King George V son = my grandfather??

bradmichaellittle

www.The-Kings-Son.com
Messages
49
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Y-DNA haplogroup
FGC5494
Hi,
I have just completed a lot of research in to whether my grandfather was the
unacknowledged son of the British King George V (Reigned 1910 to 1936). The
details are in (The-Kings-Son.com) that lead me to this conclusion through
about 14 pieces of circumstantial evidence.

My Grandfather (and my Uncle) Y-DNA 111 marker results are shown at FTDNA Kit No.
207060. Their Hapologroup is R1b1a2a1a1b4 L21+ Z253- P66- P314.2- M37- M222-
L96- L226- L193- L159.2- L144- DF21-

The final piece of evidence that will clinch the deal is that I am presently
trying to convince some of King George V's known ancestors (i.e. their
decendants) to do a Y-DNA test. If there is a match with Kit No. 207060, then
I'll have the final piece of proof and my hypothesis will be true. IF NOT ....
then so be it, my hypothesis will be false.

King George V was genetically a German whose documented family tree goes back to
950AD, all from the Coburg region in Germany. His family line is called
"Wettin". If I ever get this final piece of proof, then it will perhaps help
with the triangulation re the origins of the L21+ Haplogroup line.

Are there any questions? I'm happy for constructive feedback.
Regards,
Brad
(The-Kings-Son.com)
 
So far you have not proven anything since you don't have the data of George V. However, the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha being a family of East German origin (Thuringia at least since the 13th century, and Saxony-Anhalt before that), I can tell you that it is rather unlikely (but not impossible) that they belonged to haplogroup R1b-L21, as this is a subclade of R1b that is typical of Atlantic Europe. It is found in Germany, but mostly in West Germany, and at low frequencies. There is not a lot of Y-DNA data for Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt at present, but the frequency of R1b-L21 is probably around 1% only. On the other hand it is about 35% in England, and over 50% in Wales and Scotland. Statistically it makes is far more likely, unless otherwise proven by testing confirmed members of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, that you are not descended from George V.
 
Maciamo,
Yes - thanks for confirming that R1b-L21 is a very rare Haplogroup for a German, and this adds to my reason to try for a match with a known King George V relative and my FTDNA Sample No. 207060 in a public forum i.e. I want the match verified in public, particularly now you have stated how unlikely it to be true! What you aren't factoring in is the analysis re the 14 pieces of evidence that I have collected and documented on the book (The-Kings-Son.com).

Q for Maciamo: If I do get a known King George V relative (there are 76 of them living today - I have listed them in the book) to do a Y-DNA test with FTDNA - and there is a match at the 67 marker level AND the Haplogroup (with my 207060 sample) - then would you be convinced of the son / father relationship between my Grandfather and King George V?
Regards,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Q for Maciamo: If I do get a known King George V relative (there are 76 of them living today - I have listed them in the book) to do a Y-DNA test with FTDNA - and there is a match at the 67 marker level AND the Haplogroup (with my 207060 sample) - then would you be convinced of the son / father relationship between my Grandfather and King George V?
Regards,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)

Yes, a perfect or near-perfect match at 67 markers would be a strong evidence. If that happens (as it is still purely hypothetical), you should try to get an autosomal comparison with 23andMe or FTDNA's Family Finder. This would prove your claim beyond any doubt.

Nevertheless, even if you are descended from George V and can prove it through DNA, yours being an illegitimate branch, you shouldn't get your hopes up in being recognise as a family member by the Royal Family. George V's son, Edward VIII, was practically banished from his family for marrying a divorcee commoner - even though he was king and head of the family at the time ! The family never granted any nobility title to Wallis Simpson, and would not have recognised any children they would have had. Royalty and aristocracy is not so much about DNA than about upbringing and inheritance. If you were not born and raised a royal and did not inherit the title, then you are nothing to them.
 
Maciamo,
Thanks for the feedback - and helping to set the test re Y-DNA criteria ahead of time. Assuming I ever get one of these known King George V relatives to do their test, then I'll look at this Autosomal Comparison with FTDNA as well.

My intention is to just find out if this link to King George V it is true. Based on where I was 18 months ago - making such a King George V claim was a trillion to one shot (i.e. I no idea that such a link was even possible). So this situation is already right "out there" for me (and my extended family).

My extended family all feels pretty legitimate, and we are all successful in our own right. Thanks for the sage and realistic view re the BRF - I agree with you, I would expect no recognition. However it'll still be kinda cool just to know if the link is true OR not.

Cheers,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Good luck getting someone to do the test, Brad. Even if your hypothesis fails, I always like to have haplogroups of famous individuals tested.

