Origins

A lane near Yarnscombe, Devon, much as it must have looked when our most ancient ancestors lived here.


This website organizes research I have done into the Shattocke ancestral family, including such name variants as Shattuck, Chaddock, Shaddick, Shaddock, Shadduck and so on. 

You can use the search function above right to find a specific reference.

This "Origins" page explores the family's deep history, before 1500. 

The "Diaspora" page  describes family history after 1500 and the emigration of a major portion of the family to the British colonies due economic and technological forces in the 17th to 20th centuries. 

There are two ways of exploring family histories, by region under the "Family by Region" menu or by following links off the family tree under the "Branches" menu. You can also use the search function. If you do not find your branch of the family attached to our tree, DNA testing may help you find that connection. There is a fund that provides free DNA testing to qualified Shaddocks (or other name variants). Contact me.

Note: When I am referring to the entire family I will use "Shattocke" as a generic reference to all the different spellings of the name found in the records, like Shattock, Shattuck, Shaddock, Shaddick, Shadduck and so on.

The Etymological Evidence: Shatticke and Shattocke
Let us start where most people start, with our name. 

Although there have been many authors who attempt to trace the deep history of the family using the spelling of the name, such an approach is fraught with difficulty. Such speculations are based on the assumption that if the name "sounds like" Shaddick, Shaddock or Shattock, it must be an earlier form of the name. Without a paper trail, corroborated by DNA evidence, this approach can easily fail. 

The first spelling of the name found in the historical record is Shattock. It is found in the records for the "Court of Star Chamber."

The Star Chamber was an English court of law which sat at the royal Palace of Westminster, from the late 15th century to the mid-17th century (c. 1641), and was composed of Privy Councillors and common-law judges, to supplement the judicial activities of the common-law and equity courts in civil and criminal matters. The Star Chamber was established to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against socially and politically prominent people so powerful that ordinary courts would likely hesitate to convict them of their crimes. (Wikipedia)

Alexander Shattock and Richard Shattock were defendants, along with others, having apparently participated in a riot at an estate, the manor of Lydiard in the county of Wiltshire, which is just next door to the counties of Somerset and Dorset where Shattocke descendants are found. 

Not a particularly auspicious beginning to the family record.

The next time the name is encountered it is in 1524. At Bampton Parish in 1524 a tax payer called Thomas Shatok was taxed for ownership of goods. It appears that he or his son (John Shattocke) were taxed again in 1543, also based on ownership of goods. In all cases I have found that the double "t" version of the name (as in Shattocke or Shattick) is the most ancient spelling of the family name, preceding all other variants.
And the most common spelling is Shattocke. The Shaddock lineage that I have studied mostly thoroughly, begins in 1659 with the marriage of Richard Shattocke to Agnes Strellin in Yarnscombe, Devon. 

The last two lines record the marriage of Richard Shattocke to Agnes Strellin (?) in 1659. This is the oldest paper record of the Shaddock / Shaddick lineage that originates in Devon's Yarnscombe village and eventually disperses worldwide from nearby villages.

The document is in terrible shape. Richard Shattocke's name is also hard to read on the record. However other records of his name, that is baptism records of his children, consistently spell his name Shattocke.

His sons would have their names spelled Shattocke as well. It is not until the third generation, born between 1704 and 1726 that the name acquires its more modern spellings: Shaddick and Shaddock. This is a very important clue to our origins as the change in spelling helps us estimate when family members left Devon and Somerset in a great diaspora and where they emigrated to. 

It is interesting to note a change in spelling from earliest spelling of the family name among English settlers in the British colonies. The Shattucks who arrived in Massachusetts around 1630 probably were known as Shattockes in England. Among descendants of those original Shattucks is found a change in the spelling to Shaddock or Shaddick around 1695.

The Shattuck Name

Additional evidence that Shattocke is the ancient root name comes from a genealogist in the 19th century who wrote about the Shattucks. Lemuel Shattuck writes about Shattucks in "Memorials of the Descendants of William Shattuck " (Dutton & Wentworth Boston, 1855. pp 8 - 14). (You can download a copy of the book here.)  In the preface to the book he writes that a "friend" came across documents that make Shattocke the oldest form of the name.

In the year 1525 Samuel SHATTOCKE and Alice SHATTOCKE of Tolland, in Somersetshire, appear upon the Rolls which contain the Assessments of the Subsidies granted by Parliament.

The Shattuck surname shows up as a DNA match for me and my Shaddock branch of the family. It also shows up in the Y-DNA matches of other Shaddock or Shaddick branches of the family and our genetic cousins the Parrishs and Byars or Byers.

