Warburton Village Clan Update

Before my sojourn in the Antipodes I wrote about the Warburton Village clan and ended with a plea  for a DNA volunteer to try and resolve the conundrum of two different DNA results from the clan, neither of which supports the historical evidence that the clan is probably descended from a cadet branch of the Warburtons of Arley who remained in the manor house at Warburton after the main branch had moved out to Arley Hall in the 15th century.

Such a volunteer came forward. Thank you Kenneth, a descendant of Henry Hulme Warburton of California. I said there were 4 possible outcomes from a test. Possibility 3 was:  If the result matches the previous R1b-M269 result we would have a situation where 2 grandsons of William (1670-1728), had different DNA profiles. We would have no clue as to William’s own profile or that of his ancestors. We would need to uncover a new line that bypassed the two grandsons, and preferably William himself to make further testing possible.

Alas that was the result we got. It means that something intervened to introduce a new DNA profile between William and one of his grandsons.  As the parish records give no inkling of a problem the only possibility is that a father knowingly or unknowingly brought up a son as his own when in fact he wasn’t. That sort of thing tends not to be recorded in the parish registers,

Furthermore there are only four possible situations where it could have occurred. Kenneth and John, who had the earlier R1b-M269 result are both descended from William’s grandson Thomas (1731-1801), Kenneth via his first wife Ellen Small, and John via his second, Sarah Cadman. Therefore we can be certain Thomas also had the R1b-M269 profile.

Thomas was the eldest child of Arnold Warburton and Ann Shelmerdine. His baptism record has not been found, but his burial record in November 1801 gives his age as 70, so he was probably born in 1731, two years after Arnold and Ann married. Another son was born the following year, and a daughter 12 years later.

Arnold in turn was the only child of William and his second wife Joan Cartwright. Again he was baptised a couple of years after his parents married.

The two matching I-M253 results are from descendants of William (1733-1822) and his wife Elizabeth Atherton so we can  be can be sure William shared that DNA. William was the only child of William (1693-1778) and his second wife Elizabeth Arden. They married in 1731, two years before their son was born. William previously had three children with his first wife, also an Elizabeth who died in 1728.

In turn William was the eldest son and second child of William (1670-1732) and his first wife Priscilla Ashton. In all they had a daughter followed by four sons. Two other sons had issue, but their lines have not been traced to the present day and may well have died out.

So in summary we have four boys, one of whom, contrary to appearances, was not the natural son of his supposed father. There is no reason in the records to suspect any particular one. All were conceived during the marriage of their parents.

So for a bit of fun I’ve included a poll below so you can vote for your candidate. Of course there is no way of knowing if you are right.

We cannot know for sure, but one of the boys below was not the natural son of his supposed father. Which one might it be?



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *