Linda, I have ordered the Chromo2 test. Alan In a message dated 03/11/2013 03:13:35 GMT Standard Time, [email protected] writes: 104344..Philip Lloyd McReynolds....DF85 63915.......Frank McAninch......DF85 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Bob You posted this email a few weeks ago went I was away on holiday. There are a couple of things I would like to add here, which are important to this research. You will recall a few years back I submitted to Anatole Klyosov a set of STRs that involved the Ua Dochartaighs and Amuliganes to test out a possible age between both surnames. This was done on the basis that both geographically had a long attachment to the areas in which they originated, one in the Castlefin area of Co. Donegal, and the other in Nithsdale, Scotland. More importantly, both had strong histories with at least one testee from each surname demonstrating a proven paper trial pre-dating 1600 and a history going back to at least the 13th century. At the time, it was already known there were subdivisions within the Ua Dochartaigh Clan with one major group following a set of STRs close to the chief line of Ua Dochartaigh traced from the line of Sir Cathir O'Doherty (killed in 1608) and from him back to Domnall carragh Ua Dochartaigh (c.1202). Only this set of STRs was used in the original study and not the other STRs outside of this one. >From reading your email below, I understand you are kit no 29142 for DF85+ with DF97+ downstream of DF85+. Your test is particularly significant and will also be important to all those in that subclade identified within the M222 Haplogroup by the SNP DF85+. Your test shares markers close to the chief line, which I am happy to discuss in more detail privately. It would be beneficial if others from within this branch of the Ua Dochartaigh could be tested to confirm the presence of DF85+ and if possible, someone near to the present chief line tested again. Regards Alan In a message dated 22/10/2013 07:49:06 GMT Standard Time, [email protected] writes: I was surprised to find out my results (Doherty kit 29142) for DF97 and DF85 were available so soon. I ordered the tests on September 20 and the last time I checked, FTDNA indicated my results were due back around November 15. Yet the results are back already. I find it interesting that results for Doherty kit 29142 were FF97+ and DF85+ while results for Daugherty kit 073633 were DF85- and DF97-, and yet both kits are M222+ (R1b1a2a1a1b4b). In addition to both kits 29142 and 073633 being M222+, they have both have test results at the 111 Marker level, yet they are at an "absolute" genetic distance (ABS GD value) of 23 from each other at the 111 Marker level. Kit 29142 matches 13 other Doherty Surname Group participants at the 111 Marker level with a GD of 10 or less (one at GD7, four at GD8, four at GD9 and four ad GD10). Of the 221 YDNA participants in the Doherty Surname Group, there are 110 participants who have the combination of a variation of the Doherty surname and are M222+. While I would like to know more about what DF85+/- and DF97+/- mean, it is obvious these test results may help define further subgroupings within the Doherty Surname Group. Bob Doherty FTDNA Doherty Surname Group co-administrator Kit 29142 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

> I updated the spreadsheet again last night and attempted to break out > DF85 and DF85>DF97 varieties under M222. DF85 looks to be fairly old > so it may do a nice job of dividing M222 folks. I think the STR > signature(s) range for DF85 will be quite wide but M222 is so big and > young there could be a lot of STR convergence. SNPs are clearly > needed for M222 people and DF85 looks to be just the first of what > will probably a number of good sized subclades or sub-subclades of > M222. Mike W quoted from the R1b L21

104344..Philip Lloyd McReynolds....DF85 63915.......Frank McAninch......DF85

Oh aye the noo, tae go tae the Irish pub next door. Yours aye, Sandy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Len McC Sent: 01 November 2013 18:42 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [R-M222] Query re M222 and the USA On 11/1/2013 10:50 AM, tuulen wrote: > Ha! > > I heard a funny joke recently. > > Q: Are you Irish or Scottish? > > A: Yes. > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Len McC<[email protected]> wrote: > A quick one: One evening a Scotsman left a pub. (Yes, it CAN happen!) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

As there is Great Britain and Little Britain (Brittany), there was/is a Great Scotland and Little Scotland. Anyone like to to guess which county was formerly referred to as Great Scotland?

