Bartlett (Y-DNA) - Revision history

MayflowerDNA1620: /* Second Generation */

2026-08-14T14:53:33Z

‎Second Generation

MayflowerDNA1620: /* Biography */

2026-08-14T14:35:20Z

‎Biography

MayflowerDNA1620 at 14:31, 14 August 2026

2026-08-14T14:31:04Z

MayflowerDNA1620: /* NGS/WGS testing */

2026-08-14T12:54:41Z

‎NGS/WGS testing

MayflowerDNA1620: /* Previous Y-DNA testing */

2026-08-14T12:48:23Z

‎Previous Y-DNA testing

MayflowerDNA1620: /* Biography */

2026-08-14T12:37:13Z

‎Biography

MayflowerDNA1620: /* Second Generation */

2026-04-07T15:54:43Z

‎Second Generation

MayflowerDNA1620: /* DNA results R-BY109876 */

2026-03-29T20:27:50Z

‎DNA results R-BY109876

MayflowerDNA1620: /* NGS/WGS testing */

2026-03-29T20:27:20Z

‎NGS/WGS testing

MayflowerDNA1620: /* NGS/WGS testing */

2026-03-29T20:25:47Z

‎NGS/WGS testing

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 ===Second Generation===
-[https://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cst/bartlett/team9a.htm] [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-299 Benjamin Bartlett] was born Plymouth before Jun 1633<ref>He was admitted Freeman 6 Jun 1654, and must have then been at least aged 21.</ref> and died Duxbury between 21- 28 Aug 1691.<ref>Date of will and inventory MD 6:44-49</ref> He married three times, first [[Carey (mtDNA)#Second Generation |Susanna Jenney]] who died (without issue) bef 8 Apr 1654.<ref>Will of Susanna's mother</ref> He married second prob. bef 8 Aug 1655,<ref>codicil of prev. will</ref> [[Jane Yates (mtDNA)#Third Generation |Sarah Brewster]], daughter of [[Brewster (Y-DNA) |Love Brewster]] and granddaughter of (Elder) William Brewster. Sarah was living as late as 5 Mar 1667/8<ref>Named in Court case.</ref> but Benjamin married third, bef 21 Jan 1678/9<ref>Third wife signed over dower rights in deed</ref> to  Cecilia _____ (she survived her husband).
+[https://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cst/bartlett/team9a.htm] [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-299 Benjamin Bartlett] was born Plymouth abt 1629<ref>He was admitted Freeman 6 Jun 1654, and must have then been at least aged 21.</ref> and died Duxbury between 21- 28 Aug 1691.<ref>Date of will and inventory MD 6:44-49</ref> He married three times, first [[Carey (mtDNA)#Second Generation |Susanna Jenney]] who died (without issue) bef 8 Apr 1654.<ref>Will of Susanna's mother</ref> He married second prob. bef 8 Aug 1655,<ref>codicil of prev. will</ref> [[Jane Yates (mtDNA)#Third Generation |Sarah Brewster]], daughter of [[Brewster (Y-DNA) |Love Brewster]] and granddaughter of (Elder) William Brewster. Sarah was living as late as 5 Mar 1667/8<ref>Named in Court case.</ref> but Benjamin married third, bef 21 Jan 1678/9<ref>Third wife signed over dower rights in deed</ref> to  Cecilia _____ (she survived her husband).
 Benjamin had six children; the first three are known to be by his second wife, but it is currently unknown which wife was the mother of the youngest three: Benjamin (1658), Samuel (c1662), [[Jane Yates (mtDNA)#Third Generation |Rebecca]] (b1664), Ebenezer (b1670), Sarah (c1671 m her cousin [[Bartlett (Y-DNA)#Third Generation |Robert Bartlett]]) and Ichabod (b1674).

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 For more information see: Wakefield, Robert S., ''Robert Bartlett of the "Anne" and his Descendants of Four Generations''
 ===First Generation===
-[https://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cst/bartlett/team9a.htm] [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-297 Robert Bartlett]<ref>[https://pilgrimhall.org/robert_mary_bartlett.htm Pilgrim Hall Muesum biography of Robert and Mary]</ref> was born about 1602.<ref>It is possible Robert was the son of Robert Bartlett and Alice Barker, baptized at Puddletown, Dorset, England 27 May 1603.</ref> His first known record is his emigration to New Plimoth Colony in 1623 aboard the ''Anne.'' Robert married about 1630 to [[Elizabeth Walker (mtDNA)#Second Generation |Mary Warren]], who also came to New Plimoth Colony aboard the ''Anne''. They continued to live in Plymouth, where Robert wrote his will 19 Sep 1676, which was probated 29 Oct 1676. His wife, Mary, survived him, and her last known record was in 1677. A 1683 record by her sons called her then deceased.
+[https://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cst/bartlett/team9a.htm] [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-297 Robert Bartlett]<ref>[https://pilgrimhall.org/robert_mary_bartlett.htm Pilgrim Hall Muesum biography of Robert and Mary]</ref> was born about 1602.<ref>It is possible Robert was the son of Robert Bartlett and Alice Barker, baptized at Puddletown, Dorset, England 27 May 1603.</ref> His first known record is his emigration to New Plimoth Colony in 1623 aboard the ''Anne.'' Robert married about 1628<ref>Not married in the 1627 Cattle Division, but first child born ca. 1629.</ref> to [[Elizabeth Walker (mtDNA)#Second Generation |Mary Warren]], who also came to New Plimoth Colony aboard the ''Anne''. They continued to live in Plymouth, where Robert wrote his will 19 Sep 1676, which was probated 29 Oct 1676. His wife, Mary, survived him, and her last known record was in 1677. A 1683 record by her sons called her then deceased.
 Robert and Mary had eight children (Plymouth): [[Morey (Y-DNA)#First Generation |Mary]] (c1631), Benjamin (1633), [[Harlow (Y-DNA)#First Generation |Rebecca]] (1634), [[Rider (Y-DNA)#First Generation |Sarah]] (1636), [[William Sprague (Y-DNA)#Second Generation |Elizabeth]] (1636), Joseph (c1639), [[Nelson (Y-DNA)#First Generation |Lydia]] (1648) and Mercy (1650).

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Status summary==
-===Completed as of November 22, 2024: ===
+===Completed as of August 14, 2026: ===
 * Y-SNP tested to P312>>U152>Z56>BY3548>Z43>Z145>BY1823>BY28794>PF6582>PF6577>BY3953>BY166945
 * Separate Subclades for Benjamin (BY166945) and Joseph (BY142576) identified

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:54, 14 August 2026
Line 48:		Line 48:
	Five individuals claiming descent from Robert Bartlett have taken a Big Y test which documents the haplogroup for Robert Bartlett himself was P312>>U152>Z56>BY3548>Z43>Z145>BY1823>BY28794>PF6582>PF6577>BY3953>BY109876>FTH65483. Two testers (both descended from Joseph<sup>2</sup>)<ref>The shared lineage of these individuals is as follows: Robert<sup>1</sup>, Joseph<sup>2</sup>, Joseph<sup>3</sup>, Joseph<sup>4</sup>. Thus this mutation likely occurred somewhere along this lineage.</ref> fall under a subclade of BY109876>BY142576 while two other individuals claim descent from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> fall under a different subclade of BY109876>BY166945<ref> The fifth individual claims they descend from Bejamin (2), but he falls under the Joseph (2) subclade of BY142576.</ref> This does not automatically mean that Joseph himself had the BY142576 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Joseph. In a similar vein, it does not automatically mean Benjamin himself had the BY166945 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Benjamin.		Five individuals claiming descent from Robert Bartlett have taken a Big Y test which documents the haplogroup for Robert Bartlett himself was P312>>U152>Z56>BY3548>Z43>Z145>BY1823>BY28794>PF6582>PF6577>BY3953>BY109876>FTH65483. Two testers (both descended from Joseph<sup>2</sup>)<ref>The shared lineage of these individuals is as follows: Robert<sup>1</sup>, Joseph<sup>2</sup>, Joseph<sup>3</sup>, Joseph<sup>4</sup>. Thus this mutation likely occurred somewhere along this lineage.</ref> fall under a subclade of BY109876>BY142576 while two other individuals claim descent from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> fall under a different subclade of BY109876>BY166945<ref> The fifth individual claims they descend from Bejamin (2), but he falls under the Joseph (2) subclade of BY142576.</ref> This does not automatically mean that Joseph himself had the BY142576 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Joseph. In a similar vein, it does not automatically mean Benjamin himself had the BY166945 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Benjamin.

−	This last fact is key to the several Southern Bartlett families. The FTDNA project also documents ~~three~~ individuals descended from Joseph Bartlett of Virginia (c1765-c1836) and other Southern Bartlett lines falling under BY166945. This proves where these Southern lines must descend from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> Bartlett. As we have more patrilineal descendants of Benjamin Bartlett Big Y tested, we may be able to further refine the lineages of these Southern Bartlett families.	+	This last fact is key to the several Southern Bartlett families. The FTDNA project also documents six individuals descended from Joseph Bartlett of Virginia (c1765-c1836) and other Southern Bartlett lines falling under BY166945. This proves where these Southern lines must descend from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> Bartlett. As we have more patrilineal descendants of Benjamin Bartlett Big Y tested, we may be able to further refine the lineages of these Southern Bartlett families.

@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 ==DNA results  '''R-FTH65483'''==
 ===Previous Y-DNA testing===
-As of 10 Jan 2026, the [https://www.familytreedna.com/public/BARTLETTDNA?iframe=ydna-results-overview Bartlett DNA Project] Subgroup: "RF Plymouth, MA & TN" has 35 individuals, all who are close STR matches with each other and 11 of the members state their Most Distant Known Patrilineal (all male line) Ancestor (MDKPA) was Robert Bartlett. FTDNA predicts they fall under R1b-M269 based on their STR results.
+As of 14 Aug 2026, the [https://www.familytreedna.com/public/BARTLETTDNA?iframe=ydna-results-overview Bartlett DNA Project] Subgroup: "RF - Descent from Robert Bartlett who came to Plymouth, Mass in 1623; branches to NC, VA, KY, TN and others; one exception to this descent is under close study" has 44<ref>One of the testers does <b>not</b> descend from Robert Bartlett, but is a close SNP match to the family.</ref> testers, all who are close STR matches with each other and 13 of the members state their Most Distant Known Patrilineal (all male line) Ancestor (MDKPA) was Robert Bartlett.<ref>In addition 10 individuals claim Joseph Bartlett born ca 1765 was their MDKPA and one individual claims Joshua Bartlett b. 1768 was their MDKPA.</ref> FTDNA predicts they fall under R1b-M269 based on their STR results.
 ===NGS/WGS testing===

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 [https://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cst/bartlett/team9a.htm] [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-249 Joseph Bartlett] was born in Plymouth about 1639 and died at Plymouth (Manomet) 18 Feb 1711[/2] "in y<sup>e</sup> 73<sup>d</sup> Year of his Age."<ref>[https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/29590899/Joseph-Bartlett#view-photo=13378464 Gravestone]</ref> He married Plymouth about 1662 [[Pope (mtDNA)#First Generation |Hannah Pope]] who was born 17 Aug 1639.
-Joseph and Hannah had five children: Robert (c1663), Joseph (1665), Elnathan (c1667, never married) Mary (c1669), Hannah (1671), Sarah (c1676), Benjamin (1679) and [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-11016 Thomas] (1683-b1712 unm.)
+Joseph and Hannah had five children: Robert (c1663), Joseph (1665), Elnathan (c1667, never married) Mary (c1669 m [[Barnes (Y-DNA)#Third Generation |(Lt.) John Barnes]]), Hannah (1671), Sarah (c1676), Benjamin (1679) and [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Bartlett-11016 Thomas] (1683-b1712 unm.)
 ===Third Generation===

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 ===NGS/WGS testing===
-Five individuals claiming descent from Robert Bartlett have taken a Big Y test which documents the haplogroup for Robert Bartlett himself was P312>>U152>Z56>BY3548>Z43>Z145>BY1823>BY28794>PF6582>PF6577>BY3953>BY109876.<ref>One individual who states their Most Distant Known Patrilineal Ancestor (MDKPA) was William Brown of Dorset  (1735-1825) also has been found to be positive for BY109876. Thus this clade is not confined to solely the descendants of Robert Bartlett.</ref> Two testers (both descended from Joseph<sup>2</sup>)<ref>The shared lineage of these individuals is as follows: Robert<sup>1</sup>, Joseph<sup>2</sup>, Joseph<sup>3</sup>, Joseph<sup>4</sup>. Thus this mutation likely occurred somewhere along this lineage.</ref> fall under a subclade of BY109876>BY142576 while two other individuals claim descent from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> fall under a different subclade of BY109876>BY166945<ref>>FTH65483. The fifth individual claims they descend from Bejamin (2), but he falls under the Joseph (2) subclade of BY142576.</ref> This does not automatically mean that Joseph himself had the BY142576 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Joseph. In a similar vein, it does not automatically mean Benjamin himself had the BY166945 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Benjamin.
+Five individuals claiming descent from Robert Bartlett have taken a Big Y test which documents the haplogroup for Robert Bartlett himself was P312>>U152>Z56>BY3548>Z43>Z145>BY1823>BY28794>PF6582>PF6577>BY3953>BY109876>FTH65483. Two testers (both descended from Joseph<sup>2</sup>)<ref>The shared lineage of these individuals is as follows: Robert<sup>1</sup>, Joseph<sup>2</sup>, Joseph<sup>3</sup>, Joseph<sup>4</sup>. Thus this mutation likely occurred somewhere along this lineage.</ref> fall under a subclade of BY109876>BY142576 while two other individuals claim descent from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> fall under a different subclade of BY109876>BY166945<ref> The fifth individual claims they descend from Bejamin (2), but he falls under the Joseph (2) subclade of BY142576.</ref> This does not automatically mean that Joseph himself had the BY142576 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Joseph. In a similar vein, it does not automatically mean Benjamin himself had the BY166945 mutation, rather it means everyone who has this mutation must be a descendant of Benjamin.
 This last fact is key to the several Southern Bartlett families. The FTDNA project also documents three individuals descended from Joseph Bartlett of Virginia (c1765-c1836) and other Southern Bartlett lines falling under BY166945. This proves where these Southern lines must descend from Benjamin<sup>2</sup> Bartlett. As we have more patrilineal descendants of Benjamin Bartlett Big Y tested, we may be able to further refine the lineages of these Southern Bartlett families.