On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 5:12:57 PM UTC+2, wjhonson wrote: > *Paper trails* with conflicting Y results, and with *no* Autosomal proof are worth... nothing. I think that is a very over-broad generalization. If we take a simple case of two male and their genealogy, and their DNA unexpectedly does not match, then most likely one of them's paper trail is still probably fine, and the other one's probably just has one simple flaw somewhere. That information is very useful and worth a lot to a good genealogist, and it also does NOT mean that either of the paper trails must be worthless. If we take the case of Richard III, which is actually relevant to this list, then your sweeping generalization advises that EVERYONE who thinks they have an Edward III descent through a York or Lancaster line now has to be certain that they do not, because their was conflicting Y DNA evidence implying a bad paper trail or an NPE somewhere in the last few hundred years. This would be ridiculous advice. This has been discussed many times here.

On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 9:33:04 AM UTC-7, Andrew Lancaster wrote: > On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 5:12:57 PM UTC+2, wjhonson wrote: > > > *Paper trails* with conflicting Y results, and with *no* Autosomal proof are worth... nothing. > > I think that is a very over-broad generalization. > > If we take a simple case of two male and their genealogy, and their DNA unexpectedly does not match, then most likely one of them's paper trail is still probably fine, and the other one's probably just has one simple flaw somewhere. > > That information is very useful and worth a lot to a good genealogist, and it also does NOT mean that either of the paper trails must be worthless. > > If we take the case of Richard III, which is actually relevant to this list, then your sweeping generalization advises that EVERYONE who thinks they have an Edward III descent through a York or Lancaster line now has to be certain that they do not, because their was conflicting Y DNA evidence implying a bad paper trail or an NPE somewhere in the last few hundred years. This would be ridiculous advice. This has been discussed many times here. *If* those people who *think* they have a strong paper trail to Edward III have *not* done Autosomal DNA testing to even show that they are related to the grandparent or great-grandparent in that line that they purport to reach back to Edward III, then they *need* a swift kick in the head. Have a nice day.