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 - - at least until another volunteer comes
along. If you have any questions on the following, please feel free to email
me:
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".
You can join our DNA Project by visiting www.ftdna.com, clicking on
"Projects", finding the "Coffey" project, and filling out
the form. For more information about the process of joining, contact our
Project Administrator ljokel@comcast.net
WHO ARE WE?
The Coffey name (using this one spelling for convenience) is of
Irish origins. Our belief from previous genealogy studies was that there were
several different and genetically unrelated groups of Coffey's, and our DNA
studies indeed do confirm this.
Diversity: There are presently 23
Coffey "y-lines" identified. 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 8
Coffey Surname/DNA Origin
America 4
Coffey Surname/DNA Origin
Unknown 6
Other Surname with Coffey
y-DNA
5
Total 23
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 30 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.
How far back? We'll discuss the calculation shortly, but we think
there is roughly a 12% chance the MRCA is as recent as the father of Edward. And about a 60% probability that the MRCA was within the 4
generations prior to Edward and Peter.
(We've kept Edward and Peter separate in some of our charts
anyway, because genealogical research proves that they came to America
separately.)
"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 three 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, partly circumstantial, 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 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 66 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 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 five clearly related people who trace their ancestry back to the 1800's, and
all entered either through New York or Philadelphia, or are found in northern
States. One of them thinks his family came from County Cork, so perhaps they
all do?
And THIS group now also has two "non-Coffey Surname"
members. One 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 five 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 group of 3 are closely related to each other. A second group of 2 are
closely related to each other. But the relationship between the two
groups appears to be much more distant.
"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. Do a "Google"
search on his name, and you'll find lots of interviews and articles about him. 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 four versions
- - 12-marker, 25-marker, 37-marker, and the new 67-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. (There's
an exception, which we'll discuss later.)
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, 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. By the way, we have an annual convention and the 2011 one will be in
Independence, MO – details on the above Cousins' web page.
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 are looking for DNA clues that may offer some resolution. And
we thought we might have found one.
On that sheet, you will see three men have been marked in blue
to the left of their names. Most of the Edward group shows a value of
"40" at Locus 35, but these three people show "39". Two of
those three, and possibly all of them, appeared to be descended from the "Chesley" branch. Is it possible that "39" is
a distinctive marker for part of the Chesley branch?
One of those men is myself. After much searching I finally ran
down my 3C1R Meldon Coffey, and persuaded him to get
the test – and he proved NOT to have the "39" marker. This
proved that my own "39" mutation evolved independently of the other
two. So much for my beautiful theory!
But there is still hope for another: One of the remaining two
men only knows his genealogy for 3 generations, and also he is clearly NOT part
of my own line. Therefore there is a very good chance that he is related to the
third man who has the "39" mutation. And that could mean he is
descended from the Nebuzaradon Coffey, born 1790.
Perhaps this clue will help direct his future research?
THE ELI COFFEY CONNECTION
Similar to the above, note two men 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" must have 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?
(If not, go to FTDNA's
"Frequently Asked Questions", and read their explanation at Question
#7. Maybe they can explain it better?)
The bottom line is that Ray (versus Luther) has a genetic
distance of "four" on 12 markers, and that is extremely discouraging
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's still a stretch for claiming a relationship. However we think it may be
possible. More testing of Ray's nearer cousins might be informative.
MORE DISCUSSION: PETER AND EDWARD:
There are two topics meriting further discussion on these two
lines:
First, there are two men who descend from Peter who have a
37-marker test, and their DNA profiles are absolutely identical. However they
each differ from the Edward group by two specific markers. They each show an
"11" on Marker 16, versus the Edward group value of "10".
And they each show a "17" on Marker 30, versus the Edward group's
"16".
They both have William, son of Peter, as their MRCA. And it is
almost impossible that these two exact mutations could have occurred
independently on the lines descending from William. These markers are thus
almost certainly common to EVERY descendant of William. So, if we see them on
any future test, the odds are that we are looking at another descendant of
William and Peter.
Second, we believe the extensive data we have on the multiple
descendants of Edward and Peter give us a better handle on when the MRCA of the
two lines might have lived in Irish history. But things get rather complicated,
so we invite you to examine a separate paper, found at the following link:
www.coffey.ws/FamilyTree/DNA/Edward_Peter_MRCA.htm
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 four people presently shown in this group are excellent DNA
matches. However there is a fifth 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 "R1b1b2".
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 "R1b1b2".
The "Deep Clade" tests take
this a bit farther. We now know that our "Edward" group is
"R1b1b2a1a2". And the one we call the "Northern USA" group
is just one step farther down with "R1b1b2a1a2f". (To add to the
confusion, FTDNA uses a slightly older nomenclature, and these two samples are
respectively "R1b1b2a1b" and "R1b1b2a1b5".
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 R1b1b2a1a2 haplogroup.
The Edward Group is negative for all subclades under
that.
The Northern Group is different, only in that they are
"L21+", i.e. positive for L21, one 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.
Finally, here's a web page with maps showing where people who
test positive for our two Haplogroups (R-P312, and
R-L21) are found.
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/atlantic-r1b1c/default.aspx?section=results
As you can see from the maps, they're both quite consistent with
"Coffey" being an Irish name!