Indeed the origin of the Shattucks in Somerset, and the origin of Shaddocks and Shaddicks in Devon reflect the common spelling of the name in the two counties, which are next door to each other. The third point of origin is Dorset. Shaddock or Shaddick is the common spelling for the family name in Devon, whereas Shattock or Shattick is the common way of spelling the name in Somerset. In Dorset the name is at first found spelled "Shattocke" and "Shattock." Later Chaddock and Shadwick show up as possible variations, although descendants from northern English Chaddocks, Shadwicks and Chadwicks are shown to be not related to Shattockes in DNA testing.

See the page on the Massachusetts Shattucks for a study of the Shattuck family and evidence I provide there for the origin of the name as "Shattocke." I also include a map of the Shattock name that shows that Shattuck was the preferred spelling of the Shattocke or Shatticke name in the U.S.A while Shattock and Shattick are the common form of the name in the other English colonies settled by Shattocke and Shatticke descendants.

Most of the variants in the spelling of the name occurs in the English colonies. My theory is that local vicars in England were educated and had parish traditions on how the name was spelled. You sometimes see a change in spelling of a surname when a family moves to a different parish where the name is not familiar. This assumes the family is illiterate, which is commonly the case with our ancestors who were largely poor farmers or farm labourers. When our family members emigrated to the colonies the problem was exasperated by the fact they had English accents with a distinct local dialect and often faced an official who had no clue about the spelling of the name. 

Shattocke as a German Surname
The question becomes: "Is the name Shattocke an ancient Anglo-Saxon name as many contemporary sources on the Internet suggest? (Although they tend to use the modern derivation, Shaddock.) Or is it of more recent derivation, specifically a German name."

There is a case for Shattocke as a German name. Lemuel Shattuck in the 19th century reported an oral tradition that the Shattucks (or Shattocks, or Shaddocks) were of German origin.

A tradition has existed that the family ere of German origin; but if such be the fact, which is not improbable, it must have existed there in a very remote antiquity. It may have been, and probably was, among the Angles and Saxons, or Anglo-Saxons of the northerly part of Continental Europe, who peopled England and America with their most shrewd and energetic races. If we adopted terms in common use in our day, we might denominate ourselves Americanized-Anglo-Saxons.

From "Memorials of the Descendants of William Shattuck; Lemuel Shattuck; Dutton & Wentworth Boston, 1855. pp 8 - 14

Read the complete excerpt from the book: http://www.shaddock.ca/shaddockancestors/devon-shaddocks/1855-account-of-the-shaddock-name

Lemuel Shattuck is arguing for an ancient Anglo-Saxon heritage, consisting of Saxons, Jutes, and Angles. However, the Y-DNA research I have conducted shows conclusively that we are in fact descended from Celts, not Anglo-Saxons. It is still possible the name has an Anglo-Saxon derivation because it would not have been adopted by our ancestors until the 14th century. But we lived among Celtic descendants and the name appears to be more Germanic than Anglo-Saxon.

"Shattick" does not seem to have survived as a variant of the  Shattock name as a scientific study between 2000-2005  (Onomaps) does not have a record of that surname.

The Shadduck Version

A version of the Shattuck name appears to be "Shadduck." DNA testing of at least one Shadduck descendant showed him to be a Shattuck descendant. The fact is the name occurs virtually exclusively in the U.S. The Onomaps study shows there were 885 people with this name variant in the U.S. and a small handful in Germany (3 or 4!).

The Shadwick Version

Shadwick appears to be a version that arises most often from "Shaddick." The Instow and Frithelstock branches of the family have Shadwick variations and Lemuel Shattuck mentions Shadwick as a version of Shattuck.  According to the Onomap study (http://worldnames.publicprofiler.org/Default.aspx) by 2005 there were 1354 Shadwicks in the U.S. and 96 in the U.K. 

Possible Etymological Origin of the Family Name

There is corroborative evidence for a German derivation of the name. It is in the form of a scholarly book that was written in 1857 titled, "An Etymological Dictionary of Family and Christian Names. With an Essay on Their Derivation and Import" by William Arthur. He has an entry for the Shaddock name. Here it is on page 32:

SHADDOCK or SCHADECK. Local. The name of a lordship in Germany.

By "local" he means the name was derived from a place name. 

Clifford R. Shaddick, in his 1950 Shaddick history, quotes from yet another source, the respected "British Family Names" by Henry Barber, published in 1894. Apparently Barber consulted twenty-seven genealogical sources in developing his list of British surnames. For Shaddick, his entry is:

                                                                        Shaddick. G. Schadeck ; a p.n. 

The initials "p.n." stand for "personal name," suggesting the name is not derived like many names (such as "Smith" as a derivation of "blacksmith") but rather it is simply a family name.  

