DNA - no matches

[Phoenix]

Best mate has had DNA done.

We have now proved that her father IS her father, which is good.

But, when it comes to George Lanning, who married Jane Clements, matches appear to be with their descendants, nothing taking us back to Kington Magna, where the family lived for generations.

Best mate does not have an Ancestry sub, so the checking process is convoluted, to say the least.

I have no idea whether the many Lanning descendants from the village have decided they didn't need a test to prove who they were, or if they have taken tests and the Lanning DNA is so dilute that they don't show (she does have over 90 pages of potential cousins:D)


George was born 1770, so we are talking some six generations.


I have access to her log-in (she has no home computer) and will ask her if I can put her tree up, anonymising the recent generations. Would that strengthen the chance of us finding DNA matches?


Worryingly, (since George disappears into the sunset some time before 1813) I get more hits with the surname of Jane's second husband:d

[JBee]

Seems that its more likely you get a match if you have rellies that moved to the US as not that many people in the UK have done the test.

The other thing is that many results you do get they haven't done any research so have no family tree to work with.

[Phoenix]

Some people, on the other hand, have user names like Carlos Witherspoon 60, so that even if you can't find their tree, you can work it out from their date of birth:d

[JBee]

No such luck with mine though.

Have had plenty of close matches on one line but not the many lines I really need.

[Phoenix]

I've never found more than one or two people remotely interested in my birth surname, so I reckon there's a gene than doesn't like family history!