The five individuals in this lineage clearly all have the same ancestor, Gregory FAUX
of Croxton near Thetford, Norfolk, England who was born about 1618 likely at
nearby Mundford.  
Lineage 1 A pertains to the descendants of the above Gregory's
eldest son
Gregory FAUX Jr., born 1641.  The most recent common ancestor for the
two participants in this lineage is
Thomas FAUX born 1739 in Thetford.   His sons
Joseph FAUX born circa 1780 and Benjamin FAUX born circa 1782 are the ancestors
of participants 15060 and 9330 respectively.  There have been 5 genetic
"transmission events" from Gregory FAUX Sr. to Thomas FAUX during which a
mutation could occur before the lines of the Kit Numbers 9330 and 15060 diverged.  
Then, at that point there were 5 "transmission events" from Thomas FAUX via son
Benjamin FAUX to Kit Number 9330; and 7 "transmission events" between Thomas
FAUX via son Joseph FAUX to Kit Number 15060.

On the other hand,
Lineage 1 B does not connect with the other two until their
ancestor in common, Gregory FAUX Sr. via his youngest son
Thomas FAUX, born
1642.  There have been 10 "transmission events" (father to son) in the interval
between Gregory FAUX Sr. via son Thomas FAUX and Kit Numbers 17579 as well
as 33685 (participant 1336 is the son of 17579).  These individuals are all
descendants of
Charles Warren Clarke FAUX born 1814 - their most recent common
ancestor, and are both 3 "transmission events" removed from this man.  Kit
Number 90024 is a descendant of the brother of the above Charles Warren Clarke
Emmanel FAUX, born 1823 - and is 4 transmission events from this ancestor.  
This knowledge is needed in order to understand the likely origin of the mutational
differences between the five participants.

An inspection of the 37 marker (Y-STR, short tandem repeats) information on the
"data page" on this site indicates that the two descendants of Thomas FAUX (born
1739), despite a total of 12 transmission events only differ on one marker (in the
second panel of 13 markers) which is not shared with members of the other lineage
and is doubtless an event that occurred in the line leading from Joseph FAUX (since
the line from Benjamin matches all the Lineage 1 B individuals where marker
DYS449 = 29).  Specifically, there is one mutational difference between Kit Number
15060 who has DYS449 = 29; and kit # 15060 who has DYS449 = 28.  It is concluded
that the ancestral number of STRs is 29 at marker DYS449.  Now the other two
markers where there is a mutational difference will be examined.   

DYS439, the value is 14 found in the two descendants of Gregory FAUX
Jr. and 12 in 17579 but 13 in 33685 and 90024, descendants of Thomas FAUX born
1642.  Since it is statistically rare for a two step mutation (i.e., 12 to 14) to occur, the
most parsimonious interpretation is that the ancestral form is 13 and there has been
a one step mutational increase in the Grregory FAUX Jr. line, and a one step
decrease in one branch of the Thomas FAUX (born 1642) line.  As to when this event
occurred - for the Lineage 1A it would have happened prior to Thomas FAUX (born
1739); and for Lineage 1B, it occurred subsequent to Charles Warren Clarke FAUX
(born 1814) in the son Robert FAUX line and so is relatively recent.  

As to the last difference between the five participants, both individuals likely
descending from Gregory FAUX Jr. have
DYS390 = 24; and one participant (17579)
and his son who descend via Thomas FAUX (born 1642) have a value of 25; while
the second cousin of 17579, 33685 as well as the more distantly removed 90024 have
the same value of 24 as the two descendants of Gregory FAUX Jr.  The most
parsimonious interpretation is that 24 is the ancestral value and the 25 mutation was
introduced between Charles Warren Clarke FAUX and his great - grandson 17579.  
Thus it would appear that this branch has seen two mutation occur in three
"transmission events" - between second cousins.

