THE
DNA PROJECT:
If you've been here before, and are just trying to find the
latest update of our results, click on one of the following:
Participant genealogy and summary
(NOTE:
If the above links are difficult to read in your browser, click on the words Genealogy or Data
on this line, to download and see as a more readable/printable "PDF"
file.)
My name is Fred Coffey, and I am the "Web Master" of
the Coffey Surname Project web page. If you have any questions on the
following, please feel free to email me, or our co-administrator Lorie Okel:
FredCoffey@aol.com LJOkel@comcast.net
POTENTIAL
PARTICIPANTS:
If you are male and your surname is Coffee or Coffey or anything
that sounds like that (maybe even "O'Cobhthaigh"
if you're still using one of the original Gaelic spellings?) you're invited to
join our project. Read below to see what we know so far, and consider if you
might "fit in".
DNA
TESTING:
You can join our DNA Project by visiting www.ftdna.com, inserting ÒCoffeyÓ in the name
search box, clicking the "Coffey" project, and filling out the form.
NOTE: There are other DNA testing services, such as www.ancestry.com ,
and we invite those tested elsewhere to get in touch with FredCoffey@aol.com . There is enough
overlap that we can probably determine if you have a match with anyone in our
project. We have, for example, identified several ÒancestryÓ tested individuals
who match our Edward Group, our Northern Group, and our County Meath Group (see below), and a few of them have joined our
project and are included in the genealogy page.
WHO
ARE WE?
The Coffey name (using this one spelling for convenience) is of
Irish origins. Our belief is that there were several different and genetically
unrelated groups of Coffey's in Ireland, and our DNA studies indeed do confirm
this. Does DNA offer any clues about connections to specific Irish Counties,
and Coffey Clans? For some preliminary thoughts after you read the discussion
below, visit
http://www.coffey.ws/familyTree/Familynotes/IrishCoffeyOrigins.htm
Diversity:
There are presently 26 Coffey "y-lines" identified (including only
those who have agreed to publish their info). We define these as tested groups
or individuals who have the Coffey surname but who have a y-DNA profile different
from all others, OR those who have known Coffey-connected y-DNA, but
different surnames.
And for those with the Coffey surname, we know some had a DNA
origin in Ireland, some in America (we have stories for most of those), and
many "unknown". They break down as follows:
Coffey Surname/DNA Origin
Ireland 9
Coffey Surname/DNA Origin
America 4
Coffey Surname/DNA Origin
Unknown 6
Other Surname with Coffey
y-DNA
7
Total
26
We've started identifying these lines/groups by various names
(usually the oldest ancestor in each Group, based on genealogy research of some
of the tested people, or by geographic origin):
Edward
Group: Edward Coffey, who married Ann Powell, is believed to have come
to America in the 1600's. So far we have about 37 tested people with Coffey/ee surname who are genetically related to Edward, our
largest group. (We are now beginning to see some minor genetic differences, and
believe we are beginning to identify some sub groups.)
Peter
Group: Peter Coffee Sr. was born in Ireland in about 1716. We have now
had three people tested who trace their lineage back to Peter. However that
test proved something that had only previously been suspected - - Edward and
Peter were related! Since genealogical research proves that Peter is not
descended from Edward, the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) has to be farther
back in Ireland.
Keogh/Kaho/Kehoe Group: We now believe
Edward and Peter were part of a much larger family, involving, in addition to
Coffey, the names Keogh, Kaho and Kehoe. And we
believe the combined family Irish homeland might be in the area of Wexford, Kilkenny and Tipperary Counties.
ThereÕs a lengthy discussion at:
http://www.coffey.ws/FamilyTree/DNA/CoffeyOrigins-Edward&Peter.htm
This ÒKehoeÓ groupsÕ data, by the way, appears only on our ÒDNA
DataÓ sheet, and NOT on our ÒGenealogyÓ sheet. We donÕt know the genealogical
connection. DNA proves the connection to Edward and Peter is absolutely real,
but it has to be back in Ireland a few hundred years ago. The Òpaper trailÓ for
our genealogy doesnÕt make it back that far!
