Tag: Hays

More on DNA and genealogy

First, if you want to learn about DNA and genealogy an in depth source of information is the International Society Of Genetic Genealogy.

In “Evidence” on this site I discuss levels of proof that evidence leads us to and also that the evidence needs to be taken in totality and it is often the lack of considering all evidence (totality) that incorrect conclusions are drawn. While the DNA test is accurate, in the application of genealogy it is used to compare our DNA to others with the same or similar DNA markers. As such there is no “Scot DNA” or “Ulster DNA” which can put your ancestors in a specific spot at a specific time. Our ancestors migrated west into Europe 25,000 years ago and moved into Scotland in waves after the last ice age, some migrating back east, north, and south over time.

Often DNA is a close match but the person can be removed from consideration in your family tree due to a different surname. It is the DNA match AND surname similarity which provides the higher percentage of a recent common ancestor. As the number of people getting their DNA tested increases, and more corroborating information is shared the value and accuracy of the information will increase.

Many of us in North America look back to our country of origin when researching our roots and identify as “insert country from-American”. But in that country of origin there was also a path of settlement. In The Scots: A Genetic Journey Alistair Moffat (A must read) points out that prior to the migration to the Americas in the 16th century Scotland was the end of the western migration and that migration started after the last ice age and came in waves by several distinct tribes and different societies. I recommend this book as it not only discusses DNA but also covers hunter-gatherer settlement, the development of farming, and also historical languages.

In 10 generations you can have 1024 possible contributors to your DNA and this brings us back only to our ancestors in Scotland. To try to explain where your DNA came from Family Tree breaks it down into your “Origins” as defined by the current nations and “Ancient Origins” as defined by historical society groups in time. My origins show me 59% British (which includes Scotland), 27% Scandinavian, 8% Eastern Europe, and 4% Iberian Peninsula. My ancient break down is 43% Hunter-Gatherer society, 42% Farmer society, and 15% Metal Age Invaders society. The Scots: A Genetic Journey has a nice break down of the Hunter-gatherer, farmer, and metal worker migrations into Scotland and why my DNA shows these roots.

In my last post “the value of Y-DNA” I discussed “Nicholas Hays” whose ancestors genealogy research indicated they were from the Irish Clan “Hayes”. I have since found a site of an ancestor, Curtis Hays, who had DNA done. While his DNA ruled out relation to the Irish Clan he erroneously concludes he was not related to Clan Hay due to his DNA roots (Slav-Kurgen). Reading “The Scots” shows that this DNA is from areas that migrated into England and Scotland.

Further, who he settled with indicates a kith or kin relationship and this was ignored. While Nicholas Hays may not have a very similar DNA to John (or Patrick) Hays (a fact I am not sure of as I haven’t compared them) his settling with Ulster Presbyterians and migrating with them indicates a connection to Clan Hay. I am unsure of his religion but the books handed down at his passing were consistent with Presbyterianism. The saying that birds of a feather flock together is true for humans also. The common spelling of the surname adds to the evidence.

There are 11 listed Hay settlements, 4 in the southern lowlands of Scotland on the Clan map (top). As surnames were being adopted in the 16th century and commonly used often persons would use the Clan name. I have also found several references in 1700 Presbyterian books of the Hays being a part of that religion. My Hays ancestors are buried in a Presbyterian Church grave yard in Greene, TN. The “Hays” families who migrated to VA through PA then on to what is now Greene, TN and across that state and we can reasonably believe that the Ulstermen who migrated originally from the Scottish lowlands and were affiliated with a branch of the Clan Hay which are further back in time affiliated with the Earl of Errol’s Clan Hay.

When your Y-DNA is done it is matched with those similar to you and each person can list an “Earliest Known Ancestor”. I have corresponded with several persons who have claimed their ancestry back to Patrick Hays or John Hays both of whom settled on the Borden Land Grant in Virginia, Circa 1740 and the DNA indicates an 80% chance of a common ancestor in 10 generations, 90% at 12. My research ends at William Hays (8 generations from me) in Greene, TN. and although DNA indicates a relation to either John or Patrick I have not seen any record linking them to William Hays and then to me. The DNA has, however given me direction on where to look for the connection. I am hopeful at some point to get confirmation of the connection from a DNA Cousin.

One person shows the Earliest Known Ancestor as Sir John Hay of Tullibody d. 1418 and another shows William delaHaye (1120-1170) Lothian, Scotland. Again I have no evidence to connect the “Hays” line to William dela Haye. That said, about 1500 years ago “Expansion Clusters” began to form. These were due to increasing wealth and political power of a family offering social selection and breeding advantages and men having children with multiple women over many years. A man with 10 sons who then have ten sons has 100 related men affiliated with his Clan Banner. So while not proven on paper, it is quite possible.

Many people have listed John and Patrick Hays as brothers, and one source states that 7 Hays brothers (including them) arrived in a span of 6 years. It appears the father of the 7 brothers who migrated here, each having a large farm family (as subsequent sons did), created a bit of a DNA Expansion Cluster in America. It is confusing as whole church congregations migrated at the same time with entire families of Hays included with them. The other Hays from various parts of Ulster, many most likely with a common Hay ancestor in Scotland, dispersed across Northern Ireland where opportunity took them for several generations and then clustered together in America where opportunity and a shared belief system brought them together.