Hi Doug, That means you are Albanach. The old meaning of the word was that you are an Irishman temporarily living in Scotland. Nowadays it just means you are Scots. Best, Sandy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of tuulen Sent: 01 November 2013 17:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [R-M222] Query re M222 and the USA Ha! I heard a funny joke recently. Q: Are you Irish or Scottish? A: Yes. On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Len McC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 11/1/2013 12:00 AM, Yair Davidiy wrote: > > Are the proportions of M222 amongst descendants of Irish and Scottish > > migrants in the USA any different from those found in Ireland and > Scotland? > > Yair Davidiy > > Jerusalem > > Israel > > ************ > > > > YD, > > That is one excellent question! Susan H. is correct insofar as the > academic reality: nothing is known. It interests me to know why you ask. > You may answer directly. > len > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ha! I heard a funny joke recently. Q: Are you Irish or Scottish? A: Yes. On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Len McC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 11/1/2013 12:00 AM, Yair Davidiy wrote: > > Are the proportions of M222 amongst descendants of Irish and Scottish > > migrants in the USA any different from those found in Ireland and > Scotland? > > Yair Davidiy > > Jerusalem > > Israel > > ************ > > > > YD, > > That is one excellent question! Susan H. is correct insofar as the > academic reality: nothing is known. It interests me to know why you ask. > You may answer directly. > len > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

On 11/1/2013 10:50 AM, tuulen wrote: > Ha! > > I heard a funny joke recently. > > Q: Are you Irish or Scottish? > > A: Yes. > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Len McC<[email protected]> wrote: > A quick one: One evening a Scotsman left a pub. (Yes, it CAN happen!)

Using the public data bases is our only avenue to do such a demographic study; I haven't seen anything regarding a demographic of US measure for M222 which has been planned and executed solely for that purpose. Part of the reason is that Americans except for Native Americans are all immigrants. There was considerable migration into the American Colonies by the Scots and Ulster Scots during the late 1600 forward with the highest estimates from those environs during the 1st quarter of the 1700's to about the time of the American Revolution. After the Revolution there was an up-tick, but not at the numbers previous; during the 1800's there was an up-serge of Immigration from all of Ireland inclusive of Ulster, and rather steady immigration from Western Europe including the Isles thereafter. Needless to say, the stated ancestral origin of testers for genealogical purposes requests that Americans state an ancestral origin other than the US as all were immigrants. The stated claims are a mix of firm knowledge to anecdotal speculation to best guesses based on surnames. The greatest numbers of tested individuals are from this American Immigrant pool, hence there is an inherent skew from the beginning mostly due to now knowing for certain what the ancestral origin actually is beyond mostly immigration stories and surnames complicated by Ulster Scots inevitably specifying "Ireland" as ancestral because this is where their immigrants hailed from after being in residence for as long as 100 or more years in Northern Ireland due to the Plantation. The record situation in Ireland is not optimal because of record loss, so if these descendants of immigrants can get across the pond to Ireland they generally cannot get further unless they are very lucky. Furthermore because of the immigration within the Isles which has always been, recent demographic studies as to where grandfathers and great grandfathers lived may be legitimate for at best 4 generations, and with surname issues, albeit they may help, they certainly are not reliable for tracking these populations. Conclusions of any of the assessments my remain theoretical and speculative at best; however, this SNP testing is going to help to clarify things better than we have ever had to date. Personally, I believe the Isles should be treated as a region, but me thinks I am in the minority with that opinion. Many seem to want to put a national identity to the DNA. M222 bearers have a history of bi-directional migration within the Isles. New SNP discoveries are showing some clade dividing SNPs which people are testing via both FTDNA and BISDNA (Britain/Ireland/Scotland's DNA). The picture of M222 is going to radically change, and since some of the SNPs seem to have some environmental coalescence of their own, different assessments of possible ancestral origins may result. It is however, way too soon to tell, and it will be not immediate for us to have some better assessments as testing has really just commenced and the numbers will need to be collated, assessed, and further analyzed also using genealogical information to qualify these things. It will take an entire project M222 effort IMO to make the best sense of things as there are several to many very knowledgeable people regarding the ancient history, more recent history, linguistics, clan & sept specialists, and family historians who have spent near life time careers on their surname groups that have records and documentations which stretch back hundreds of years, as well as those who spend a lot of time on the DNA results themselves. All this information needs to be considered with the new information from the SNP testing results. On 11/1/2013 3:00 AM, Yair Davidiy wrote: > Are the proportions of M222 amongst descendants of Irish and Scottish > migrants in the USA any different from those found in Ireland and Scotland? > Yair Davidiy > Jerusalem > Israel > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

