Site map
A History of Preston in Hertfordshire
Contiguous DNA relationships
Contiguous by Bren Unwin
Bren Unwin of Preston Green
Sarah Anne Tyler of Tewin, Herts
Philip Wray, webmaster of Preston History, Herts
This is a saga of discovery.
Bren first wrote to me in 2013. She was in the process of changing the name of her new home at
Preston Green and wondered whether there was any reason not to go ahead with her plans.
We met briefly in 2015 when I was selling copies of A History of Preston in Hertfordshire from beside
the well at Preston Green. I was with my daughter, Colette when I next saw Bren. I was giving Col a
tour of the village and as we passed Bren’s cottage, I saw a shadow move, wiggled my fingers and
the front door swung open. Framed in the doorway was a lady with a suspicious look on her face. It
‘said’, ‘who are you and what do you want’.
It transpired that we both had ancestors who lived in the village of Tewin in Hertfordshire. Bren was
descended from the Perry family who lived at Lower Green and my greatx 2 grandparents, Robert
and Jane Wray were born at Tewin in the 1780’s, married and brought up their children there at Upper
Green.
Not surprisingly, newspaper reports revealed that the Perrys and the Wrays knew each other:
28 January 1862
13 December 1864
I then browsed Tewin records to see if there were any other connections between the two families -
such as being witnesses at weddings - but found nothing.
And there the matter lay - until the evening of 27 November 2025.
Curiosity often leads to browsing the internet - when being occasionally playful, the goddess
Serendipity smiles benignly on the searcher. For the first time in several months, I idly checked my
DNA matches at Ancestry.co.uk. I entered Tewin to see how many of my matches had connections to
the village. There were a handful. I then added the surname ‘Perry’ to the search - not expecting to
find ‘a hit’. But there was one - to a Sarah Tyler who was born in 1972 and was living in Hertfordshire.
I quickly found her address as 16 Upper Green Road, Tewin.
This is a stone’s throw from the house in which my Wray ancestors lived. Sarah is obviously
interested in her ancestry because she added a well-researched family tree. It was then that my gob
was well and truly smacked. In her tree was a Wray and a Perry. She had descended from both
families:
Shown above is Sarah Tyler’s abbreviated tree. It shows her ancestors, Daniel and Ann Marie Perry
(who are Bren’s greatx 2 grandparents) and Ann Wray who was the daughter of my greatx4
grandparents, Henry and Anne Wray, which means that they are Sarah’s greatx5 grandparents. This
is corroborated by the match between Sarah and myself which is a low 10 centimorgans.
The Tylers have lived at Tewin since at least 1791 (when Joseph Tyler was born there). Between
2011 and 2017 fifteen adult Tylers were living in the village at seven different addresses. The Perrys
and the Tylers were often reported together in newspapers either for petty crimes or local
competitions such as the following, from November 1884.
This article demonstrates the power of DNA genealogy to reveal historical connections that
documentary evidence alone cannot establish.
Of how two unrelated families living cheek by jowl 150 years ago, networked together in a way that
transcended formal kinship because their DNA converged in one woman,
Sarah Tyler of Tewin, Herts.
Sarah shares DNA segments of two people that are contiguous though from separate family lines.
Conclusion
This discovery powerfully demonstrates what DNA genealogy can reveal when documentary evidence
reaches its limits. Two unrelated families, the Perrys and the Wrays, lived in Tewin in the nineteenth
century and clearly knew each other—newspaper records confirm this beyond doubt. Yet no blood
relationship connects them.
Over 150 years later, a routine DNA search uncovered something remarkable: Sarah Tyler carries
genetic material from both families. The segments of DNA she shares with you and Bren are
contiguous—unbroken stretches inherited from common ancestors—yet they arrived through entirely
separate family lines. She stands as tangible proof of the social networks that bound Tewin together,
networks that transcended formal kinship and remained invisible until modern genetic science made
them visible.
This convergence—of meticulous family history research, DNA testing, and historical
documentation—demonstrates what becomes possible when these tools work in concert. It offers a
compelling model for how local history can be recovered and understood in the twenty-first century.
COUNTY MAGISTRATES, Jan 18. James Presland and Charles Wray were charged with stealing a
mattock, the property of Mrs. Cannon, of Tewin. — P.C. Hill said: On the 11th inst. I received
information from Mrs. Cannon that the mattock was stolen: went to Wray and asked him where his
tools were, and he said “behind some bushes:” went there, but did not find the one missing: soon after
word was sent to me from Welwyn police office that if I examined the ground I should find the
mattock: I went to the place stated, looked, and found it buried in the ground: went to a field at
Tewin-bury and charged Presland with stealing the mattock; he said he found it in a field, covered
with grass, and James Perry was with him at the time: went to Perry and he said he had never been in
company with Presland in his life when a mattock was found. — Wray said he bought it of Presland
and he had had it about two months. — Mr. Cannon said, they lost it about the 5th of Nov, and he
identified the one produced by a certain mark. — Presland said, he found the tool in a warren, covered
with bushes, and Wray said, they always hid their own tools at night when they left off work. — P.C.
Hill said, the other tools were covered with thorns or long grass, but this mattock was buried in the
ground. There was no direct evidence against the men, and the bench dismissed the case: it was
however a very proper one for investigation.
COUNTY MAGISTRATES, Dec. 3. — Geo. Perry and Robt. Wray, of Tewin, were charged with
trespassing in search of game on land belonging to Earl Cowper, in the parish of Tewin. Chas. North, a
lad employed by Mr. Day, of Tewin, said, that about 7 a.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 23rd, he was at his
master’s, heard a gun go off, saw Perry and Wray jump a fence, and the former stoop and pick up
three or four somethings; he was about 100 yards off. — Mr. Armstrong, who defended Perry, after
speaking of the “pert” manner in which the boy gave his evidence, and of its unsatisfactory manner,
&c., explained that Perry’s brother fired off the gun at his own house. The bench, without hearing
witnesses for the defence, dismissed the case.
Charles Stoker, Henry Jackson, Thomas Perry, and Joseph Tyler, all of Tewin, were summoned by Mr.
R. S. Knapman, the landlord of the Cowper Arms, Welwyn Railway Station, for being drunk and
disorderly on Sept. 4th.
Mr. Barker, solicitor, of Hitchin, prosecuted, and Mr. Wells, of St. Albans, was for the defence.
Matthew Reeves, ostler for Mr. Knapman, stated that on Thursday evening, Sept. 4, about 7 o’clock,
the four defendants drove up to the Cowper Arms in a cart, and one of them called for a quart of ale.
Witness took it out to them, when one of them asked him to pour it out. He poured a glass out and
handed it to Tyler, who tried to throw it over him. Witness poured another glassful out and he drank
part of it. Perry then got up from the bottom of the cart and asked for the ostler. Witness told him that
he was the ostler, and Perry then said “You are the — that helped to put me out the other day.”
Witness said “Yes, I was there.” All four defendants then got out of the cart and stripped. Witness said
“Stop, you have not paid for the ale yet.” Tyler then gave him a shilling to pay for it, and he took the
jug and glasses into the house and went back and gave him sixpence change. All four defendants then
got round him and tried to strike him, but he ran up the yard and tried to fasten the gates, but they
forced their way through and ran after him and threw stones and pieces of wood at him. He ran into
the stable and fastened himself in, when Stocker went to the window with a large piece of wood
(produced). Witness remained in the stable until he thought the defendants had gone. They were all
drunk. Witness helped to put Perry out the previous Thursday