A search in a world database for surnames shows that in 2002 Schadeck is found in Luxembourg, Belgium, Germany, France and the U.S. in that order. There are less than 1,000 people with that surname worldwide. The Schadecks are found in the same area that our remote ancestors originated from. At the Geneat genealogical website, a search in the database of people who traced their ancestry back to Schadecks in the period before the 17th century turned up the following very interesting statistics:

Switzerland 16
Luxembourg 9
Germany 8
Netherlands 2
Belgium 1

Almost half the people with the Schadeck name are descended from ancient families in Switzerland, with as many descended from ancient families north of Switzerland in Luxembourg and Germany. There is no record of how English etymologists in the 19th century identified this surname as the probable antecedent of the Shaddock and Shaddick names, but the DNA evidence of our origins points to the exact same area.

What DNA Tells Us About Our Origins
Vital records began sporadically in England after 1538 and were not in wide use until a century later. Many records have become lost, badly damaged or inaccurately transcribed. Our family was not sufficiently illustrious, notorious or royal to warrant mention in historical documents before vital records were kept. The only way we can look into the deep history of the family is to read the genetic code stored in our DNA, passed down from one generation to the next unchanged. Or almost unchanged. Tiny changes to the genetic code, one letter in the genetic alphabet, do occur, very rarely. These one letter mistakes (called SNPs) are faithfully copied to the next generation and all subsequent generations. They can be used as markers that define new branches in the human tree. For our family that SNP marker is called Y16884.  

Y16884 branches off the dominant paternal lineage of Western Europe, R1b, also known as M343. Around 25,000 years ago our ancestors began a long migration to our ultimate home in the south of England. We carry the story of that migration in the male Y-chromosome members of our family. 

The journey of our forefathers begins in eastern to southern Africa with genetic Adam. But I will begin my story further down the line, with the migration of our forefathers into Europe from the western Asia steppes. There we find an individual who lived sometime around 25,000 years ago who had the M343 SNP copying mistake in his genetic code.  He is the oldest Eurasian grandfather in our family. He passed this change in his genetic code to his sons. And they passed it on to their sons. This means that in every male Shaddock, Shaddick, Shattuck or Shattocke and our genetic cousins, like the Parrishs and Byers or Byars, there is a tiny change in the genetic code of our DNA that sets us apart from billions of our fellow humans. Our family is descended from that man who had this single letter mistake, this marker of our shared ancestor. 

As time passed new copying errors in the Y chromosome happened by chance and were passed from a descendant to his sons. The sons and their descendants carrying the new mutation became part of a new branch of the family, defined by the name of the SNP mutation. This is how we know the path of migration of our family's ancient grandfathers. We find in them in our chromosomes and in the telltale code changes in the remains of prehistoric men buried in the places along the route. And in many cases we find them in the descendants who remained when their relatives moved on. This is how we can reconstruct the migration route for our family beginning with M343 man in far off western Asia.


Enlarge the map to see where your so very distant relatives are buried. Each point where you see a letter code (like M269) is the site where your direct male ancestor lived, farmed, fought and moved on. The map tells the story of the migration up to 1200 BCE (before the common era). Look for U152 in the Alps north of modern day Italy. That is where your 125th great grandfather lived, worked and died.

We know that is where he settled in Europe because he had a descendant who had a new SNP variant, called Y16884. And that variant is what distinguishes us from other European males, our cousins, such as the L21 males who were the first to settle in England. If you are wondering if you are biologically a true Shaddock or Shaddick or Shattuck (or our genetic cousins with other surnames like Parrish or Byars) than you can actually purchase a test kit, swab your cheek, and send the test kit back. A few months later the DNA testing company will confirm or deny your membership in this wandering tribe of humanity. (If you are a Shaddock, Shaddick or Shattuck you might be eligible for free testing under the Robert J Shaddock DNA Fund.) 

Our La Tène Ancestors

So where was this ancient culture that we belonged to? We belonged to a tribe in central Europe, defined by modern day eastern France, Switzerland, Austria, southwest Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. For our specific ancestors "home" was probably Switzerland. Broadly described he was a Celt, speaking a form of the Celtic language. More precisely he belonged to what ethnographers call the La Tène (lä-ˈten) culture, named after an archaeological site on the shores of a lake in Switzerland where artifacts created by these people were found.  The La Tène elite power structure arose at the fringes of the early Iron Age Halstatt elite power structure, which collapsed between 450 and 400 BC. Where the Halstatt lived in fortified enclosures on hill sides, La Tène people lived in small, dispersed, self-sufficient settlements in the valleys and plains below. 

Reconstruction of the house your 93rd great-grandfather lived in.

By the 4th century BC the La Tène had become over-populated. They developed a warlike culture where warriors became the elite members of a society that was otherwise not stratified like the earlier Halstatt culture. They began raiding the rich Mediterranean communities they found south and east of them. They were considered barbarians by the Roman and Greek classical cultures. They were heavily influenced by Mediterranean culture,  and the Celtic culture north of the English channel. This map shows the original extent of the Hallstatt culture in yellow and expansion of the La Tène culture in green.


