Some genealogical problems seem destined never to be solved. However, the new Family Finder DNA analysis introduced by Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) in May 2010 solved a seemingly intractable problem that had resisted all efforts at solution for nearly 10 years.¹ Research involving all possible paper records, including even extensive research of several 19th-century Russian revision lists (census records) in the Kiev, Ukraine, archives had left a problem with no answer. The technique used to solve this problem not only is applicable to other similar problems, but also shows that the new Family Finder DNA analysis can be used imaginatively for more than simply finding cousins.

The Problem

On November 1, 1907, my father, Hyman Spector, then a 13-year-old orphan, landed at Ellis Island in the company of Yos (later Joe) Basovsky and his wife, Ruchla (later Rachel or Rose), and four of their seven children.² They emigrated on the Russian Volunteer Fleet’s Saratov. They all came from the shtetl of Pavoloch, 61 miles southwest of Kiev. Hyman’s elder sister had immigrated to Chicago earlier that year, and he went from New York directly to Chicago, not staying with the Basovsky family members who had settled in New York. Why did the Basovsky family take this orphaned child with them from Pavoloch to America? It was enough, certainly, for the Basovsky parents to look after and pay for four of their seven children. Why did they bring Hyman with them? The most logical and obvious answer is that Hyman must have been a relative.

For nearly 10 years I have been trying to determine if and how Hyman Spector was related to Joe or Rachel Basovsky. The name the Basovskys gave on the Saratov manifest as their closest friend or relative in Russia was someone named Spector. Although the given name is garbled, it clearly is meant to refer to a Kisil Spector who later immigrated to Philadelphia with his wife and several of their children. Research over the years revealed that Kisil was Hyman’s uncle. Establishing this fact, however, did not prove that Hyman was related to the Basovsky family.

Jennie Basovsky, one of the elder Basovsky children, had emigrated by herself earlier in 1907 and gone to Chicago. On the ship manifest, she listed Kiva Spector, a “cousin,” as her contact in Chicago. Again, research over the years proved that Kiva also was a relative of Hyman, a first cousin once removed. On the other hand, just because Jennie Basovsky was related to Kiva did not prove that Hyman was related to Joe or Rachel; Jennie may have been related to Kiva through the non-Spector side of his family—his mother, for example. Or Jennie may have been a blood relative of Kiva’s wife and only referred to him as a cousin because he was married to her blood cousin.

Over time I tracked down Sherry, a great-granddaughter of Joe and Rachel who lives in New York.³ We communicated for some years, and she told me about another Basovsky family to which she was not sure she was related. While Sherry and I were working on the Basovsky family genealogy, I was contacted by Robert, a member of a large Basovsky family also from Pavoloch.³ Robert has relatives in Canada and, apparently, is a member of the family Sherry had mentioned.

For several years, Robert and I worked to establish that his Basovsky family and Sherry’s Basovsky family were the same family. After all, if I were related to the Basovskys through Joe’s father, i.e., the Basovsky line, then Robert’s family would be a branch on my family tree. This surname is extremely unusual, and with both families coming from Pavoloch, we were sure that they were the same family. Despite our best efforts, we could not find the link. This was true even though Robert knew much of his family ancestry back to the early to middle 19th century, and I had researched the Basovsky family in the Russian revision lists for Pavoloch back to a patriarch born in the late 18th century.

After almost 10 years of research, I had exhausted every possible technique and known document relevant to answering my two questions: Was Hyman related to the Basovsky couple that brought him to America? Were the two Basovksy families one and the same? At least I thought I had exhausted all possible avenues of research.

Family Finder DNA Analysis

In May 2010, FTDNA introduced a new DNA analysis method, called Family Finder, that sweeps away many of the major limitations of the (relatively) old Y-DNA and mtDNA analyses.⁴ The older techniques can be used only to trace exclusively male (Y-DNA) or exclusively female lineages (mtDNA). According to FTDNA, the Family Finder analysis allows two people to determine if they are first, second, third, or fourth and possibly even fifth cousins.⁵ What is critical is that gender is immaterial, a radical departure from the requirements of Y-DNA and mtDNA analyses.

Like all DNA analyses, however, Family Finder does not always work, and, depending on the degree of closeness of two people, this technique will miss some relationships. The closer the relationship between two people, the greater the probability that the Family Finder test will confirm that relationship. Also, for certain genetic statistical reasons, some false positive identifications of relationship may occur.

The most obvious use of the Family Finder technique is to determine whether two people are cousins. I began to understand, however, that with the cooperation of Sherry and Robert, I could possibly determine, or make considerable progress in determining, not only whether my father was related to the couple that had brought him to America, but also to which of the two he was related. Since Sherry was descended from both Joe and Rachel, merely matching her DNA with mine would not reveal to which of her great-grandparents my father was related, if he were related to either one at all. Moreover, if I could determine that Robert’s extensive Basovsky family was a branch of my family tree, this would shed further light on precisely how my father was related to the couple who brought him to America (if he was so related).

