Surname Project

Clustering (Groups) of individual DNA results in the SFA surname project

            Below is a description of the relationships in and between the groups of Stiles/Styles  in the Stiles Surname DNA project.  We examine the Y-DNA37 results.  There are currently 64 such.   There are 17 groups, 13 of which have more than one member and four that have a genealogical trail back to England and no competing genetic lines.  There are an additional 10 Stiles/Styles that are labeled, “ungrouped,” with no matches and no likely trail back to England..    In addition there are a few male non Stiles/Styles with a Styles paper trail that is included   The ungrouped people are unrelated to any of the groups here or to each other.. No group is related to any other group except as noted.

We use the word mutation to refer to differences in the information at a site in the DNA test so that two mutations would mean in the 37 sites considered here that there had been mutations at two different sites.  The term mode refers to the most common value at a site for the cluster.  When speaking of mutation differences within a cluster it is comparing results for the individual to the mode of the site for the cluster unless otherwise noted.  The magnitude of the difference is not noted and in most cases the two values at a site differ by 1.

In addition when referring to a particular person, they will be noted e.g. John, Sr. 1595 England means John Stiles, Sr. who was born in 1595 in England.  The information about people comes from the SFA master file.  HRS refers to Henry Reed Stiles and MSPG to Mary Stiles Paul Gould genealogies.  Other information is added and should be self-explanatory.  In some cases we have included potential pages in HRS but have not yet done so for MSPG.

A paper trail refers to the information in the SFA file. Most of issues for DNA related people are the ends of their paper trails.  The genetic results and paper trails have conflicts that involve lots of issues and these are most often about paper trails that end on John, Sr. 1595.  There are lots of problems and issues related to people having lived in NJ.  Too many “Stileses” one might say and two few records, is a comment often heard. Controversy over the paper trails of different sets of genetically unrelated people pointing to a common ancestor seems to be rife with many shared common ancestors.

There are two distinct close knit groups with paper trails back to Robert 1637.  The largest is Group A with 13 members at the Y-DNA37 level and the other, Group B, has six members.  The genetic distance between Clusters A and B indicate that they are not related.  The larger cluster is more apt to be the direct descendants from Robert 1637 as they are descended from five of his sons.  Group B are all descended from one son which is also in the A group but as noted the genetic distance indicates that the B group could not be descended for that son

Cluster A has seven people with no genetic variation, two just 1 mutation away, three 2 away and one 3 away from the mode of the cluster.  The two who share Amos 1705 (one with 1 mutation and one with 3) as an ancestor have  mutations at a common site that likely occurred some few generations after Robert 1637.  The largest separation within the cluster between two individuals is 5 mutations.   Also there is a non-Stiles just 3 off the mode that we believe is likely to be related to this group..

Group A living

Cluster B has five members.  The largest variation in the cluster is 2 mutations.  This cluster also has a paper trail that ends with Robert 1637.  Cluster B members have three common ancestors before Robert 1637.  .  Among the three shared ancestors in Cluster B’s paper trail is Samuel Sr. 1682 son of Robert 1637.  Two of the people in unrelated Cluster A also have him as an ancestor. There is no indication as to where the adoption or other event contributed to at least one false paper trail likely for Cluster B.  It is probable it between Samuel, 1682 and Israel, Sr. 1746 or between the latter and John, Sr. 1735/6

Group B living

Cluster C is clearly a Joseph abt. 1648 England cluster.  He settled in VA.  It also is a close cluster with deviations from the mode of only one mutation except for one at four.  There are seven with paper trails to Joseph and one incomplete trail that likely will connect.  However there is an additional case whose paper trail traces back to John 1595 England and is most certainly incorrect.  This John line is unrelated to all others that appear to have John 1595 England as a common ancestor while belonging to this cluster.

Group C living

Cluster D has eight people in it, is likely a Thomas Style,s bef. 1567 England group and is most likely a proper trail through John, Sr. 1595 England to Thomas Stylles Jr. bef 1567 b England.  There are no trails to any other ancestor among the six living in the US.  D has six people with paper trails to John 1595. Four of these share 1 common ancestor, two share 5 and one has no common ancestor before John.  The deviations from the mode in mutations are 0, 1, 2, and 3 and the maximum variation among individuals is 5.  Two knew their grandfathers well and the latter two are in HRS.  These five are unrelated to all others Stiles/Styles that have a paper trail to John, Sr. 1595 England as a common ancestor.   In addition there is one person in the D whose ancestor is Francis 1602 a brother of John, Sr. 1595. This person is just 4 away from the Mode of D.   In addition there is a Styles descendent in England that deviates just 1 from the mode but has no connecting paper trail that connects with the others.  It is highly likely that Group G is related to Group D in recent times.  The two group modes differ only by 3.