"Edward
Connections" Group: The "Edward"
Group might be considered even larger than the note above implies, but there is
a disconnect between surnames and DNA. We believe we
have tested three family lines that got their "Coffey" name from
Edward's line, but did not inherit his y-DNA. And there are also five family
lines that got Edward's y-DNA, but not his Coffey name. Let me explain:
Annister
Coffey (abt 1708, VA)
was a daughter of Edward, and she had an illegitimate son in about 1735 named
James. The evidence says this son had a grandson named Lewis M. Coffee that was
born in 1798. And we have tested two "Coffey" men who match each
other's DNA and who clearly descend from Lewis M. by different lines. But their
DNA does not match the Edward group, suggesting the hypothesis that they
actually descend from Edward's daughter Annister is
probably true.
By the way, we have long had great hopes of solving this 275-year-old
paternity mystery, and have so far gone through three hypotheses as to who was
James' father - all testable by DNA. And on the third try, we got it right! DNA
tests show that James father was someone in the family of one James Samuel
(1690-1759), and court records suggest it was James Samuel himself. You can
learn more about it if you click here on James COFFEE.
Jane Coffey (1760, VA) was
a great-granddaughter of Edward, who passed on her Coffey name to son Jordon,
but of course not the y-DNA. And indeed, the y-DNA of the tested descendents do not match the Edward Group. Initial speculation was that
the father might be the man she later married, named Fitzgerald. However we now
strongly believe the father was a "Taliaferro", based on upgraded DNA
tests and on the presence of Taliaferro men in the same county where Jordon was
born.
Lucinda Coffey (born about 1830-35, NC)
may offer a story similar to Jane. She is a GGG granddaughter of Edward. The
parentage of her son Jasper Pink Coffey has long been subject to question. And
the DNA test on Jasper's GGG grandson, Ben, indeed came back "no
match" to the Coffey DNA. However Ben then decided to upgrade to
"67-markers", to see what would turn up - and the result came back
with a large number of excellent matches (up to 67 out of 67 markers) to the
"Estes" family! Further, census data showed there were MANY Estes
families living in Johns River, Caldwell County, NC, as neighbors to Lucinda
and her father, Enoch. And Ben now even has a prime suspect, one "Joseph
Estes" who lived next door.
And next, William Coffee Berry (1796, NC), and his sister
named Mary Coffee Berry, are firmly believed by genealogists to be the children
of Rice Coffee (a great-grandson of Edward), via a relationship with Elizabeth
(Fields) Berry, who at the time was married to Bradley Berry (or was his widow,
accounts vary). This was apparently an open secret. The genealogy is supported
by William's middle name "Coffee", by reported recognition in Rice's
will, and by an autobiography written by William himself. Anyway, the living
descendents surnames are "Berry", but as expected the y-DNA was
"Coffey". Case proven.
And then there is an "Adams" connection. This dates
back to 1888 in Wilkes County, NC, when Charles Robert Burke/Adams was
born. (His mother originally gave him her surname of "Burke", but in
later years he changed it to his stepfather's name of "Adams".) The
family had been searching for the identity of his birth father, and the DNA
clearly offers "Coffey".
And next, there is a Boone Family connection, but the
details are still elusive. This involves a line of Boones that descend from the
family of Israel Boone (the elder brother of the famous Daniel Boone). The Coffey and Israel Boone families
were neighbors in North Carolina, and at some point one Boone line acquired
Coffey y-DNA, yielding a match on 64 out of 67 markers.
And finally, we find a Holt Family connection - - or
actually two of them. First, we found a person named Holt who tested an
excellent match to the Edward group. Then, in the process of exchanging notes
with that person, we found ANOTHER researcher had documented a
Holt/Coffey family connection, but it proved to NOT be connected to the first
tested Holt family. Then we found someone from the second line to test. If you
want the LONG version of this story, along with speculation and clues, click
here on Holt Connections.