In the Wikipedia article Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_(Y-DNA) The following statement is found: # M222 is also found as a substantial proportion of the population of Scotland which may indicate substantial settlement from northern Ireland or at least links to it.[33][57] Those areas settled by large numbers of Irish and Scottish emigrants such as North America have a substantial percentage of M222.[33] # I checked the references given and did not find anything specifically directed to the USA. My question is: Was there differential migration of M222 to the USA? i.e. Are the proportions of M222 amongst descendants of Irish and Scottish migrants in the USA any different from those found in Ireland and Scotland? Yair Davidiy Jerusalem Israel

On 11/1/2013 12:00 AM, Yair Davidiy wrote: > Are the proportions of M222 amongst descendants of Irish and Scottish > migrants in the USA any different from those found in Ireland and Scotland? > Yair Davidiy > Jerusalem > Israel > ************ > YD, That is one excellent question! Susan H. is correct insofar as the academic reality: nothing is known. It interests me to know why you ask. You may answer directly. len

David, I have just read Marilyn Larach's excellent article, on which you were science advisor. sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/ Anesthesia_Breakthroughs_bioscience.pdf I am totally in awe of your accomplishment that underlines the benefits continuing to stream from our increasing understanding of the human genome. I trust that the broader commitments apparent in the M222 community will help identify the family occurrence of the mutation in chromosome 19 that is responsible for malignant hyperthermia in Canadian and Irish families. Best, Malcolm On 31 Oct 2013, at 02:21, David Maclennan wrote: > Sandy, there is a difference between a Royal Society University > Research > Fellow, which Jim Wilson is, and a Fellow of the Royal Society - > Fellows > of the Royal Society get to add FRS behind their names. > > David H MacLennan FRS > > On 2013-10-30 8:44 AM, "Alexander Paterson" > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> They are not equivalent. It was my whole genome that led to the >> discovery >> of >> 11 new SNPs downstream of M222+. Another Scotsman's whole genome >> led to >> the >> discovery of 13 new SNPs downstream of M222. >> >> This information comes from Jim Wilson, a PhD and a Fellow of the >> Royal >> Society. >> >> Best, >> >> Sandy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Ó Du??aig >> Sent: 30 October 2013 09:16 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? >> >> Phylogenetically they are "equivalent", this is the term used by >> ISOGG for >> two or more separate SNP's that mark the one branch. Basically >> until a >> S661+/S658- or a S658+/S661- man is found the two are regarded as >> functionally equivalent for purposes of the haplogroup tree. As an >> example, >> DF41 is equivalent to CTS2501, all DF41+ men tested so far have >> come back >> as CTS2501+, likewise all CTS2501+ men we have found (through Geno >> 2.0 >> testing) have likewise tested as DF41+. The two are indeed separate >> SNP's >> but are regarded "equivalent" when it comes to defining: >> *R1b1a2a1a2c1i* >> >> L21 has a similar position with regards to L459 and Z290. Going by >> what we >> know from Chromo2 it would seem that there are at least 24 snp's >> "equivalent to" M222. >> >>> From my original email, I should have put DF85 in Parentheses eg. >>> "S673 >> (DF85)" -- DF85 been just a different name for the same SNP. Just >> like how >> ScotlandsDNA call DF41: S524 -- same SNP just different name. >> >> As you note in case of S661/S658 and S660/S659 they are indeed >> 4 separate snp's, but they only mark two levels in the phylogeny. Of >> course >> if enough people do Chromo2 tests we may end up separating each of >> these >> from each other. >> >> -Paul >> (DF41+) >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Alexander Paterson < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> Just a clarification. >>> >>> >>> S661 >>> S658 >>> S660 >>> S659 >>> S588 >>> S7814 >>> S603 >>> S595 >>> S592 >>> S673/DF85 (you are probably negative for this one) >>> S668 (you are probably negative for this as it's subclade of DF85) >>> S568 >>> S567 >>> >>> S661 is not equivalent to S658. >>> S660 is not equivalent to S659. >>> >>> They are four separate mutations downstream of M222. >>> >>> There are a total of 27 SNPs downstream of M222. I alone have 11 >>> SNPs >>> downstream of M222. >>> A Scotsman has 13 SNPs downstream of M222. >>> There are three more. >>> >>> All 27 were discovered by ScotlandsDNA. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Sandy >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Ó Du??aig >>> Sent: 29 October 2013 16:07 >>> To: Helen Murphy; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? >>> >>> Helen, >>> >>> Chromo2 is a chip based test from ScotlandsDNA/IrelandsDNA/ >>> EnglandsDNA. >>> They've included several SNP's that help sub-divide M222. One of >>> these >>> SNP's is DF85 which you probably have seen talk about on the list. >>> From >>> looking at your matches in the Ireland project it's probable that >>> your >>> husband is DF85-. >>> >>> The advantage for you in taking a Chromo2 test is that it would >>> test you >>> for the following SNP's under M222: >>> S661/S658 >>> S660/S659 >>> S588 >>> S7814 >>> S603 >>> S595 >>> S592 >>> S673/DF85 (you are probably negative for this one) >>> S668 (you are probably negative for this as it's subclade of DF85) >>> S568 >>> S567 >>> >>> Here's a phylogenetic tree that shows the current known structure of >>> these >>> SNP's under M222: (maintained by Iain Kennedy) >>> http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf >>> >>> If you come back positive on any of those SNP's it would at least >>> "tie" >>> your husband down to a particular part of wider M222 "tree". >>> >>> Regards >>> -Paul >>> (DF41+) >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Helen Murphy <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I administer my husband Dave Murphy kit #201315 at ftDNA - he is >>> R-M222 >> - >>>> I have done his markers up to 111 & his autosomal at Family Finder. >>> What >>> is >>>> Chromo2 ? and should I order it for him? He is full Irish, his >>>> grand >>>> parents & gr-gr came from Galway, Mayo, Cork, & Waterford. Please >>> advise... >>>> >>>> Helen Murphy - [email protected] >>>> >>>> PS: I am #128128 on ftDNA - with Reynolds line in Virginia >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>> the >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

