Unravelling the origins of Alpha Hughes

This post continues Alpha’s story by turning to the question of her father. In Part 1, I set out the documentary and DNA evidence that clarifies Alpha’s maternal origins within the Hughes–Montgomery family. If you haven’t read Part 1, you can find it here: LINK

With Alpha’s maternal origins now clarified, this post turns to the question of her father. Unlike the maternal line, this part of the investigation rests on a specific working hypothesis, developed by testing how well different paternal scenarios fit the DNA evidence, family networks, and historical context.

What follows is not a definitive answer, but a reasoned assessment of the most plausible candidate, showing how the evidence supports — or challenges — that conclusion at each step.

Returning to the DNA evidence

The working hypothesis explored here grew directly out of the DNA analysis described in the previous post, where the results from three of Alpha’s descendants were examined side by side. Rather than focusing on individual matches, the analysis looked for patterns — groups of people who matched all three testers and also matched one another.

Across all three testers, shared matches consistently fell into two distinct ancestral clusters:

The Hughes–Montgomery cluster, which aligns with Alpha’s birth certificate and underpins the maternal conclusions already reached.
The Edgar–Rundle cluster, which points to Alpha’s paternal ancestry and forms the focus of this post.

Together, these clusters narrow the field dramatically. While they do not, on their own, name Alpha’s father, they point to a small number of historically plausible scenarios.

Considering alternative paternal scenarios

Before examining the preferred explanation, it is important to acknowledge that the DNA evidence allows for more than one possible paternal pathway. In communities where families lived in close proximity over several generations, shared matches can reflect multiple relationships within the same social and geographic network.

In Alpha’s case, the DNA results show two strong and clearly defined paternal clusters: one centred on the Edgar family, and another on the Rundle family. Each cluster is internally consistent and substantial in its own right.

On that basis, three broad paternal scenarios were considered:

A direct connection through the Edgar family.
A direct connection through the Rundle family.
An overlapping connection involving both families, arising from known or undocumented relationships between them.

Only one formal marriage between these families is recorded, but the possibility of additional, unrecorded relationships cannot be excluded. The task, therefore, is not to dismiss alternatives prematurely, but to test which explanation best fits all of the available evidence with the fewest assumptions.

Focusing on Alpha’s paternal line

The Edgar and Rundle families are formally linked through the marriage of Halbert James Edgar (born 1852) and Elizabeth Rundle (born 1857), who married in 1881 at Deniliquin, New South Wales. This documented connection provides a critical anchor point for interpreting the DNA evidence.

Part 1: The Edgar family

The Edgar line begins with:

Halbert James Edgar (1823–1869), born at Moffat, Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland
Margaret Mary Burgess (1823–1887), also born at Moffat

They married in 1844 and emigrated to Australia in about 1853 with their young family. The Edgars initially settled in Victoria, where Halbert died in 1869. Margaret later moved north into New South Wales, dying at Euabalong in 1887.

Through their children, the Edgar family became established across inland Victoria and New South Wales, forming connections with other settler families of the central west — including the Rundles.

What the DNA matches show — the Edgar family

DNA matches with descendants of Halbert and Margaret (Burgess) Edgar

Colour-coding is used to distinguish the different branches of the family. Individuals shown in red are DNA matches, and the numbers beside their names show how much DNA they share with Alpha’s child and with each of her two grandchildren, measured in centimorgans (cM).

This layout makes it easy to compare how DNA is shared across generations and to see how the Edgar connections cluster together. For example, the sixth line shows a match who is a child of Kenneth and a third great-grandchild of Halbert and Margaret Edgar. This person shares 220 cM with Alpha’s child, 194 cM with one grandchild, and 105cM with the other. Variations like this are expected and reflect how DNA is inherited differently by each descendant.

The DNA results from all three testers form a strong and coherent cluster tracing back to the Edgar family, as shown in the first chart. The pattern is not confined to a single descendant line but appears across multiple branches and generations. The size of the shared DNA is particularly informative. Repeated centimorgan (cM) values at the 3× and 4× great-grandchild level occur across all three testers. Matches of this magnitude are inconsistent with a distant or incidental connection and indicate that Alpha’s father belongs within this part of the Edgar family.