Three-Way Cooperative Effort

If Sherry, Robert and I all had FTDNA run its Family Finder analysis on our DNA samples, the results might be most informative because, as discussed below, more could be learned from the three DNA results considered together than could be learned from just two alone. Both Sherry and Robert readily agreed to contribute DNA samples (as did I, of course).⁶ One of eight outcomes was possible. None of the three might be cousins or each of us might be a cousin of the other two.

• In the first case, I could conclude that Hyman was not related to Joe’s father, the two Basovsky families were not related, and I am not related to Robert.
• In the second case, we might find that the two Basovksy families are one and the same; Hyman was related to Joe’s father and thus to Robert’s branch of the family (which the DNA analysis comparing Sherry and Robert would also show). See Charts 1a and 1b.

Six other outcomes were possible depending on which DNA pairs showed a relationship and which did not.⁷ The two Basovksy families might be unrelated, but I might be related to Sherry. Such a result would not show if Hyman were related to Joe or Rachel. The analysis might show me unrelated to Sherry (and Hyman unrelated to Joe or Rachel) but that there is only one Basovsky family.

In fact, results revealed that I am related to Sherry but not to Robert, although Sherry and Robert are related. The Basovsky families, Sherry’s and Robert’s, are one and not two families. Since I am related to Sherry, but not Robert, Hyman must not have been related to Joe through his father; otherwise, I would be related to Robert, who is now known to be part of the same Basovsky family as Joe. See Chart 2.

Sherry and I are, in the language of FTDNA, “fourth to distant” cousins. The numerical specifics of the results are such that, according to FTDNA, we are definitely related, but FTDNA cannot assign a high enough confidence level to make a specific statement about our exact relationship.⁸ Even more can be determined about this relationship by combining the DNA results with previously known information developed over the years about Sherry’s and my ancestry. By using this information, certain relationships between Sherry and me either may be excluded, because the names of our ancestors are known, or may be rendered highly implausible, because certain relationships would almost certainly conflict with other known facts about our ancestral families.

The most likely relationship is that Sherry is my third cousin once removed, which means that Rachel, or Joe through his mother, was a first cousin of Hyman’s father.⁹ It is possible that our relationship is fourth cousins once removed, but this is less likely, based on other evidence not discussed here. (The DNA results are not precise; they encompass a range and are not classified in “once removed” categories. Thus, a third cousin once removed is consistent with “fourth to distant” cousin.)

Sherry and Robert are “fifth to distant” cousins; the most likely relationship, based on other paper genealogical information, is fifth cousin. Fifth cousins share a four times great-grandparent, which is consistent with a common ancestor in the early 19th century.

Conclusion

Through imaginative use of the Family Finder technique, we established not just that my father was related to the couple that had brought him to America, but specifically that he was not related to the father of the husband of the couple, i.e., not related through the Basovsky line. Moreover, two branches of a family that separated in the early 19th century were shown to be parts of the same family.

The search does not, however, end here. Since only three plausible ways exist in which Sherry and I can be third cousins once removed (based on our known ancestry), the possibility remains that we might be able to analyze the DNA of some of the descendants of Rachel’s four known siblings sometime in the future. If so, then I might determine exactly the relationship between Rachel and my father (or at least narrow the possibilities). I have found some of these living descendants; my next step, hopefully, is to enlist their participation in a cooperative DNA venture.

Notes

1. www.familytreedna.com
2. The actual name on the manifest was “Bassovsky,” one of four spellings found for this surname in various rec­ords. The more common spellings are “Basovsky,” used in this article, and “Basofsky.” The spelling “Bassofsky” can also be found.
3. Due to a name change in an earlier generation in one case, and a female Basovksy ancestor in the other case, neither Sherry nor Robert bears the surname Basovsky.
4. Y-DNA refers to the DNA in the Y chromosome found only in males and passed down the generations from father to son. It often may be useful in determining if two males share a common ancestor along their exclusively male ancestral lines. On the other hand, mtDNA refers to the DNA in the mitochondria of the cell and, although it exists in both male and female cells, it is always passed down from the mother.
5. For answers to an extensive set of frequently asked questions about the Family Finder DNA analysis, see www.tinyurl.com/2weopdk.
6. The procedure for obtaining DNA for Family Finder analysis, just as for other genetic DNA analyses, involves a cheek swab and not a blood sample.
7. Some possible outcomes would make no sense: for example, if I were related to Robert but not to Sherry, and Sherry were not related to Robert. This could only happen if my father were somehow not related to the couple that brought him to America but related to another Basovsky family for which absolutely no genealogical evidence of a relationship has emerged.
8. According to the material on the FTDNA website, Longest Block is the largest DNA segment in centiMorgans that a person and his or her match share. Segments greater than 10 cM are indicative of definite shared ancestry in the genealogical time frame, and DNA segments between 5 and 10 cM indicate likely shared ancestry within the genealogical time frame (see Note 5, above). Sherry and I share a block of 10.08 cM. Sherry’s and Robert’s longest shared block is 7.94 cM.
9. As sometimes happens, Sherry and I have a generational mismatch. Although we are approximately the same age, she belongs to a generation younger than mine.

Richard M. Spector is a retired attorney. Working for more than a decade, he has found more than 1,600 relatives, some born in the early 18th century. He has contributed a number of articles to AVOTAYNU and is immediate past president of the Jewish Genealogy Society of Cleveland.