Chapter 34 Austin Plant - Plant Family History Group

Following on from this, it became possible that this situation might need to be re-considered in
the light of a further volunteer (P18a) who came forward for testing. His earliest known ancestor
is James Plant, born 1793 in Sibsey to parents Richard and Sarah (née Waltham); James’s sons
emigrated to Australia. Sibsey is in south Lincolnshire, just to the north of Boston. The results for
P18a, however, turned out not to be quite as expected: P18a did not match with the main English
Plant family; nor did he match with P17a; but he was a close match to Walter Plant (P9a) whose
result was discussed in the previous DNA Report.
There was also a further development for Walter (P9a). His line was originally recorded as being
from ”late nineteenth century Hull”, further up the east coast of England. However, by more recent
research, he had traced his line back to his great-grandfather’s 1862 birth at Stickley, just north of
Boston; and, moreover, his great-great-grandfather was William who was born 27.5.1832 at nearby
Leake East Fen Allotment to John and Eliz (b 1791). The paper trail hence places the ancestors
of Walter (P9a) not far from those of Bill (P18a) around 1800; and this goes some way towards
explaining why their Y-DNA results indicate that there is a 67% chance that they had a common
Plant ancestor within the last 24 generations. To check out this finding with more certainty, it would
be beneficial if Bill (P18a) were to upgrade his Y-DNA test results from 12 to 25 markers, though
this would entail Bill’s paying an extra fee. In the absence of extra information from further testing,
we can nonetheless say that, when taken together, the paper trail and the Y-DNA results seem fairly
convincing: there seems little doubt that both Walter and Bill were from the same south Lincolnshire
family around 1800.
It was also discussed, in the previous DNA report, that there was also a 67% chance that Walter
(P9a) had a common ancestor in the past 24 generations with a Javier Planter (PR1a) in Spain. Given
the lack of a similar geographical location, not to mention the slight difference in surname, this
was rather more surprising. It was speculated whether Walter (P9a) and Javier (PR1a) might both
be descended from the Gascony Plante family, for example, for whom we have no direct Y-DNA
results so far. It can be added that Walter (P9a) recalls a family story that his line was from Holland,
which might be in keeping with overseas origins. Ideally, further Y-DNA results are desirable to
check out this apparent cluster of matching Y-DNA results more fully. Though Walter (P9a) has
upgraded his Y-DNA results to 25 markers, Javier (PR1a) did not do likewise. Perhaps more clarity
will emerge when, for example, some Gascony Plantes come forward to be tested.
Thus, though the full details of the situation for Walter (P9a), Javier (PR1a) and Bill (P18a)
are still not entirely clear, their results suggest a secondary Y-DNA Plant cluster, associated in
part with south Lincolnshire around 1800. It is possible that this may relate back to the early
south Lincolnshire cluster that is found in the pre-1700 Plant Name Distribution data. Whether this
also relates to a family connection with Javier Planter in Spain is not certain (just a 67% chance).
However, this could offer one possible explanation of why this south Lincolnshire Plant family,
around 1800, does not match with the main English Plant family: the south Lincolnshire Plants
may have originated overseas. It has to be added, however, that another possible explanation is that
there was a false paternity event before 1800 in the descent of this south Lincolnshire Plant family;
and, furthermore, if there is truly a family connection to Javier Planter’s line in Spain, which he
has traced back to around 1840, the connection could have originated with a south Lincolnshire
Plant travelling to Spain rather than because the south Lincolnshire Plant cluster originated from
overseas. Nonetheless, this illustrates how a fuller picture can begin to emerge, reaching back into
earlier times, as more Plants come forward to take the Y-DNA test.
The test can also help to resolve fine details in more recent Plant family trees.
64