Group D living

Cluster E consists of a father, his uncle and also his son and one other person whose genealogy doesn’t connect yer.  They differ by one mutation out of 37.  These genetic cousins seem to connect in York, PA but we don’t yet know how.

Group E again

Cluster F is the most interesting genetic cluster of cousins for lots of reasons.  Its major Haplotype is different from that of all the other Stileses in the Surname project.  Although not as prevalent as the other haplotype there is a significant group in England.  The seven members have two major sub-clusters.  There is a non-Stiles who is a genetic cousin for which we have an incomplete paper trail but evidence exists that he his ancestor was a Stiles adopted by another family and took the surname as his.

F1 has two members whose trails go back to Robert abt. 1666 whose father was Bartholomew 1635 and both were born in England.  They differ by 2 mutations from each other and 1 and 2 mutations from the mode of the whole cluster.  Robert’s son Robert was born in Chester, Burlington Co., and N.J.in1692 and hence this is most likely a New Jersey Family.  However the connect through John II 1695 is tenuous at best.

F2 has four members whose trails go back to John, Sr. 1595. They differ from each other by five mutations and two and three from the mode of the cluster.  It has two groups of two that each have five common ancestors before John, Sr. 1595.  They differ by two mutations from each other and each one mutation from the mode of the sub-cluster.  This sub-cluster is broken down into two further divisions, F2a and F2b.  They are unrelated to all others that appear to have John, Sr. 1595 as a common ancestor.

F2a has two members that have five common ancestors descended from John, Sr. 1595.  They join together with a Jacob 1777 b NJ who is in HRS.  However, Robert abt. 1666 had a descendent named Jacob that died in 1817 in the same area and may indicate a different paper trail.

F2b has a similar issue around John, Jr. 1729.  There are lots of important notes in the SFA file that need to be addressed.

Group F living

Cluster G contains three people and two are uncle and nephew.  These two individuals’ paper trail goes back to John, Sr. 1757 b VA and there are no mutations between them.  The third person goes back to James 1790 b NC. and his trail does not connect to the other trail.  His differs by one mutation from the other two.  In addition there is an individual that has only tested to 25 but at that level is an exact match.  The three are  an extremely tight match all the way to 111 site test

All three of people of G share the same three mutation differences with D.  This probably means that sometime in the past there was a line related to John 1595 that accumulated there separate mutations and that all of G here are descendants of him or of some of his ancestors.

Group G living

Cluster H is the line through Bermuda.  One of the two members has a paper trail that goes through Bermuda to John 1600/10 in England.  The other ends with Benjamin Sr. ab. 1720 in Bermuda.  They differ by 4 mutations.

Group H living


Cluster I    has three members.  There are two who have just 1 mutation between them and the third deviates by 5 and is at best probably weakly related to the other two. The two have a common ancestor of Benjamin  1805 PA.  The earliest ancestor for the third is John G 1837 NJ.

Group I Living

Cluster J   Contains two individuals differing by 2 but only one Stiles.  There are intermarriages between Stileses and Ranneys in the past.  It is not certain that they are related in recent times and we are exploring possibilities.  This is the only case of two genetic cousins in which only one is currently named Stiles.  They are tightly related even out to Y-DNA111.  There have been a detailed study of the cluster as a part of 8-10 related people and where the splits to different names took place.  We will see if we can feature that later.

Group J living

Cluster K has just two people with only one deviation between them.  Their paper trails share three generations of ancestors before John, Sr. 1595 England  They are unrelated to all others that appear to have John, Sr.  1595 England, as a common ancestor.

Group K living

Cluster L has just three people with only one deviation between them.  Their paper trails share three generations of ancestors before John 1595 England  They are unrelated to all others that appear to have John, Sr.  1595 England as a common ancestor.  Yet Ephraim, Jr. is certainly correct with two genetic lines emanating from him.

Group L living

Cluster M has two members that have an exact match and incomplete and non-overlapping paper trails.

Group M living

 The next four “Groups” have only one member as mentioned above, they are N, O, P, ad Q

Groups NOPQ living

If you have questions go to the contact list and send them on as we look forward to being helpful.