I suspect this is the story of the John and Patrick Hays brothers and Nicholas Hays. A Patrick Hays migrated to present day Derry, PA and owned land there. I suspect he was the advance for the rest of his brothers. Patrick and John both took land grants in 1740 in Virginia on the Borden Grant in the Shenandoah Valley which were given to families which “self imported” (paid their own fare over). Nicholas Hays entered as an indentured servant to a tailor in Philadelphia in 1745. From there he migrated to VA. While Patrick Hays returned to PA it appears his, and his brothers ancestors, migrated to Greene, TN which was on the western edge of the new nation. Nicholas was to also migrate there with his family.

The various Hays families participated in the French and Indian Wars and then the Revolutionary War on the side of the Colonials and in fact the Presbyterian Ulstermen (Scotch-Irish as they had come to be called) had few Tories in their ranks. Many were paid in land grants, often on the western front. As the country expanded they expanded also and played a part in history in the formation of Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas, Texas, and all the way to California. Hopefully DNA and the historical record can help us sort out the whose who of the Hays in America.

Different spellings by different Hays, Hayses, & Hayeses

The question I wondered is why do the related Hay, Hays, and Hayes have different spellings?  Is one related to a different faction of the Clan, perhaps changed to denote a different geographical area or religion or loyalty?  My line spells it H-a-y-s and “no e” was the standard response to those who sought to automatically put it in.  It was so often done I now state my name then spell it (Hays-H-A-Y-S), and still many put the “e” in it.  But why different spellings and why the added “e” by many?

First grammar 101 – You plural a name (noun) by adding an s (no apostrophe).  For names ending in s we add an es and for names ending in y we do not change to ies like other nouns and add an s after the y, exceptions to the rule.   To make a name possessive we add the ‘s but here we have another rule exception in that a name ending in s can be made possessive by adding only an ‘ after the s and both are considered correct.  For example, the Kennedy family are the Kennedys and their home is Kennedy’s house.  The Jones family are the Joneses and their home is Jones’s House or Jones’ House.

And I note for the record I had to look it up and so expect I (and others) often make an error in the standard rules. So Hay, Hays, and Hayes have exceptions to the rules (ending in y or s) which are probably often not followed.  And the rules of grammar as we know them weren’t in place until the 1900’s (the King’s English and Modern English Usage).  Also, levels of education varied greatly from 1700-1900 and although many could read or write it wasn’t at the levels of knowledge we know today, many being educated at grade school levels only into the 1900’s.  So our present day high school education tendency to err on making the surname plural or possessive is greatly increased in prior generations.

I note on the Scottish Clan map that Hay is used for both the highland and lowland (border) branches of the Clan.  But Clan Hay (following today’s grammar rules would be the Hays and Duns Castle would be Hays’ (or Hay’s) Duns Castle.  But absent a written record with todays proper grammar the use of Hays/Hays’/Hayes/Hays’s for both plural and possessive variations of Hay would sound the same.  I surmise that Hays came into common language use with written spellings of Hays and Hayes being used interchangeably for plural and possessive of Clan Hay peoples and places.

While delaHaye was being anglicized into Hay in Scotland there was an Irish Clan “O hAodha” which was anglicized into Hayes (in County Cork O’Hea and Ulster Hughes).  Scotland, Ulster, and Ireland all had migrations to America over time and so we can expect Hay, Hays, Hayes from Scotland; Hays and Hayes from Ulster; and Hayes from Ireland with each recorded with whatever spelling suited the writer to match the spoken.  A good example is U.S. President Rutherford B. Hayes who is listed on the aforementioned Irish Hayes as a famous person but his own genealogy research shows his Hayes ancestors coming to America from Scotland in the 1600’s with no Hays or Hay spelling in the recorded line.

I did find one mention that the spelling “Hays” was used by the Clan Hay who were Presbyterian and migrated to America due to religious strife in the early 1700’s (Ulstermen).  It was told through 3 generations to an author (I lost specific reference in a computer crash) and thus hearsay.  Pennsylvania Genealogies (1886) by William Henry Egle lists (p. 286) the Hay or Hays Family of PA noting Hay, Hays, or Hayes derive from DelaHaye and “The American branch of the family write it Hays, as a general thing.”

The US Census records (1850 and beyond) used in support of my Hays line spell it “H-A-Y-S” with notations they could read and write, and thus provided a proper spelling.  Grave markers give us better support for the spelling as it is “H-A-Y-S” and it is expected that correct spelling would be of utmost importance on these.

I think we can say beyond a reasonable doubt that the Ulstermen John Hays and Patrick Hays (and their relations in PA and VA in the early 1700’s) preferred the spelling “H-A-Y-S”, but there were variations and “H-A-Y-E-S” was used, including by some of their descendants officially.  We have reasonable cause to believe that Ulster Presbyterian Scots used “H-A-Y-S” as a preferred spelling and a suspicion that this may have been used in the lowlands and Ulster to distinguish the Clan Hay Presbyterians.

The title is correct for the plural of Hay, Hays, and Hayes but I note in closing the proper “s” or “es” grammar rules are not often followed even today.  I am learning that most questions of genealogy and history of the Hays opens up two more questions which requires more research to answer.  But it is the journey which is the adventure, nor arriving at the destination.