FWIW Maciamo is right on target with his skepticism, in the meantime.
 
Sparkey,

Thank you for the best wishes.

If I do get a known Wettin family line man to do his Y-DNA test, then it'll be beneficial to the cause of DNA analysis for this forum and for the wider humanity cause of understanding our overall migration history. Knowing the Y-DNA info for a family that is documented back to 950AD will help us all a lot - irrespective of whether I get a match with my grandfather.

I'll post the "Wettin line man" Kit No. irrespective of the outcome.

Cheers,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Hi,
I have just completed a lot of research in to whether my grandfather was the
unacknowledged son of the British King George V (Reigned 1910 to 1936). The
details are in (The-Kings-Son.com) that lead me to this conclusion through
about 14 pieces of circumstantial evidence.
(The-Kings-Son.com)

I will say that before spend the time to solicit royal heir to give DNA, which they will not do, you should first share this circumstantial evidence to support the case.

What I see on the web site you direct is not reliable of me. Making mention of the DaVinci code which is fictional as support is so far not making sense at all. This sound like lot of imaginations from someone.

The reason you ancestor get to early australia and own some lands in short time is that it is value at nothing in desert conditions at that time, with small demands for these lands by few settler. This is my opinion.
 
* The circumstantial evidence is documented and written up in the 146 page book at The-Kings-Son.com. If you are really interested you can read about it there, if not then this is ok as well.

* We shall see if I convince a known and documented George V relation to do their Y-DNA analysis .... it may take a few months. I am very hopeful that I will be able to convince one of them to do a Y-DNA test.

* 15% of Australia is good arable land (this includes all of Sydney), so your statement about it being totally desert is incorrect.

Thanks,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Hi,

I've been asked by a few people what is the ysearch.org code for my grandfather's Y-DNA sample. It is MSYKK (also FTDNA Kit No. 207060).

Also, I continue with my analysis with finding contact details for the 75 men I identified in the book, that will either prove or disprove my hypothesis that my grandfather was King George V's eldest son.

From the 75, I worked out that 15 are boys (i.e. under 18 years old – therefore not contactable), 11 are Windsor’s (i.e. they were not going to help me was my assumption), 3 had said “No” already, 2 had “Ignored” my initial approach, 1 was sick, 3 were very old.

So it is actually only 40 men that I can approach. Stay tuned.

Regards,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Sparkey or Maciamo,

If I do get one of these 40 men (known male line Wettin men) to do their Y-DNA test, then as you know their documented male line goes back to about 900AD (both individuals & location).

Do you know what the oldest confirmed Y-DNA sample is that is currently in the Y-DNA databases (ignoring Iceman etc)?

Independent of whether a Wettin man's Y-DNA matched my grandfather's - then having such a sample in the sysme appears to be like it will be very beneficial to the wider Genealogical community.

Regards,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Sparkey or Maciamo,

If I do get one of these 40 men (known male line Wettin men) to do their Y-DNA test, then as you know their documented male line goes back to about 900AD (both individuals & location).

Do you know what the oldest confirmed Y-DNA sample is that is currently in the Y-DNA databases (ignoring Iceman etc)?

Independent of whether a Wettin man's Y-DNA matched my grandfather's - then having such a sample in the sysme appears to be like it will be very beneficial to the wider Genealogical community.

Regards,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)

I'm not sure about the oldest line that can be traced genealogically, but Jean Manco keeps a summary of ancient DNA here. Maciamo also has a summary of his own here.
 
Hi Sparkey,

I didn't phrase my question very well.

Do we know anyone in the community who has a Y-DNA sample in the system with confirmed and historically documented family tree that goes back to BEFORE 900 AD? If so, what is their ysearch code (and family line name)?

Thanks,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Hi Sparkey,

I didn't phrase my question very well.

Do we know anyone in the community who has a Y-DNA sample in the system with confirmed and historically documented family tree that goes back to BEFORE 900 AD? If so, what is their ysearch code (and family line name)?

Thanks,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)

I do not mean this to hurt you or inflict any mean will. You seem serious and not a prankster or profiteer minded person in your delusion.
For this reason I strongly and with only good will suggest to you that you seek to talk to someone in the field of helping those who have psychiatric issues, and assessing where these delusions are coming from and why you manifest them.

Based on the specific you cite as 'evidence' there is literally not a ounce or shred of reason to base a rational conclusion that this is you paternal ancestor. I am sorry, and hope you come to the assistance you need to resolve your problems.
 
ALL,
* Please refer to my facebook account associated with (The-Kings-Son.com) if you wish to track my good news i.e. a known King George V relative has agreed to do his Y-DNA test. Ongoing detailed status updates will be posted there.


pipinnacanus,
* Do not provide such advice on a public blog - it is offensive, and ignorant.
* If you have read the book, then you could have dropped me an email with some questions. If you haven't read the book - then your last post continues a trend equal to your prior one on Australian geography.


Thanks,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
ALL,
* Please refer to my facebook account associated with (The-Kings-Son.com) if you wish to track my good news i.e. a known King George V relative has agreed to do his Y-DNA test. Ongoing detailed status updates will be posted there.

Actually, this is great news. Will he be testing both STRs and SNPs? It would be great to get an in-depth look at both.

I'm still betting for a mismatch... more specifically, my bet is R1b but L21-. Is anyone here other than Brad betting for a match? If so, we could get a +rep wager going like we did for Ötzi.
 
Sparkey,

Yes - I will get the SNP tested, after I get the initial 67 marker STR results. I'll get the SNP tested - even if the STR doesn't match my uncle / grandfather .... as it'll then provide a complete picture for others.

Now ..... this is NOT to say that I'm not confident. I did a pre-"know the truth" survey with 12 of my immediate relatives (from all over the world), and the average was 74% ...... which is amazing. It should be between 0% and at best 1 in a million (0.000001%).

So, you may be at a disadvantage to bet against me - if you haven't read the book, and given it an objective review :wary2:. However, I'm on for the bet - as long as no one gets rude or insulting.

Cheers,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 
Sparkey,
I have a few clarifications, I'd like to get regarding "what a match" between my Uncle Eric's Y-DNA sample and "Wettin man" sample should look like. IF my hypothesis is correct ..... then my Uncle Eric is 5 generations away from Prince Albert (Queen Victoria's husband) and "Wettin man" is 6 generations from Prince Albert (Queen Victoria's husband). I've been looking at a few blogs and going back over your replies, I can now see that perhaps the Haplogroup may be veyr important.
1. Are you saying BOTH samples must have be the same i.e. R1b1a2a1a1b4 L21+ Z253- P66- P314.2- M37- M222-
L96- L226- L193- L159.2- L144- DF21- (which is from my Uncle Eric Kit No. 207060)?
2. Is matching of Haplogroup initially the most important criteria to establish a connection?
3. Based on the hypothetical relationship between my Uncle Eric and Wettin man .... what GD using 67 markers should there be?
4. Based on the hypothetical relationship between my Uncle Eric and Wettin man .... what GD using 111 markers should there be?
Appreciate your help.
Regards,
Brad
 
1. Are you saying BOTH samples must have be the same i.e. R1b1a2a1a1b4 L21+ Z253- P66- P314.2- M37- M222-
L96- L226- L193- L159.2- L144- DF21- (which is from my Uncle Eric Kit No. 207060)?

Yes, both absolutely must be L21+ for it to be a match. The SNP L21 dates approximately to the Bronze Age, and mismatching on that would mean that you match prior to that.

2. Is matching of Haplogroup initially the most important criteria to establish a connection?

It's necessary, but not sufficient, to match on your haplogroup.

3. Based on the hypothetical relationship between my Uncle Eric and Wettin man .... what GD using 67 markers should there be?
4. Based on the hypothetical relationship between my Uncle Eric and Wettin man .... what GD using 111 markers should there be?

Mutations are random, so it's not a precise number. A GD of less than 4 on 67 would be compelling evidence. 4, 5 or 6 will need closer inspection. 7+ and it's getting a bit far away.
 
Thanks Sparkey for helping me get some better clarity on this. I'm keen not do be doing any Monday morning quarterbacking.

I'm now getting to understand this better (I'm still on my "L plates"). FYI - "Wettin man" should get the Y-DNA kit in the next week.

I can see that once I get the 67 markers results, I'll then need to proceed with a Deep Clade test as well ..... therefore more time before I'll know if this is all rubbish.

Interesting about the 67 markers, as before I had the 67 marker test completed with my Uncle Eric (using FTDNA), I had prior to this had a 46 marker test completed by Uncle Eric's son (i.e. Jeffrey) (using Ancestry.com). Comparing the two (and adjusting the Ancestry.com markers to the FTDNA standard); there was one mismatch DYS447 = 25 (for Eric) and DYS447 = 26 (for his son).

Question 1 .... I see ultraviolet light can cause mutations .... could the high levels of sunshine in Sydney cause "extra" Y-DNA mutations vs other places with less sunshine i.e. Germany region (where Wettin man lives)?

Question 2 ..... what is your prediction for the Haplogroup of "Wettin man"?

Thanks once again,
Brad (The-Kings-Son.com)
 

This thread has been viewed 38955 times.

Back
Top