Just as important is the distribution of those matches. Edgar descendants appear through more than one child, producing the broad, overlapping pattern expected when multiple sibling lines contribute to the DNA signal. This genetic pattern aligns closely with the documentary record, particularly the Edgar–Rundle marriage discussed below.

Part 2: The Rundle family

The second major paternal cluster connects to the Rundle family.

Richard Rundle (1833–1897) was born at St Blazey, Cornwall.
Elizabeth Williams (1835–1904) was born at Swansea, Wales.

They married in South Australia in 1855. Their children were born across South Australia, Victoria, and New South Wales, reflecting the family’s gradual movement east. By the mid-1870s, the Rundles were firmly established in the Deniliquin district, where Richard and Elizabeth both died. The Rundle children formed a large and widely dispersed sibling group, with descendants spread across several Australian states — a pattern that explains the strength and persistence of the Rundle DNA cluster.

What the DNA matches show — the Edgar–Rundle branch

DNA matches with descendants of Richard and Elizabeth (Williams) Rundle

This layout makes it easy to compare how DNA is shared across generations and to see how the Rundle connections cluster together. For example, the sixth line shows a match who is a child of Kenneth and a third great-grandchild of Richard and Elizabeth Rundle. This person shares 220 cM with Alpha’s child, 194 cM with one grandchild, and 105cM with the other. Variations like this are expected and reflect how DNA is inherited differently by each descendant.

When the DNA results are considered together, the strongest signal centres on the Edgar–Rundle branch, as illustrated in the second chart.

The most striking feature is the consistently high cM values among descendants of Elizabeth Rundle and Halbert Edgar, particularly at the 3× great-grandchild level. Multiple matches in the range of approximately 190–280 cM are shared independently by all three testers. This degree of sharing points to a close ancestral connection within this branch.

The breadth of the cluster further strengthens this conclusion. Matches appear through several descendant lines, including lines where intermediate generations remain unidentified. Additional, slightly smaller matches descending from Thomas Rundle follow the same structural pattern and confirm that the DNA signal reflects a broader family network rather than a single individual.

To maintain clarity, only matches sharing 40 cM or more are shown in the charts. Lower-level matches are present and consistent with the same pattern but add little additional resolution at this stage.

Taken together, the size, consistency, and multi-branch distribution of the DNA matches, combined with the documented marriage of Elizabeth Rundle and Halbert Edgar, strongly indicate that Alpha’s father belongs within this Edgar–Rundle branch of the family. It is this conclusion that underpins the working hypothesis examined in the sections that follow.

What this means for identifying Alpha’s father

The children of Halbert James Edgar and Elizabeth Rundle can be reconstructed from New South Wales civil registrations and related records. Together, these documents show a family closely associated with the western districts of New South Wales, particularly Hillston, Cobar, Condobolin, and surrounding areas, from the early 1880s through the early twentieth century.

Their eldest surviving child, Halbert Richard Edgar, was born on 2 December 1881 at Hillston. He married Frieda Emelia Gerlach on 12 October 1905 at Cobar. Halbert Richard lived much of his adult life in western New South Wales and died at Cobar on 7 November 1956, aged 74.

The second child, Rennick Harold Edgar (sometimes recorded as Renwick), was born on 7 May 1884 at Hillston. His birth in far-western New South Wales, followed by marriage in Rockley in 1905 and death in Sydney on 29 April 1914 at the age of 30, indicates that he travelled more extensively within New South Wales than his older brother.

Another son, Leslie Rain Edgar, was born in 1886 at Cobar. He married Rosalind Grace Hayward in 1910 at Cobar. Leslie later lived in Sydney and died on 12 October 1957 at , aged 71.

The family also experienced early deaths. Llewellyn John Edgar, born in 1888 at Cobar, died in childhood in 1892 at Nymagee. Elsie Alice Edgar, born in 1901 at Condobolin, died at St Leonards in 1921 at the age of 20. No marriage has been identified for Elsie.

Several daughters and sons survived to adulthood. Margaret Elizabeth Edgar, born in 1890 at Cobar, lived until 1970 and died at Albury. Jean Isabel Edgar, born on 28 April 1904 at Hillston, lived to the age of 85 and died in 1989 at Gilgandra. Valmai Lillian Edgar, born in 1908 at Condobolin, lived into the late twentieth century, dying in 1999.

Another son, Lynn Alexander Edgar, was born in 1893 at Cobar. He married Christina Minnie Lyons in 1919 at Ashfield and died at Kogarah on 14 September 1969, aged 76.

Taken together, these records document a large sibling group, born between 1881 and 1893, with multiple children surviving into adulthood and forming families across New South Wales. The family’s movements remained largely within the central and western districts of the state, with later connections to Sydney and regional centres such as Albury and Gilgandra.

This documentary outline establishes the family structure, timing, and geographic context needed to assess possible paternal candidates in the analysis that follows.

Given that Alpha was born in 1901, the range of possible fathers within this sibling group can be narrowed on age alone. Of the sons of Halbert James Edgar and Elizabeth Rundle, only Halbert Richard Edgar (born 1881) and Rennick Harold Edgar (born 1884) were of an age that makes paternity plausible at that time. The remaining sons, although born by 1901, were still children and can be excluded on age grounds.

This age-based filtering does not, of itself, identify Alpha’s father, but it provides an important constraint by reducing the field to two historically plausible candidates. The following section examines how the DNA evidence further distinguishes between these possibilities.

To explore the remaining possibilities more formally, I again used the WATO (What Are the Odds?) tool at DNA Painter. WATO evaluates how well different proposed relationships fit the actual shared centimorgan values observed in the DNA. In this case, the analysis focused on the two historically plausible candidates identified on age grounds — Halbert Richard Edgar and Rennick Harold Edgar — and tested how well each scenario aligned with the DNA evidence from all three testers. The results do not, on their own, provide absolute proof, but they allow the competing hypotheses to be compared objectively and reveal which explanation best fits the observed DNA patterns, and which require additional assumptions.

WATO results: assessing the paternal hypotheses

The WATO analysis produced a clear ranking of the two paternal scenarios tested.

The highest-ranking result places the Alpha as the child of Rennick Harold Edgar. This hypothesis returned a score of 1, making it the most likely outcome of the two scenarios tested. While this score is not statistically strong in absolute terms, it indicates that this scenario provides the best fit to the observed centimorgan values when compared with the alternative.

The competing hypothesis — that Alpha is the child of Halbert Richard Edgar — was not supported. WATO returned a score of 0 for this scenario, indicating that it is not statistically possible given the shared DNA amounts and the family structure entered into the model. However, it is important to note that no confirmed descendants of Halbert Richard Edgar have yet been identified among the testers’ DNA matches, and the absence of such matches remains a factor to be addressed through targeted testing.

Taken on their own, the WATO results do not prove paternity. However, they provide an important additional filter by distinguishing between the only two candidates who are plausible on documentary grounds.

A note on WATO scores (for non-DNA readers)

WATO scores are relative rather than absolute. A score of 1 does not mean that a result is weak or inconclusive; it means that, among the scenarios tested, this hypothesis fits the observed DNA better than the alternatives. What matters is not the size of the score, but which hypotheses remain viable and which are excluded. In this analysis, WATO identifies one scenario as possible and rules the other out.

What this does (and does not) prove

The WATO analysis does not provide definitive proof of Alpha’s father. DNA alone rarely delivers certainty at this level of resolution. What it does do is test competing explanations objectively against the observed DNA and eliminate scenarios that cannot work given the known ages, relationships, and centimorgan values.

Here, WATO supports one paternal pathway and excludes the other. That result does not stand in isolation; it aligns closely with the broader DNA clustering patterns and the documentary framework already established. Together, these strands of evidence substantially narrow the field, even if they stop short of absolute proof.

The value of testing Halbert Richard Edgar’s descendants

Further clarification could be obtained by testing confirmed descendants of Halbert Richard Edgar (born 1881). Because Halbert was the brother of Rennick Harold Edgar, some shared DNA would be expected between Alpha’s descendants and Halbert’s descendants under either scenario. The key distinction lies not in the presence of shared DNA, but in its amount and distribution across generations.

If Halbert were Alpha’s father, Alpha’s child would be expected to share DNA with Halbert’s descendants at levels consistent with a grandparent–grandchild relationship, while Alpha’s grandchildren would share DNA at great-grandparent–great-grandchild levels. If, instead, Halbert were Alpha’s uncle and Rennick her father, the shared DNA would reflect a more distant collateral relationship: Alpha’s child would be related to Halbert as a great-uncle, and Alpha’s grandchildren would be one further degree removed, with correspondingly lower expected centimorgan values.

Comparison of centimorgan totals and shared-match patterns across Alpha’s child and two grandchildren, particularly when matched against descendants from more than one of Halbert’s children, therefore allows these two hypotheses to be evaluated and ranked. This approach does not rely on the mere presence of shared DNA, but on whether the observed levels and patterns are consistent with direct descent or with a collateral relationship, and it provides a robust, falsifiable test of the WATO findings.

Interpreting the evidence: a working hypothesis

By combining documentary evidence, age-based filtering, DNA clustering, and formal hypothesis testing, it has been possible to move beyond speculation and toward a reasoned interpretation of Alpha’s origins. The documentary record narrows the pool of plausible fathers to two men; the DNA clusters place Alpha firmly within the Edgar–Rundle branch; and the WATO analysis distinguishes between the remaining candidates.
Taken together, these lines of evidence point consistently in the same direction. While any conclusion must remain cautious, the balance of probability favours Rennick Harold Edgar as Alpha’s father. On the evidence currently available—and subject to future testing of descendants of his brother Halbert Richard Edgar—this represents the clearest and most defensible explanation of Alpha’s paternal origins.
To understand why this interpretation fits the evidence best, it is necessary to consider the documented lives and family circumstances of the men involved.

Rennick (Renwick) Harold Edgar and his family

Rennick Harold Edgar was born on 7 May 1884 at Hillston in far-western New South Wales. During the 1890s his family moved widely across the western districts, with siblings born at Cobar, Condobolin and Hillston, indicating a mobile childhood shaped by the rhythms of inland life. In 1905 he married Kathleen Elizabeth O’Rourke at Rockley in the Central West. While Rennick’s own birth and marriage occurred in different districts, the birthplaces of his children point to a more limited and stable pattern of residence during his married life.
The couple’s first three children were born at Cobar, then a major mining centre: Melba May Edgar in 1906, Elizabeth Marjorie Edgar in 1908, and Rennick Lionel Joseph Edgar in 1910. By 1912 the family had moved to Sydney, where their youngest child, Edith Edgar, was born. Edith died in infancy later that year at Waterloo.
Rennick’s life ended suddenly in Sydney in April 1914. A contemporary newspaper report records that he was killed in a cycling accident in Regent Street after swerving to avoid broken glass and colliding with a motor lorry. An inquest heard that he sustained fatal head injuries and died while being transported by ambulance towards Sydney Hospital, and a verdict of accidental death was returned. Rennick was still a young man at the time of his death, leaving Kathleen a widow with three surviving children under the age of eight. [1]
Kathleen lived for many decades after Rennick’s death, dying in 1966 at Young. All three surviving children reached adulthood. Melba May Edgar married William John Spilsted in 1927 and died at Erskineville in 1993. Elizabeth Marjorie Edgar married Stanley Louis Lauer in 1925 at St Peter’s Church, Cooks River, and died in 1997. Rennick Lionel Joseph Edgar married Myrtle Brown in Sydney in 1931 and died in 1987.
While Rennick’s children were born only in Cobar and Sydney, his own life trajectory—from Hillston to Rockley, then to Cobar and finally Sydney—demonstrates a degree of geographic mobility within New South Wales. This pattern provides important context when interpreting both the documentary record and the genetic evidence, particularly when contrasted with the longer, more settled life of his brother Halbert.