In addition to 171920...Jerry Don McGee...DF85 ordered 227811....David Herman MacLennan.....DF97 91704.....Michael Francis Kelly....PF3292 Susan reported test results for: 16279...Duncan..........DF85+ and DF97+

171920...Jerry Don McGee...DF85

Sandy, there is a difference between a Royal Society University Research Fellow, which Jim Wilson is, and a Fellow of the Royal Society - Fellows of the Royal Society get to add FRS behind their names. David H MacLennan FRS On 2013-10-30 8:44 AM, "Alexander Paterson" <alexanderpaters[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Paul, > >They are not equivalent. It was my whole genome that led to the discovery >of >11 new SNPs downstream of M222+. Another Scotsman's whole genome led to >the >discovery of 13 new SNPs downstream of M222. > >This information comes from Jim Wilson, a PhD and a Fellow of the Royal >Society. > >Best, > >Sandy > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Ó Du??aig >Sent: 30 October 2013 09:16 >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? > >Phylogenetically they are "equivalent", this is the term used by ISOGG for >two or more separate SNP's that mark the one branch. Basically until a >S661+/S658- or a S658+/S661- man is found the two are regarded as >functionally equivalent for purposes of the haplogroup tree. As an >example, >DF41 is equivalent to CTS2501, all DF41+ men tested so far have come back >as CTS2501+, likewise all CTS2501+ men we have found (through Geno 2.0 >testing) have likewise tested as DF41+. The two are indeed separate SNP's >but are regarded "equivalent" when it comes to defining: *R1b1a2a1a2c1i* > >L21 has a similar position with regards to L459 and Z290. Going by what we >know from Chromo2 it would seem that there are at least 24 snp's >"equivalent to" M222. > >>From my original email, I should have put DF85 in Parentheses eg. "S673 >(DF85)" -- DF85 been just a different name for the same SNP. Just like how >ScotlandsDNA call DF41: S524 -- same SNP just different name. > >As you note in case of S661/S658 and S660/S659 they are indeed >4 separate snp's, but they only mark two levels in the phylogeny. Of >course >if enough people do Chromo2 tests we may end up separating each of these >from each other. > >-Paul >(DF41+) > > >On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Alexander Paterson < >[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> Just a clarification. >> >> >> S661 >> S658 >> S660 >> S659 >> S588 >> S7814 >> S603 >> S595 >> S592 >> S673/DF85 (you are probably negative for this one) >> S668 (you are probably negative for this as it's subclade of DF85) >> S568 >> S567 >> >> S661 is not equivalent to S658. >> S660 is not equivalent to S659. >> >> They are four separate mutations downstream of M222. >> >> There are a total of 27 SNPs downstream of M222. I alone have 11 SNPs >> downstream of M222. >> A Scotsman has 13 SNPs downstream of M222. >> There are three more. >> >> All 27 were discovered by ScotlandsDNA. >> >> Best, >> >> Sandy >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Ó Du??aig >> Sent: 29 October 2013 16:07 >> To: Helen Murphy; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? >> >> Helen, >> >> Chromo2 is a chip based test from ScotlandsDNA/IrelandsDNA/EnglandsDNA. >> They've included several SNP's that help sub-divide M222. One of these >> SNP's is DF85 which you probably have seen talk about on the list. From >> looking at your matches in the Ireland project it's probable that your >> husband is DF85-. >> >> The advantage for you in taking a Chromo2 test is that it would test you >> for the following SNP's under M222: >> S661/S658 >> S660/S659 >> S588 >> S7814 >> S603 >> S595 >> S592 >> S673/DF85 (you are probably negative for this one) >> S668 (you are probably negative for this as it's subclade of DF85) >> S568 >> S567 >> >> Here's a phylogenetic tree that shows the current known structure of >>these >> SNP's under M222: (maintained by Iain Kennedy) >> http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf >> >> If you come back positive on any of those SNP's it would at least "tie" >> your husband down to a particular part of wider M222 "tree". >> >> Regards >> -Paul >> (DF41+) >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Helen Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I administer my husband Dave Murphy kit #201315 at ftDNA - he is >>R-M222 >- >> > I have done his markers up to 111 & his autosomal at Family Finder. >>What >> is >> > Chromo2 ? and should I order it for him? He is full Irish, his grand >> > parents & gr-gr came from Galway, Mayo, Cork, & Waterford. Please >> advise... >> > >> > Helen Murphy - [email protected] >> > >> > PS: I am #128128 on ftDNA - with Reynolds line in Virginia >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>the >> > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message

16729 Duncan confirmed positive for both df85 df97 For these R-M222+ these that I look after is awaiting results for 3 others in 3 surnames; should be in soon. Susan