The growing power of Rome and the constant state of war that La Tène brought upon themselves, along with increasing social stratification, eventually led to their decline and defeat at the hands of the Romans by the first century BC. Some scholars even suggest their love of wine and feasting made them too fat and contented to live up to their warrior ideals.

The take-away from all this is that we do not belong to the tribes that inhabited southern Europe or northern Europe. We do not descend from the Vikings or the Angles or Saxons. We are La Tène Celts. If you are a Shaddock, Shaddick, Shattuck or a closely related genetic cousin (Paris, Parrish, Byars, Byers), have you been calling yourself an Anglo-Saxon all these years? You are not.  Call yourself a Celt or more precisely La Tène. (Sounds like "La Ten.") 

Devon Dumnonii
If you look at the top of the above map for England, you will see that the area where modern day Devon and Cornwall is located, the area where our recent ancestors lived, is occupied by the Celtic Dumnonii. The Devon name derives from Dumnonia, which during the British Iron Age, Roman Britain, and Early Medieval was the homeland of the Dumnonii Brittonic Celts. Somerset, the other ancient homeland of our family, was occupied by the Belgae, a Gaulish Celtic people from across the channel. (Belgium is derivative of the name of this cultural group.) Many speculate that the Belgae were from the East of the Rhine, pushed west by the Germanii people. They ultimately crossed the channel to southeastern England. 

But the origin of the Dumonii of Devon is thought to be in Armorica, the name of an ancient part of Gaul between the Seine and Loire rivers, including the Brittany peninsula, and extending inland and down the Atlantic coast. Ancient cultural and trade exchanges between the areas around Brittany and Cornwall and Devon continued up to the medieval area. The trade and cultural exchanges between Somerset and areas north tended to be with the lower Seine valley and the low countries. So it is possible we are descended specifically from the Veneti  La Tène Celts you see in the map in western France, where modern day Brittany is located. Indeed when the Angles and Saxons invaded England in the 4th century, some of our most distant Briton relatives may have fled to Brittany. The cultural exchange between these two areas continued down to the modern age. 

The following map is probably the most important on this page. It is a topographical map of south western England. You find our ancient family farming the green area bounded by natural barriers, the moors north and south (Exmoor and Dartmoor), the Atlantic Ocean to the west and the River Parrett to the east.


The Shattockes and Shattickes and their descendants are found in north Devon and south and central Somerset. Indeed the Romans drove the Celts west until they got to the River Parrett, which had always acted as a natural boundary between Celtic tribes. 

So are we descendants of the Dumnonii? There is not a definitive answer to that question. We are La Tène certainly, but when we arrived in England is still an open question. There is much controversy among the scholars about the ethnic make-up of Britain. The consensus right now is that Britain has long been composed of distinct ethnic groups formed by a steady stream of immigration from across coastal waters and not a uniform ethnic group the result of successive large-scale invasions. My genealogical research finds our ancestors in the counties of Devon and Somerset. Has the Y chromosome that have been passed down these several thousand years migrated from Armorica or the lands inhabited by the Belgae or the La Tène homeland? When did our common ancestor step ashore in Devon or Somerset? Are we expatriates from Somerset, or are we expatriate Devon people? 

Other DNA Research
In early 2015 a detailed study of the genetic makeup of the British isles was published in the Journal Nature (
Nature Reviews Genetics
 
16,
 
256–257
 
(2015).

Click here to see a larger version of this "genetic map."

The study was able to break down Britons into genetic clusters. If you compare this genetic map with the topographical map I showed earlier, you will notice that the blue area of the genetic map in south western England covers almost the exact same area as the farmland where I said Shattocke ancestors are found, the area sandwiched between Exmoor in the north and Dartmoor in the south, the Atlantic Ocean in the west and the River Parrett in the east. The "Devon" blue area of the map shows that the people in this area share a lot of their DNA. Not surprising their closest ancient relatives are from Breton France, across the English Channel. In other words, they share more DNA with people in Brittany across the Channel than people to the north or southwest of them in England. 

The authors of the study found a marked genetic division between Cornwall and Devon people that almost exactly follows the county border. And Devon people are shown to be quite genetically different from neighbouring Dorset. 

The following pair of maps from the Nature study shows something very interesting, which is that around 600 A.D. our ancestors (the Britons in the purple areas on the map on the left) were pushed by the Angles and Saxons west. And some of them fled south to the Brittany area. 

The map on the right shows the effect of the Viking migrations between 800 and 950 AD. 

The map on the left shows that the original Britons were pushed left into the areas coloured purple in the map. If you compare this map to the previous genetic map, you will see that two blue areas on the genetic map are the homelands for the Shaddock (in the south) and the Chaddock (in the north) surnames.