Nance Hughes in Cobar and Newcastle: a composite view

Newspaper evidence adds a further, geographically significant strand to the analysis. Women known as Nance Hughes appear in New South Wales newspapers in the early twentieth century, particularly in connection with hotel work, and the name was used openly and consistently as a personal identifier rather than merely as an occasional nickname.
The earliest and most relevant reference appears in The Cobar Herald in March 1901. In that report, Nance Hughes is described as a barmaid residing at the Empire Hotel in Cobar. She was charged with a minor offence and arrested while preparing to travel, reportedly intending to go on to Sydney or Dubbo. This places a woman of that name squarely in the western districts of New South Wales six months before Alpha’s birth and within the same regional setting as the Edgar family. Her occupation and reported mobility suggest a woman living independently, engaged in hotel work, and accustomed to movement along inland transport routes.
Later newspaper references identify a woman named Nance Hughes working as a barmaid in Newcastle between 1907 and 1910. In these reports she is described as being 24 years old in 1910, implying a birth around 1885–1886. [2] At face value, this does not align with the Nancy Alice Agnes identified in the baptismal record with a birth date of 1878. However, Alpha’s birth certificate shows that Nance understated her age, indicating that reported ages cannot be taken at face value. In addition, documentary evidence places the Hughes family within Newcastle networks: later records associated with Nance’s father, as well as the recorded birthplaces of children born to her sisters, demonstrate ongoing connections with the Newcastle area. In that context, it is not implausible that Nancy herself spent time there.
Even so, the Newcastle newspaper material cannot be used to positively identify the barmaid as the same woman recorded in the baptism. It remains possible that these reports refer to a different woman who shared both the name and occupation. What the material does demonstrate is that Nance Hughes was not a unique identity in New South Wales newspapers, and that “Nance” was used publicly and independently as a familiar form of Nancy.
Against that broader backdrop, the Cobar Herald reference retains particular significance. It provides independent contemporary evidence that a woman called Nance Hughes was present, mobile, and socially active in western New South Wales shortly before Alpha’s birth. While this does not establish identity on its own, it strengthens the geographic plausibility that Nancy herself was in the west at the relevant time and could have encountered either Rennick or Halbert Edgar within that setting.

Drawing the threads together

The evidence assembled so far demonstrates how far it is possible to progress when documentary records, genetic evidence, and careful hypothesis testing are brought into conversation with one another. Age-based filtering narrows the maternal possibilities; DNA clustering places Alpha securely within the Edgar–Rundle network; and formal hypothesis testing reduces the paternal field to two closely related candidates.
Within that framework, the balance of probability favours Rennick Harold Edgar as Alpha’s father. His documented movements, residence in Cobar during the years immediately following his marriage, and early death together help explain the genetic patterns observed today. When this is contrasted with Halbert’s long, settled life in Cobar and his numerous surviving descendants—through whom no DNA matches have yet been identified—the absence of a Halbert-based genetic signal becomes more intelligible.
Equally important is the emerging geographic picture of Nancy herself. The Cobar Herald reference to Nance Hughes in 1901 provides independent confirmation that a woman of that name was present and mobile in the western districts shortly before Alpha’s birth. While this evidence does not establish identity on its own, it places a plausible candidate in the right region, at the right time, and within a social milieu consistent with the documented movements of the Edgar family.
At this point, the task ahead is clear. What is needed now is evidence that can either strengthen or challenge this working hypothesis: records that might place Nancy more firmly in the west, clarify her movements after Alpha’s birth, or introduce new descendants whose DNA could further refine the analysis. As so often in family history, progress may depend on fragments held outside the formal record—family stories, photographs, letters, or DNA results that have not yet been connected to this research.
If you recognise any of the people, places, or circumstances discussed here, or if you descend from the Edgar, Rundle, Hughes, Montgomery, or related families, I would very much welcome hearing from you. Please use the contact form linked on this blog to get in touch. Even small pieces of information can make a decisive difference.
This story is not finished—but it is now well framed, well tested, and ready for the next piece of evidence to emerge.

[1] BICYCLE FATALITY. (1914, May 5). The Cobar Herald (NSW : 1899 - 1914), p. 3. Retrieved December 22, 2025, from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article116958253

[2] NEWCASTLE POLICE COURT. (1910, April 18). Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners' Advocate (NSW : 1876 - 1954), p. 7. Retrieved December 22, 2025, from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article137449338

Search This Blog

The Clancy - Flaven chronicles: From Irish roots to Sydney streets