Hugh
Group: Hugh Coffey is believed to have entered America in the early
1700's. So far we have three project participants who trace their ancestry to
Hugh, or who are shown by the DNA test to be related to Hugh. These
participants are clearly NOT genetically related to either the Edward Group or
the Peter Group.
Mills
Group: This group is descended from Lilburn Coffee, who was born in
Tennessee in 1821. Family stories said that Lilburn was actually a
"Mills" who was adopted by a Coffee family, and the Y-DNA test proved
those stories to be absolutely true! FTDNA reported that Lilburn's descendants
had matches in the "Mills" Surname Project, but none with any
other Coffey Project members. (Given their "very recent" Coffey
origins, we consider the descendents of Lilburn to be the most modern Coffey
Clan in the world!)
"Northern
USA" Group: Most of the Coffey families that can trace
their ancestry back to the 1700's, show that their ancestors entered through
Virginia. But there is another group of eight clearly related men who trace
their ancestry back to the 1800's, and most entered either through New York,
Connecticut or Philadelphia, or are found in northern States. Three of them say
their families came from County Cork, so probably they all do?
And this group includes two "non-Coffey Surname"
members. One BRANCKY involves a known adoption. In the other, a descendant of
one Charles ROSS, born 1864 in MS or LA, tested an excellent match to this
group. Charles' descendants have long questioned his name – they now
speculate he may have been a Coffey, who had some trouble with the law, and
changed his name to "Ross"?
"County
Meath" Group:
For the first time we have found a DNA matched group (now with ten members),
one of whom traces a significant genealogy within an Irish County.
Therefore we have the "County Meath" group.
They match each other, but do not match any of the other Coffee/y groups. We
also perceive that there are two sub-groups here: One ÒGroup AÓ of 5 are
closely related to each other. A second ÒGroup BÓ of 5 are
closely related to each other. But the relationship between the two
groups appears to be much more distant.
And thereÕs another wrinkle. The ÒGroup BÓ has some nice matches
to ÒEgan/KeeganÓ, that are actually closer than their matches to ÒGroup AÓ.
Further, the ÒEgan/KeeganÓ additionally have two separate more distantly
related groups. And they also come from counties near Meath
and Westmeath.
And these differences may be explained: This group is flagged by
FTDNA as descendants of "Niall of the Nine Hostages", after a 5th
century Irish warlord who supposedly left behind thousands of descendants. It
suggests that all these Coffey, Egan and Keegan families have common origin and
have been in the general area for hundreds of years, and their y-DNA has been
gradually evolving in different directions.
Note: Of the 10 tested men, 4 were tested by Ancestry.com. There is not a perfect
alignment between the markers tested by FTDNA, and those tested by Ancestry, so
there are gaps in the data match. But there is no doubt they are related. Of
the 4, we have 3 who have given permission to enter their data into to our
project. So there remains one match named ÒAnonymousÓ.
"Irish
Coffey" Group: Yes, we now actually have two members who
still live in Ireland. Fintan lives in Dublin, Sean
lives in Galway, and Fintan suspects their common
family roots are in County Westmeath. They match each other but, unfortunately
for those Americans wishing to establish DNA ties to the Old Country, they
don't match any of our
presently tested USA members.
"Unknown"
Group: There are several persons that the DNA test shows are not
related to any other individuals or groups in the Coffey/Coffee database. Maybe
future DNA tests will offer matches?
Dr. Russell Coffey:
There is one person in our "Unknown" group who is rather special, and
new participants may want to sign up just to discover if THEY might be the ones
related to Russell?
Russell is interesting, because he lived to the age of 109, and
was one of the last three surviving veterans of WWI. His DNA is also
interesting, because he is the only "Coffey" in DNA Haplogroup "I" - - almost everybody else named
Coffey/Coffee is Haplogroup "R", the most
common European group. (We'll talk more about "R" later.)
