The process of family reconstitution is a combination of documentary research, scientific testing and geographical analysis. Each of these key elements has shortcomings which are partly complemented by advantages in the others.

Documentary research remains the primary process to link all families; this is fine when there is a good stream of records with which to corroborate each generation. However, as is so often the case, the documentary path is lost in a forest of alternatives or stalled at a brick wall. In these circumstances the ability of DNA testing to link distant families is inestimable.

DNA testing is absolute in its capability to establish a common genetic relationship but cannot define the detail of that relationship. The DNA signature of fathers and sons are indistinguishable from their cousins, uncles and grandfathers. 

The role of spatial cluster analysis is equally novel and, as far as high-frequency polygenic surnames are concerned, not fully tried and tested. Its purpose is to define "hotspots" using statistical techniques which identify the geographical origins of families with common genetics.

DNA - An introduction to male bonding?

In tracing our ancestors we are normally accustomed to thinking  in terms of what is potentially achieveable through documentary research alone. The fortunate few will be able to trace their ancestry as far back as the mid 16th century; most however will get no further than the end of the 18th century.  Yet most of our families assumed their surnames in the mid 14th century: two centuries before the introduction of parish registers. The conclusion is obvious: even the most extensively documented family will have distant collateral branches which can only be verified by DNA testing.

This study is only concerned with the Y chromosome and its correlation with inherited surnames. As such it is an exclusively male process. Females cannot inherent nor pass on the Y chromosome in the same way that married females do not pass on their surname. From father to son, the Y chromosome passes unchanged, generation after generation, except for very infrequent mutations. The occurrence of mutational differences and the number of markers tested are critical to distinguish separate family groups and structure of individual families.

The Fisher surname comprises many separate families each with its own genetic signature or haplotype, as it is properly known. The size of each family will be a product of its antiquity and the extent to which it has ramified over successive generations. There will be a few dominant families with many living male descendants and a large number of smaller families;  some close to extinction.

Initially the definition of each family haplotype shall be based on a low resolution test of consisting of 12 markers. The final definition of each family group will be based on a high resolution test of at least 25 markers.

What can we expect?

Each test provides a score for a particular DNA marker (DYS). By itself it is of limited value. It is potential becomes apparent through the comparison of these scores with the tests of other individuals with the same surname.

These are the (low resolution) results of the Group Administrator, which are a little unusal in that there is a score of 14 at DYS393. Most Fishers score 13. So I am a "single-step mutation" from almost all the testees in the Fisher Group.

In general close matches signify close relationships; however, on its own DNA testing cannot reveal detailed family trees and should always be viewed as a complementary tool to documentary research.

The value of DNA will only be fully realised when a substantial number of men have been tested. The Fisher Surname DNA survey is a long-term project the success of which depends on the number of test results accumulated. We do not expect spectacular results in the early stages of the survey. But potentially it should:

• Identify the origin of in-migrant families - especially useful to Fishers who moved to the major conurbations of the UK from the rural counties during the Industrial Revolution and earlier.
• Identify emigrant families in America, Canada and Australasia, whose origins in the British Isles are unknown.
• Link up families where documentary evidence has been lost or destroyed.

Is the family of St. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, still extant?

John Fisher, born 1469, Beverley, East Riding of Yorkshire, Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, Bishop of Rochester, Cardinal. Condemned to death for high treason he was beheaded on 22 June 1535. Four hundred years later he was canonised as a martyr for the Catholic faith.

We may not be able to verify a connection with this 16th century historical figure but we are interested to hear from potential participants who belong to ‘ancient’ families to provide ‘benchmark’ definitions for Fisher haplotypes. These include the Fishers of Cossington, of Chetwynd, of Packington, of Higham on the Hill, of Tydd St Giles, of Spring Dale, of Thorncombe and others.

Contact: fisher@one-name.org