The Chaddock Surname
The Chaddock surname that is found in the north sounds like "Shattock" or "Shaddock." According to Philip Chaddock (one letter removed from my name) who is an administrator of the DNA project for the FTDNA Chaddock project, the name probably derives from a medieval village, Chaddock, that once existed just west of modern day Manchester.  The original spelling was Chaydok , with variants such as Chaidok, Chaydoke and Chaidoke, among others. It stabilized as Chaddock in the late 1600s. 

Worldwide distribution of the Chaddock name according to the OnoMaps study at the University College of London between 2000 and 2005.

Notice in the map at the left that the highest concentration of people with the Chaddock name as of 2005 is the United States with about 770 people, and Canada has the highest concentration of Chaddocks with about 360 people. The United Kingdom has 430 Chaddocks. The Chaddock name is even more rare than the different forms of the Shattocke name.

Not shown on the map is Australia and New Zealand. The study detected no Chaddocks in Australia and only 10 Chaddocks in New Zealand.

If we take a closer look at the distribution map for the U.K. (on the left) we see the name is prevalent in the Midlands and North West with a somewhat lower incidence in Yorkshire and Humberside. 

The families  Shaddocks and Chaddocks were 160 miles apart (between Stoke-on-Trent and Taunton, Somerset). That would seem to make it unlikely they are related. 

However it is difficult to know how much significance to give this. I do not have enough Chaddock DNA data as a foundation for a theory. The names have become confused in the records, making DNA analysis the only long term solution to sorting out family histories. Philip Chaddock traces his ancestors back to Staffordshire and he belongs to haplogroup R-CTS10893, which is a subclade of U106. It is thought U106 people descend from Germanic tribes that inhabited what is modern day Denmark and northern Germany. They are part of a distinctly different migration of early peoples into Europe. This makes Philip Chaddock very different in his ancestral origin than Shattockes.  Were his ancestors the invaders and mine the local residents? We will see how ongoing DNA studies play out this story! Is Philip's DNA results typical of other Chaddocks who are not Shattocke NPEs?

The Chadwick or Shadwick Surnames

The Chadwick and Shadwick surnames have sometimes been mixed up with Shattocke variants in places like Dorset or New England. But DNA tests of descendants of Chadwicks or Shadwicks from English areas north like Lancashire have proven that their ancestors are not even remotely related to Shattockes of south western England. The mix up in names occurs especially often in places like New York state where incoming immigrants in colonial times, arriving with heavy accents, often had their names recorded incorrectly. In two different cases I have examined, one Shaddock was actually a Polish immigrant and the other was a Chadwick from Ireland. 

The Forbidden Fruit

When was the first time you looked up "Shaddock" or "Shaddick" in the dictionary? If it was in the previous century you would have seen it was the name of a type of grapefruit whose parental seeds were brought to the West Indies by a Captain Philip Shaddock. However a couple of botany researchers published a paper in 1987 ( "Mystery of the forbidden fruit: Historical epilogue on the origin of the grapefruit, Citrus paradisi (Rutaceae) by J. Kumamoto et al.") that shows a paper trail back to the original spelling of the name, Chaddock, not Shaddock. It was also popularly known as the shattuck fruit, another variant name. The shaddock or shattuck fruit  should have been called chaddock, or perhaps chaddocke or chadock, since these are other spellings of Captain Philip Chaddock's name! 


See the narrative Captain Chaddocks and the Forbidden Fruit for the complete story.

Philip Chaddock's Y-DNA does not match any Shaddocks that have been tested against him. At this time we have not found a genetic link between Chaddocks and Shaddocks. I believe this is a case where two similar sounding names with completely different family genealogies have been confounded. But we will have to wait until a lot more DNA evidence comes in.

One last thought. If you look at the Chaddock name distribution in the U.K. in the graphic above, you will see that it was possible there was a flow of migrants north or south between the Midlands and south western England. Only further DNA studies will determine if this was historically the case.

DNA Testing Separates Shattockes and Parrishs (and Byars or Byas)
In Shaddocks, Shaddicks and Shattucks who have been Y-DNA tested, numerous individuals with the surnames "Parrish, Byers, Byars and Byas" show up as matches, meaning they are closely related to our family. By "closely" I mean in the past 900 years. They are our very distant cousins, people we are more closely related to than all the other human beings on the planet. Advanced SNP testing has shown we share a common ancestor with them who lived about 1300 AD. We do not have next generation SNP results for Byas and its variants, but the evidence so far is that they branched off of Parrishs. SNP studies suggest that the common ancestor between the Shattockes and Parrishs lived about 1300 AD. Given that surnames did not arise until about 1400 among our ancestors, that probably means when it came to adopt surnames, at least one ancestor chose Shattock or Shattocke while at least one other chose Parrish. 