Group "I" is found throughout Europe, but at low
frequency - - it is somewhat more common in Scandinavia. Hey, Scandinavia is
where the Vikings came from, and they were rampaging through Ireland more than
1000 years ago! One can imagine where Russell got his "I" DNA?
WE'RE
RECRUITING MORE MEMBERS:
We hope that other males with the Coffey or Coffee surname (or
other variations) will join our project, including descendants of more recent
immigrants to America and perhaps more of those still living in Ireland. If
you're not sure about joining, tell me (FredCoffey@aol.com)
what you know about your family history. I can then engage you and other
"Coffey Cousins" in a discussion about what you (and we) might learn
from your test.
VIEWING
THE RESULTS:
We have two ways of looking at the results of our testing. To
see the basic data, click here on DNA data. (If
you find that hard to read, try clicking on Data.pdf
to see a more readable and printable PDF version.)
However if you want to see the DNA results in conjunction with
the known ancestry of the participants, we offer another approach. You can see
it at Participant genealogy and summary (and
again, clicking on Genealogy.PDF will get you
a PDF version), but please read the following explanation first:
The latter chart shows the male ancestry of each participant, as
far back as his genealogical research has taken him. If the participant has
serious doubts about some of the connections, these are marked with a
"?" on the connecting line. (Remember almost everyone on this chart
is obviously named "Coffey" or "Coffee", so only first
names are shown. Also, if known, birth year and state are shown in each box.)
We have chosen one individual in each Group as a
"Reference" - - usually this is the person who has taken the most
detailed DNA test and/or has the most confidence in his family tree based on
genealogy research. And the column of numbers to the far left shows how closely
the DNA of each participant matches that "Reference" person in his
group.
You will likely want to do additional reading on what the test
results mean. But for the moment just know that the tests come in five versions
- - 12-marker, 25-marker, 37-marker, 67-marker, and 111-marker. And if
there is a match on at least 11 markers out of 12, or 23 out of 25, or 33 out
of 37, then the participants are likely related. If we include a person in one
of our "Groups", then his DNA results match at least on this level.
Just to pick one example, the chart shows that I (L. Frederick
Coffey) match the "Edward Group" reference by a score of
"25/25" and "66/67". In other words, on the 25-marker test
I had a perfect match, and on the 67-marker test I was only out by one marker.
And that single marker is known to change more easily than most of the others.
These people really are my cousins!
The chart is segmented by
Group. Except for Peter and Edward (and their ancient Keogh/Kehoe/Kaho cousins), there is no meaningful genetic match between
the groups. You can look at the DNA data and confirm this.
HOW
CAN YOU LEARN MORE?
You can find all sorts of general information on DNA testing for
the Surname Projects, and how to interpret the results, if you visit www.ftdna.com.
We also have a web site, and you're welcome to visit the Coffey Cousins
site, which links to several additional resources. We publish a newsletter,
which you can read at http://coffeycousinsclearinghouse.org. Historical newsletters are available at http://www.coffey.ws/familytree/CCCNewslettersOnline/,
and this includes an index with over 29,000 entries.
THE
CHESLEY COFFEY CONNECTION
I'm going to begin to address some more complicated issues in
the remainder of this report. If we've reached the end of your attention span,
you're welcome to stop reading:
On the bottom half of the genealogy chart for the Edward group,
you will see a group of people who believe they are descended from a grandson
of Edward, named Chesley, born in the early 1700's.
There is actually a great deal of uncertainty about Chesley,
including serious doubt that he even existed. You will see that our chart shows
an alternative line that bypasses Chesley completely
- just in case!
We havenÕt yet found any DNA clues that allow us to sort out the
Chesley problem.
THE
ELI COFFEY CONNECTION
Similar to the above, note two men on the genealogy chart marked
in pink to the left of their names. Meldon and Kevin
both descend from Eli Coffey, and they have a perfect 37-marker match to each
other. And they are the ONLY Coffey men with an allele value of "17"
at Marker 13 – every other Edward descendant has "18". One
might think this could be an identifying marker for the "Eli" line, except
one other Eli descendant (me!) has the more common "18". One idea was
that maybe both Kevin and Meldon were descended from
Willis, who was the origin of the mutation to "17". But both Kevin's
and Meldon's genealogy look solid, so we're puzzled.
Maybe it's just coincidence?
THE
"MARKER #27 = 12" CONNECTION:
There are three men marked with a violet band to the left of
their names. The tested men (Gordon, George and Danny) trace their ancestry
back to three men (Joel, Franklin and Jackson) who were all next-door neighbors
in the 1850 census for Russell County, KY.
All three are very solid "Edward Group" matches,
EXCEPT all three differ by showing a value of "12" at Marker 27.
Everybody else in the Edward Group has an "11" for this marker. The
easiest way to explain this is if Joel, Franklin and Jackson are brothers, and
the mutation to "12" occurred in their unknown father. And Coffey
relationships in that time period do abound with unproven assumptions and
unclear clues.
The resulting discussion among Coffey Cousins now runs to pages
and pages of theories, clues and opinions – far too much to cover here.
If anyone wants to jump in, let me know and I'll put you in touch with our
discussion leader.
The Two Gordons:
Oh, the astute observer will note that there are TWO "Gordon Lee Coffey
born 1941 in KY" entries on adjacent lines. This is NOT an error. They are
two different men.
ARE
TERRY AND RON CLOSE COUSINS? ALSO DAVID AND KENNETH?
Another interesting comparison is with L. Ronald Coffee versus
Max Terry Coffey. They are "Edward" group, but are the only pair
within that group that match at Locus 9. Both have gotten the 67-marker test,
and they are very solidly part of the Edward group, and no other unique matches
are evident. As with the previous case, perhaps this one match is an indication
of an unidentified common ancestor between them and Edward? (A dotted line is
used on the genealogy chart, to indicate where the researcher is focusing her
effort to seek the possible link.)
(A similar "pair" is for David Randall Coffey and
Kenneth Cyrus Coffey. They are the only ones with a matching "36" at
marker #34. But they already know they have a unique common ancestor in
Edward's grandson, Edmund S. Coffey. The mutation from the more common value of
"37" most likely occurred in Edmund, and this value of "36"
may now be a marker indicating likely descent from Edmund? We'll be watching
for confirmation!)
COMPLICATIONS:
GENETIC DISTANCE
This
is another of the more complicated issues, and if we've reached
the end of your attention span you're welcome to stop reading.
The issue is that FTDNA reports a genetic distance of
"five" for cousin "Raymond Allen". However if you look at
the Data table, only three markers have changed. So how do they calculate
"five"?
The first half of the answer is easy. If you look at Locus 11
(DYS #392) you see that Ray's result is "11", and the Edward
Reference is "13". That's a difference of two, and counts as two
changes. (Whether or not it should count as two is arguable.)
The hard part is that we show a genetic change for Locus 12 (DYS
#389-2), but the score for both Ray and the Edward Reference is "28".
How does FTDNA count this as a change?
The reason is that Locus 10 (DYS #389-1) is considered to be a
sub-segment of DYS #389-2. Since DYS #389-1 dropped from "12" to
"11", there has to be an offsetting change elsewhere in DYS
#389-2 in order for the overall score to remain the same at "28". Got
that?
The bottom line is that Ray (versus Luther) has a genetic
distance of "four" on 12 markers, and that would be a stretch in
claiming a relationship. However on the next 25 markers there is only one more
difference, bringing the total to a genetic distance of "five". That
is within a reasonable range for claiming a relationship.
COMPLICATIONS:
GENETIC DISTANCE
There's another strange result with Kenneth Ray Coffee. FTDNA's
basic comparison says his "genetic distance" from Luther is
"six", because there are two single changes plus a difference of four
at DYS #576. However, after consulting with Bennett Greenspan at FTDNA, we
conclude the change at #576 should be treated as a SINGLE change. This makes
Kenneth a clear member of the "Edward" Group. (Note the FTDNATiP calculator apparently also recognizes this as a
special case, and it shows him as having a high probability of a common
ancestor with Luther.)
ABOUT
GEORGE AND ERNEST:
If you look at the data for George and Ernest, in the Edward
Group, you will see that they each have a genetic distance of "2"
from our Reference, and this clearly ties them to the Edward Group. However
they both also claim to be descended from "Joel", a possible
great-grandson of Edward, and herein lies a possible problem: When George and
Ernest are compared with each other, the genetic distance rises to
"4" - - and that big a number has to shed some doubt on whether they
really do have Joel as a common ancestor. More examination of the paper trail
is needed.
MORE
ABOUT THE "NORTHERN" GROUP:
The people presently shown in this group are excellent DNA
matches. However there is an additional person, Alan Dale, who also has a
tenuous match to this group. The FTDNATiP says, based
on the 37-marker test, there is a 50/50 chance of a common ancestor with Robert
Eugene if you go back 24 generations. Perhaps Alan's family branched off in
really ancient times, or there have been an exceptional number of mutations?
We've left Alan in the "unknown" group for now, but will continue to
look for evidence.
DEEP
CLADE TESTS:
This is another of those topics that may go beyond the attention
span of some of our readers:
Recently individuals from two of our Coffey groups have elected
to get what FTDNA calls a "Deep Clade" test, which is designed to
explore ancient origins. This is not going to help us put names on our
genealogy – we're talking about "ancient" as being in terms of
thousands of years. We're looking back to before the use of surnames like
"Coffey" became common.
As humans evolved, there have been mutations in the y-DNA, and
people fall into various "Haplogroups" which
are indicative of their ancient genetic origin. We already knew, based on the
original DNA tests, that almost all of the Coffey groups in our DNA project are
in Haplogroup "R1b1a2".
The "R" group first appeared perhaps 30,000 years ago,
in central or south Asia. This soon divided to yield an "R1" group,
believed to date back about 20,000 years. And a bit later there was an
"R1b", which is now found with high frequency in Western Europe. One
of the highest R1b frequencies is Ireland - where the frequency of R1b is
greater than 90% - although R1b is not believed to have evolved there.
Finally, after further mutations, by about 5000 to 8000 years
ago we are up to our "R1b1a2".
The "Deep Clade" tests take this a bit farther. We now
know that our "Edward" group is "R1b1a2a1a1b5". And the one
we call the "Northern USA" group is just one step different with
"R1b1a2a1a1b4".
These results are determined by testing for a "SNP"
(Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) in the DNA, i.e., markers that are distinctive
for each Haplogroup. As an alternative to the above
"R" labels, some prefer to speak simply of the test results. Both of
our Coffey groups test positive for the SNP "P312" (i.e., they are
"P312+"), which defines the "R1b1a2a1a1b*" haplogroup. The Edward Group is positive for only one subclade under that – they are ÒL176.2+Ó.
The Northern Group is different, only in that they are
"L21+", i.e. positive for L21, another of the subclades
under P312. They are negative for all further subclades
under L21.
Details are evolving rapidly, and it is likely that the
nomenclature will continue to change, and that estimates of when and where
these sub-groups evolved will become available. I haven't seen an estimate of
when these two Coffey groups diverged, but you need to be thinking in terms of
a few thousands of years, not a few hundred. And if our common male ancestor
COULD be found, one can be sure he was not yet using any variation on the name
"Coffey".
If any members of our other y-DNA groups are interested, they
are invited to get the same test. But note that there is no reason for more
than one person from each group to be tested. Given the closeness of
conventional DNA match, what applies to one will apply to all in the same
Group.