as I can determine, for answering the two questions:

Was Archibald Austin, Jr. genetically from the Austin family or the Riggs family?

Who is the father of Archibald Austin, Sr.?

Sincerely,

John Clinard    865-607-9191