The R-Y16884 branch (aka clade)  of the human family that formed about 4300 years ago includes both Shattockes and Parrishs The YFull SNP interpretation service has assigned the Parrishs who have tested to the subclade R-Y16884, called R-A8033. It is important to note that the formation of this subclade is estimated from Parrishs who have tested so far. It says that they had a common ancestor who lived about 1450 AD. 

I should make clear that only a small number of people with the surname "Byas, Byers, Byars or Parrish" are our genetic cousins. The majority of their descendants  actually come from a mixed background, meaning they are not genetic cousins. The Parrish surname arose from genetically unrelated people from different regions of England and France, who adopted the Paris or Parrish surname. 

The following phylogenetic tree shows how the Parrish family branched, according to the individuals who have been tested so far. The branch that has been tested have a common ancestor who lived about 1450 AD.

The Parrish name is very rare in the earliest Devon, Somerset and Dorset records suggesting their origin may be from points north of Devon. Another curious fact is that A8033 Parrishs have so far only appeared in DNA tests to be from Virginia in the 17th century. No English, Austrailian or Canadian matches have been shown up so far.  According to the YFull analysis the R-A8033 Parrishs branched again about 1800. The phylogenetic tree shows remarkable parallels between the DNA studies and the study of genealogical documents. 
 
Further testing is required.

Exploring Older Family Connections

I did a study of the more distant relatives of Shattockes and Parrishs that I found as 67 level YDNA matches on FTDNA.

I have added their genetic markers to the spreadsheet, at the bottom, in a group titled "Z36 Matches (before 1300 AD)." The spreadsheet can be downloaded using the usual link.

I have highlighted the genetic markers (STRs) that are different than those of my close genetic cousins in my spreadsheet,  who I define as descended from a common ancestor ca. 1300 AD. (They are the Shattockes and Parrishs.) The orange colored highlighted markers are genetic markers the seven FTDNA matches share with some but not all Shattockes and Parrishs. The dark grey markers are those they do not share with Shattockes or Parrishs. The green highlighted markers indicate signature markers.

I have built a phylogenetic tree from the DNA results. The phylogenetic tree shows the familial relationships suggested by the genetic markers.

The first assumption I make is that the matches belong to the same human family as the Shattockes and Parrishs: Z36. I think that is a safe assumption. They are 67 level matches with us and we know through Big Z testing that we belong to the Z36 branch, which formed about 4500 years ago. In fact I think they belong to the same sub-branch of Z36, Y16889. The assumption is based on the fact they show up as 67 level matches and have a significant number of matching STRs that they share with Shattockes and Parrishs.

The second thing I am sure about is that they do not share a common ancestor with us in the time frame 1300 AD to the present. It may be 300 hundred years previously (1000 AD) or as many as 4500 years earlier. But because they are 67 level matches with us, it is more likely our common great grandfather lived closer to 1000 AD than 2500 BC. The reason why I think the common ancestor with them is before 1300 will be explained shortly.

Many of the orange markers might seem to suggest a close relationship, but I think this is a case of parallel mutations. In other words, by chance their ancestors had some of the same mutations as we did. In other words most of the markers highlighted in orange were not inherited from common ancestors with us.

This is not true of DYS390=24. All seven of these distant genetic relatives are DYS390=24 while Shattockes and Parrishs are DYS390=23. This genetic marker is the key marker. The Shattocke and Parrish common ancestor lost a repeat for this marker sometime before 1300 AD. The other reason that makes me sure they do not share a common ancestor before 1300 is because they do not have the signature markers held by Shattockes and Parrishs.

Important to note is that YFull identifies DYS390 as a Z36 marker. This strengthens the case for our new distant relatives being Celtic! 
DYS458 is also a Z36 marker according to YFull. 

I have indicated the markers that I think segment our new (or rather old!) distant relatives into separate branches. Of course, if I add additional results to the table in the future, the branching may be refined or corrected. 

The Rarity of the Shattocke Name and Its Variants
I did a study of the 1891 England Census. Using a family household as my basic unit, I counted how many Shaddicks, Shaddocks or other variant surname households there were in England in that year. There were 71 households in the entire England. Here are the tabulated results:

The surprise is that there were only 71 households in England. We know that a huge number of the families dispersed around the world from the 17th through the 19th century, particularly to North America and Australia. The largest number of households were in Devon, with 21 households, followed by London with 18, and 7 households in each of Dorset and Somerset. Fifty-four or just over three quarters of the family lived south of London, even after the industrial revolution in farming made farm labourers and cottage workers leave largely agricultural Devon and Somerset, literally for greener pastures in the new world. A study of earlier census records showed that Londoners who said they were born in London were from families that had relatively recently migrated from Devon or Somerset. Indeed there are Shaddock households in Yorkshire that originated from Burrington, my own branch of the family's departure point for Canada.

On following Diaspora page of this site, I present a table that shows just how rare the Shattocke name, including its variants really are. A study at the University College London (UCL) shows that there were about 11,500 descendants of Shattockes in 2005. That is .00000017% of the world's population of 6.49 billion people. 

Is there an explanation for the rarity of the surname and the lack of a wide number of genetic cousins like the Parrishs and Byers? I decided to look elsewhere for an explanation. I researched populations dynamics between 1300 AD and 1550 AD. Here is what I found:

Pre-industrial populations had low reproductive capacities.
  • 20 percent of couples would have no children surviving them
  • 20 percent would have only daughters surviving them
  • 60 percent would have one son survive them
Estimates of the average family size is between 3.5 and 4.5. The consensus is that the smaller size was more probable. The practice of legal “maintenance agreements, “ where a couple beyond their reproductive years contracted with another person to look after them until their death in exchange for property rights yields an interesting statistic. Over half the agreements were with people unrelated to the retired peasants. This suggests over half of peasants had no surviving children.

This rate probably improved in the 12th and 13th century but in the early 14th century famines and diseases swept through the English countryside. The earliest recorded incidence of the bubonic plague was in 1348 in Dorset from an immigrant from Gascony. Dorset is next door to Somerset and Devon where our family originated. Estimates of mortality are 50% in the first wave of the plague and 20% in the decades that followed for a cumulative total of 60%. Two out of three people who would have descended from our common ancestor were wiped out.

I have not done the math for the expected expansion of the number of descendants from that couple who gave birth to the common ancestor between Shattockes, Parrishs and possibly Byars / Byers, but this might explain why our DNA results only show three groups of surnames, Shattockes, Parrishs and Byars / Byers. And it might explain why there are so few Shattockes in the early records. Finally it might explain why I have been having success recently connecting far-flung branches of the Shattocke families together using both genealogical and genetic research tools. I did explore an hypothesis hat an immigrant family arrived in Devon / Somerset in the 15th or 16th century. But now it seems YFULL (the SNP interpretation service) analysis of the SNP evidence and my own analysis of the STR evidence is pointing to another immigrant to southern England whose presence explains the low number of Shattockes and our Parrish cousins in the world. That immigrant was was a seaman who arrived at Weymouth, Dorset, from Gascony in June 1348. He was carrying the bubonic plague. 

Here is something else to consider. The ancient form of the name, either "Shattocke" or "Shatticke," does not appear to be descriptive and cannot be traced by etymology to a place, occupation or other obvious human feature or activity, or a feature or activity of the natural world. Almost all etymologists consider it to be or German origin. We come from a very specific place, Devon and Somerset. So while the theory of a recent (i.e. around 1450) immigration of a "Shattocke" family to England might is still plausible. However if it is not be the case, perhaps it can be said that the Shattockes that carry the name down to the present are members of a single founding family around the 14th century. And we are the handful of survivors of black plagues, of English civil war, of religious persecution, of crop failures and economic turbulence. Aren't we lucky to have such a rare and unique last name? It makes the job of re-establishing the family's shared history so much easier than names like Smith or London. 

On the following page of this site, The Diaspora, I discuss the modern distribution of the family throughout the world. 

When Did Our Celtic Ancestor Arrive?

A study conducted by Kees Recourt, an expert on the Z36 clade, adds some evidence for a migration of our ancestors to England in the period 350 AD to 1550 AD. He used a spreadsheet created by Tim Janzen, which calculates the time to the most recent common ancestor. Kees cautions that the information may change as more people submit their DNA results and as the calculations themselves are refined.

R36 Distribution of Descendants (closest relatives blue lines)



Here is what Kees says about his map:

First, the “Time to the Most Recent Common Ancestor” (TMRCA) was calculated for specific geographical regions (green numbers). Apparently, the TMRCA value of Switzerland is the oldest (1500 BC), suggesting the largest genetic diversity and thus the most likely homeland for our R-Z36 ancestral family. Hot spot regions in Germany (350 BC) and Northern Italy (650 BC) appear younger in age.

Further, it seems that major migrations of R-Z36 subhaplogroups appeared at least during two different time periods. The first - about 500 BC- includes migrations to Northern Italy and Hungary (pink subgroup) and also Germany (light blue subgroup). A second migration at about 500 -1000 AD, concurred with the fall of the Roman Empire (dark blue, red, orange and subsets of the light blue haplogroup) at the onset of the Middle Ages. The relative old TMRCA (1000 BC) for the UK as a whole, may indicate that a number of continental migrations have occurred during various time periods."

Zoom in on the purple dots connected by purple lines in England. These are people, including Shattockes and Parrishs in Devon, who are our closest relatives among all the descendants of a common Z36 ancestor who lived most probably in Switzerland in the period 500 - 0 BC. Tibor Feher, one of the descendants and a student of genetic genealogy, theorizes that our common ancestors came over to England with the Romans sometime before 350 AD. He thinks they were pushed west and south by subsequent invasions. This is a possible theory. However this does not preclude the possibility that Shattockes were medieval immigrants to south western England. I still think the etymology of the name, the rarity of the surname and the geographical distributions of our ancestors favors the medieval immigration of our common ancestor.