Answering the question of O'Connell Kit 179948 from Galway. There is another O'Congaile family from Cill achaidh duibh, a branch of Ui Fiachra Finn in Ui Amhalgaigh. (linked to the barony of Tirawley in Sligo). http://books.google.com/books?id=fgMGAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=O'Congaile+of+Cill+achaidh+duibh&source=bl&ots=r6mnrHqpK2&sig=0mwYeiWwfCMtjKLMFK63QMSLak4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0hFxUoH0Hue-sQTfuYCgDw&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=O'Congaile%20of%20Cill%20achaidh%20duibh&f=false As to O'Connell families in general I read of three identified septs: one from south Kerry (associated with Ui Echach Mumhan); one from Derry (possible Cenel nEchdach of Cenel Eoghain and now possibly a branch of Ui Fiachrah Finn) and another from Galway. There is Galway O'Connell family recorded in O'Donovan's "The Tribes and Customs of Hy-Many, commonly called O'Kelly's Country", which covers areas of Galway: "These are the seven oirrighi i.e. sub-chiefs of Hy-Many, viz., O'Conaill, and he has the same patrimony as Mac Cnaimhin and O'Dubhurrla." and "O'Conaill and Mac Eidhigan have the marshallship of the forces, and the Hy-Fiachrach Finn and the race of Soghan have the office of taisigheacht scuir." Mention of Hy-Fiachrach Finn reminds me of the Lally 181933 results of DF85+ and DF97 unknown. O'Donovan translates: "The kings of Maenmagh are Muintir Neachtain and the O'Maeilallaidhs [Lallys]. And the king of Erin, strange to say, gives a subsidy to the chiefs of the Hy-Fiachrach Finn, more than [or in preference to] the king of Hy-Many." http://www.ucc.ie/celt/online/G105007.html Looking up O'Donovan note to the passage I find:  "The O'Maeilallaidhs.—This family was afterwards removed from Moenmagh to the parish of Tuam, where they resided in the castle of Tolendal, four miles to the north of the town of Tuam. The head of this family removed to France after the defeat of the Irish, at Aughrim, and was the ancestor of the celebrated statesman and orator Count Lally Tolendal, who was created Marquis by Napoleon. The French and Tuam branches of this family are now extinct, but there are many of the name still in the original territory of Moenmoy in narrow circumstances, who retain the original form of the name, except that in writing it in English they reject the O', which has become a general practice among the Irish peasantry. O'Dugan also, in his topographical poem, mentions the O'Neachtains and O'Mullallys as the chiefs of Moenmagh. His words are: Ríogha Maonmhuíghe na mal, / D'ar ab duthaidh an donn-chlár,— / Dias do thechtaid an taobh sin,— / O'Neachtain, O'Maoilalaidh; / A n-gleo co trom is na t! achraibh,/ As leo an fonn co Fiachrachaibh. 'The kings of Maonmagh of chiefs, / To whom the rich plain is hereditary,— / Two who have strengthened that side,— / O'Naghten and O'Mullally; / Their fight is heavy in the battles; / They possess the land as far as Hy-Fiachrach.' This extract is curious, as proving that Maonmagh was bounded on one side by the country of the Hy-Fiachrach-Aidhne, which was co-extensive with the diocese of Kilmacduagh, as could be demonstrated from the most authentic and clearest evidences." The DNA result suggest the Lally where Ui Fiachrach and like