The Y-DNA has been upgraded to 37 markers.  Here Kit 9330 and Kit 1336
mismatch by one step on
DYS576 (16 versus 17) and DYS570 (18 versus 17).  It was
hoped that the last 13 markers for participant 33685 would help to resolve which of
these alternatives is ancestral.  The data, now available, is quite unusual.  All
markers in this panel match except the above two, but to complicate things further,
33685 does not match either 9330 or 1336.  Here DYS576 = 18, and DYS570 = 19.  
Adopting the most parsimonious view and that is that the mutations are at the one
step level, then the ancestral haplotype on these two markers is 17, 18.  This
interpretation was supported when it was determined that 90024 has this motif.  
Clearly, 90024's
DYS391 = 12 is an unusual  recent mutation on a "slow" marker.

This line of reasoning has allowed the Project Administrator to construct the
ancestral haplotype of Gregory FAUX Sr.
, which is shown graphically on the spread
sheet accessed via the data page.  
Kit Number 90024 most closely matches this
pattern, only deviating at a single marker - DYS391

What is also striking is that despite descriptions of high rates of exrta - marital
daliances, adoptions, "illegitimate" births in some families, in all four branches of
this Faux lineage, in 10 generations or more, and 46 transmission events where
breaks in the biological line could have occurred, there have not been any "non -
paternal events".

Another type of testing is for "deep" or "ancient" ancestry of informative markers
on the Y-chromosome.  Here single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) testing of 1336
showed that he tested positive for M269 and so is classified as R1b1b2 (where a
nucleotide base such as adenine was changed at this location from the ancestral
version).  In addition, subclade testing revealed that 1336 (and therefore all in
Lineage 1) was also positive at the S116 / P312 marker position, and and as well
/ U152
and therefore is placed in the phylogenetic category of R1b1b2h or R-U152 as a
shorthand version.  Testing was done by EthnoAncestry, Family Tree DNA,
deCODEme and 23ANDme with the same finding on each occasion.  Most recently,
Family Tree DNA found that 1336 was
L2+, a marker downstream of U152.  It is
with this information along with place of origin of the family that one can provide a
detailed story of the Y-chromsome and hence the Faux family back through history
and pre-history.
Despite many years of diligent genealogical inquiry, the participant with kit # 13,015
has not been able to find solid documentation to go much beyond the beginning of the
1800s.  What is known is that Thomas FAUX (FOWKES) and his wife Maria baptised
a number of children at Burton Upon Trent, Staffordshire, England - son William
(baptised 1822) being the ancestor of the above participant.  At present the
participant is looking into the possibly that Thomas was from Leicestershire.

Based on the DNA evidence one thing that can be said with certainty: the participant
with kit #13,015 is unrelated to those from Suffolk and Norfolk.  For this reason he is
assigned to Lineage 2.  More markers will be needed to obtain information about
possible deep ancestral ties, as well as R1b1c subclade YSNP testing.
To Project
Faux Lineage 1 Deep Ancestry (Danish
The participant with kit # 95342 traces his line to one Francis FAULKS born 1809,
son of William FAULKS in Hinckley, Leicestershire.  It is likely that the family
resided there during earlier generations.

The Y-DNA results show that the participant's haplogroup is I1c (as denominated
by the testing company FTDNA), but in today's parlance (the 2007 ISOGG YSNP
Tree) he would be I1b2a.  One person who has studied all branches of haplogroup
"I" has determined that this participant fits very clearly into the I1b2a -
Continental - 1 variety, "whose center of population frequency is Netherlands to
Denmark via northwest Germany."

An inspection of match patterns in the FTDNA and other databases suggests that
this participant's early ancestors likely came from Southern Sweden or Denmark.  
The most likely "time of arrival" would be with the "Great Army" of Danes who
settled in the Leicestershire area in the late 9th Century.

Considering that there are matches in Switzerland this points to the possibility
that, despite very different haplogroup assignments, this participant and those of
Lineage 1 may share the same North Jutland, Cimbri tribe link.  See Lineage 1 for
more detailed information.  It is also possible, considering the findings from a
Bronze Age cave in Litchenstein, Saxony, Germany that this haplotype has been in
the Saxon areas of Germany for many thousands of years.  It will be necessary to
compare the haplotype data from the participant with the haplotypes obtained via
ancient DNA testing in this care in order to arrive at a more reasoned hypothesis
about the origin of this lineage in England.  The data is in fact available and will be
explored for possible connections to the present participant's haplotype.