One of the markers on the map, in the Shetland islands north of Scotland, marks the location of one of our very distant Z36 relatives. The descendant who tested traces his ancestors back to Laurence Strang born about 1680. I have entered his Y-DNA STR markers in a spreadsheet that compares markers among Shattockes, Parrishs and Byars. 

Tibor Feher has identified the SNP mutation that is shared with our very distant Z36 relatives as A7990 and estimates it is 64 generations back, falling in the period between 1 AD and 350 AD or the Roman era in England. If this SNP is not found in continental Europe, then the case for our ancestors arriving with the Romans will be strengthened considerably. At least it is good to know the theory will be tested in the future. I checked and we have that SNP.

There is additional evidence for a migration of a single family into Devon from our ancestral grounds. It comes from the analysis of the Devon DNA Project results at FTDNA (the testing company Family Tree DNA). The Devon DNA project is focussed on surnames of people who have ancestors who lived in the county of Devon, England. There are 515 members of the Devon DNA project. 

The Y-DNA results of 514 members of the project into haplogroups. Haplogroups is the scientific name for "branches" of the human family, so it is a useful way of categorizing people according to their DNA results. 

The oldest and largest branch of Devon ancestors belongs to the M269 haplogroup. About 440 of the 500 Devon testers belong to M269. As noted earlier, our family ancestors belong to that branch. 

P312 is a subclade (branch of) M269. (See on the map.) We belong to this subclade. Here is the significant point: Only 53 of the 514 Devon testers have ancestors who belong to this subclade. There are 102 testers who have not done advance testing to see what subclade of M269 they belong to, so it is likely the number is larger than 53.

Now let's come forward in time again and follow our ancestors to the next location. U152 is a subclade of P312 that migrated to roughly the German and Swiss Alps and down into Italy. It was formed about 4500 years ago. We are a member of this branch. Only 4 of the 514 members of the Devon DNA group are assigned to this subclade. Wow. This is pretty significant. Perhaps there are 2 or 3 other untested M269 testers who also belong to this subclade, but the resulting number is very small.

Of course the final migration was to the German and Swiss Alps and the founding of the La Tène culture about 4500 years. I am the single tester in the 514 people in the Devon DNA project who belongs to this subclade. 

What does this mean? I think it adds evidence to a theory that says Shattockes, Parrishs and Byars were not part of a mass migration of La Tène descendants to Devon. There must have been a single individual or single family that arrived in Devon. Unless plagues and families had a particularly devastating effect on our ancestors, it is quite possible our common ancestor was a relatively recent immigrant to England from continental Europe, somewhere between 1300 and 1500. Of course, it is also possible the migrant came from north or south of Devon. But the etymological study of the name suggests a recent German origin. And the DNA interpretation service YFull recently estimated our common ancestor lived in the year 1300. 

Does this analysis of the DNA data at the Devon DNA project prove that Shattockes, Parrishs and Byas's were immigrants to England about this time period? No, but it does provide some evidence to support that theory. If Shattockes and our genetic cousins were part of a large migration or invasion, or part of a steady trickle of migrants, we would expect a lot more U152 or Z36 DNA results to show up among the large sample (500+) of Devon descendants. But so far, I am the single individual who shows up as a Z36 Celtic immigrant to Devon among all Devon testers.

Y16884: a New Z36 Subclade That Defines Our Family



Click on the image to see the entire image.

The diagram above picks up the story of our family's history from about 2550 BC when our ancestors carrying the U152 mutation lived in or around Switzerland.

YFULL, an organization that interprets DNA results, reported on their study of the DNA sampled from me and several other members of the Shattocke family, as well as Parrish cousins. It declared we form a new branch of the human family tree. They found a mutation that is common on all our Y chromosomes. It is found at a location called "Y16884," shown at the top of the tree. YFULL estimates that man lived about 1300 AD.  

Subsequently their analysis showed that the Shattucks among those who have been tested form a new subclade called Y19751 after the SNP that they share. The Shattucks who have had their Big Y tests have a common ancestor around 1625, which happens to be roughly the birth year of William Shattuck (1621-1672), purported founder of all Shattucks in America.

The Big Y data has also been analyzed by Alex Williamson, and he divides the people who have been tested into two branches. Using STR data, I arrived at the diagram you see here.

The Story Continues
The next chapter of our story unfolds on the next page. A majority of the descendants of the Shattocke Celts who arrived in England to farm its fertile land in Devon and Somerset sometime in the Dark Ages or the early Medieval period would find themselves uprooted again by social and economic forces and scattered almost literally to the four corners of the earth. I call it The Diaspora.