over Ui Briuin families had been absorbed into the expanding Ui Maine. For the O'Connell issue it all comes down to knowing your terminal SNP (below M222). Which leads to the question whether Chromo2 define other non-northern Ui Neill families? (I think there my be a Scottish (Northern Ui Neill bias in its creation). However I don't think this will be important in regard to the O'Connell Kit 179948 from Galway. For I suspect them as being Ui Fiachrach and hence should be DF85+. For as O'Donovan pointing out that the Lally possessed Ui-Fiachrach Aidhne lands. It would appear that the Lally are from a branch of Ui Fiachrach and are DF85+ This leads me to believe from the Lally' DNA result that we should consider the Cenel Conaill to be a sub-branch of Ui Fachrach. Probably pushed in Donegal by an expanding Ui Briuin.

Hi Bernard, You are spot on with my downstreams. Yes, there is a Scot with 13 SNPs downstream of M222. They are S568 S555 S556 S557 S558 S559 S560 S561 S562 S563 S564 S565 S566 S567 I think I know his surname, but I'm not 100% sure so it is better not to mention it. Best, Sandy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bernard Morgan Sent: 30 October 2013 13:35 To: dna-r1b1c7 Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? Sandy > They are not equivalent. It was my whole genome that led to the discovery of > 11 new SNPs downstream of M222+. Am I correct that below you have S661, S658, S660, S659, S588, S603, S595, S590, S592, S597, S598. > Another Scotsman's whole genome led to the > discovery of 13 new SNPs downstream of M222. > However there is now a un-named Scotsman with more identified SNPs under M222 than you? Does he have two private SNPs beyond S592 or a different line of SNPs? Thanks. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected]web.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi All, I am currently in conversation with Laura Marshall of ScotlandsDNA about the Chromo2 test, and am now about to toss myself into that ring. I look forward to test results in early next year. Best, Doug On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Alexander Paterson < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bernard, > > You are spot on with my downstreams. > > Yes, there is a Scot with 13 SNPs downstream of M222. > > They are > > S568 > S555 > S556 > S557 > S558 > S559 > S560 > S561 > S562 > S563 > S564 > S565 > S566 > S567 > > I think I know his surname, but I'm not 100% sure so it is better not to > mention it. > > Best, > > Sandy > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bernard Morgan > Sent: 30 October 2013 13:35 > To: dna-r1b1c7 > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 order ?? > > Sandy > > > > They are not equivalent. It was my whole genome that led to the discovery > of > > 11 new SNPs downstream of M222+. > > > Am I correct that below you have S661, S658, S660, S659, S588, S603, S595, > S590, S592, S597, S598. > > > > Another Scotsman's whole genome led to the > > discovery of 13 new SNPs downstream of M222. > > > > However there is now a un-named Scotsman with more identified SNPs under > M222 than you? Does he have two private SNPs beyond S592 or a different > line > of SNPs? > > Thanks. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >