DNA testing has revealed some interesting results on the Fitzpatrick line. my mother, brother and I have matches with known descendants of Michael Fitzpatrick, through all 4 of Michael’s children who are known to have had children (James, Henry, John and Robert). There are a significant number of matches, that I haven’t been able to connect in yet, Amongst these, there are two distinct clusters.
The first cluster, that I refer to as the “McFarlane Cluster” is a group of about 10 matches, who all descend from the same McFarlane ancestor. I started investigating this cluster, as some of the matches with Mum were quite large, suggesting that there was a close connection. All of these matches have shared matches with various confirmed Fitzpatrick descendants, many also have shared matches with confirmed Kelly descendants. Their shared McFarlane ancestor, John Thomas McFarlane, was supposedly the son of Michael John McFarlane and Margaret Kelly. I could not find any record of John Thomas McFarlane prior to the birth of his first child in Blackall Queensland in 1893. Blackall was a place of interest, as James Thomas Fitzpatrick married his first wife there. During the divorce trial for his second wife in 1895, he did not appear, documents suggested that he may have been in Blackall. The last confirmed knowledge of James was in 1889, after that he “disappeared”. At this point, there are 3 Fitzpatrick brothers who are MIA, James, Michael and Andrew. John Thomas McFarlane had a brother, Arthur Michael McFarlane, who also just “appears” in the early 1890s.
Based on the size of the DNA matches, and the fact that they match confirmed Fitzpatrick and Kelly descendants, these matches ARE descendants Michael Fitzpatrick and Margaret Kelly. I have been able to look at match sizes of one of the McFarlane cluster members and 2 confirmed descendants of James Thomas Fitzpatrick. Results do not rule in or rule out that James was their Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA). Further investigation will be required to resolve which Fitzpatrick was their ancestor.
The second cluster, which I refer to as the “Scott/Knapsey cluster” appears to be a little more distant based on the match sizes. There are 26 matches in this cluster, who descend from Mary Adeline Scott and James Knapsey. These matches have shared matches with various confirmed descendants of the Fitzpatrick family, but no matches with confirmed descendants of the Kelly line, which points to the match being somewhere on the Fitzpatrick line. There are also some other matches on this line, who have Scott ancestors, but I haven’t yet worked out connections. The other interesting finding, is that there appear to be no matches with people who have Fitzpatricks, Sheehans, Andersons or McKenzies in their ancestral trees. This requires a lot more investigation, but it could point to Michael’s surname not being Fitzpatrick, and that his line might have some sort of connection with the Scott surname.
Gordon Family History Blog 