Hi all, I've already posted this on DNA Forums and the L21 list but I thought it would be worth mentioning here. It appears DF23 is now available for ordering from the Order Advanced Tests menu. To be clear for anyone not following the discussion up to this point, DF23 is known to be upstream of M222, so if you have already tested positive for M222 there is no point in ordering a DF23 test. However if you are a close match to the North-West Irish signature but have tested negative for M222, you may well wish to test for DF23 as it will provide further evidence for your close relationship with the M222+ clade and may help clarify the origins and early history of M222. For instructions on how to order DF23, follow the instructions in this post (substituting DF23 for Z253): http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RL21Project/message/5129. Best, Steve

Susan, You said, "there is such a thing as putting all the eggs in one basket and when they hatch we find a goose, a chicken, and a duck among perhaps a bunch of others." Quite right. SNPs and STRs aside, I think we too often forget about NPEs. One project administrator, who also is a good researcher, recently posted that she believes 10% of her project members descend from NPEs. There are at least six identified NPEs in my project of 220 members, I have a half-dozen small clusters whose origins are as yet unidentified, and I have about 30 project members in my "Unassigned" (to a cluster) section. There must be many additional NPEs among these. I have one project member who traced his ancestry back to a small town in Massachusetts circa 1780. He was not genetically close to anyone else named Burns/Byrne, but he was close to two other surnames, one of which traced to Rhode Island about the same year. In correspondence with the administrator of the third-name project, I found that one of his members had an ancestor who had lived in both the Rhode Island and the Massachusetts towns. Now do I have a suspicious mind, or what? Anyway, my point is that whenever two surnames seem to be of common origin, one must consider the possibility of an NPE. Also, anyone who claims to trace their pedigrees back for more than a few centuries has great faith in the morality of their ancestors (not to get into the possibility of unrecorded adoptions, etc.). Paul

Susan, Paul http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=10088.0 My interpretation of the posting by MJOST on September 21 at 10:16:21 is that all M222+ are expected to be DF23 and some L21+ are expected to be DF23- But to me the most exciting information is that a Jay Flatley who is M222+ has had a full-genome sequencing done. But there's more. If MJOST is correct, it means that L21+, although ancestral to M222+, is not parental to M222+. DF23 is! And this raises the interesting possibility that Niall may have been DF23+,M222-. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Susan Hedeen Sent: 24 October 2011 13:42 To: dna-r1b1c7; dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations Hi, Paul, yes I saw the DNA forums discussion; those discussions are about all that is out there, and origination a bit fuzzy w/the anonymity of the one contributor. I likewise agree with your points regarding the evolution of M222 in terms of SNP identifications. On the ages of these, what we have are projections based on all the various computer analytical models which I think we all agree are not at present the final answer. In terms of mutations, however, it is in my mind rightly or wrongly that the STR's may have more to do with population migrations/and living environs to a greater degree than what some believe-- at least for those populations back then. To put it simplistically, and we all know these things --if we look at the other animal populations, ie various mamals, birds, reptiles, etc. we will see various types evolve differently in different environments--most obviously the Galapagus, Australia, Hawaii, etc. We also know this process was in affect among humans and obvious when we consider the various races which developed with in geographic areas. Thus we have to also accept that obviously the STR's with in a sub-clave are subject. Mutation and evolution takes time, and it begins with one progenitor and spreads out. I suspect this most strongly with the very close matches evidenced between M222 McC group A and M222 Duncan group B of the Donnachaidh project as it seems that this group very likely rose from the Ancient McC's on the Island of Bute who were subsequently chartered in 1506. Yes, populations were more mobile than we often remember, however some core populations were more fixed for extended periods of time. The idea that newly identified SNPs may help sift all of this -- yes, maybe, but likely we will see it among the marker signatures more readily than the SNP's if for no other reason than the STR's are more inclined to mutate more frequently with those mutations also passed down through the chain. The point being, we have to consider both, and this is not a new discussion. Until testing for DF23 gets underway with significant data accumulated, I'd say, yes the jury is out. Beyond the discussion on the forums we know nothing about it nor the voracity of the claims made there. DF23 could be one of those which is geographically confined and thus, yes, it may help in that regard but likely will not help in the absence of other SNP the rest of M222 in other environs/locations. I think what we are going to find out about M222 is that as some have suggested it extended farther afield than Ulster (Connaught, Donegal eastward across the sea to Scotland. Just what if it did migrate into both Ireland and Scotland and flourished because A) those environs were basically the end of the road for these Celtic populations, and it flourished there because of the rich environment and the fact that it was somewhat a protected environment. Yes there were invasions and wars but the coalescence was allowed due to environment. What if all three SNP (L21, DF 23, and M222) migrated in? Does discovering them among the descendants of those populations there in the here and now necessarily preclude that or are we witnessing the flourishing of populations? I don't know the answers to all of that; no one else does, and I mention it only because there is such a thing as putting all the eggs in one basket and when they hatch we find a goose, a chicken, and a duck among perhaps a bunch of others. Susan On 10/24/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com <mailto:dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net <mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > 2. Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net <mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > 3. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations (Sandy Paterson) R1b1c7 Research and Links: http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Sandy -- you know I've an open mind about all of it, and anything is possible. Since we haven't Nial's DNA we don't know anything regarding his genetic make up, even though the evidence has been mounting that just perhaps he was a carrier of the SNP. I am going to throw out there for digestion something that I just a few days ago pledged that I would not, and I will do so in the form of a question. M222 is considered a Celtic population SNP, correct? Has anyone read up on Celtic Society practices and conventions in reference to their high holiday observations and celebrations and traditional pre Christian activities which are know to have been practiced during these? While some observances were for a day and a night, some extended to several days and night worth of celebrations. Also keep in mind that with-in the Gaelic population even post advent of Christianity that certain conventions were held onto long after the otherwise religious conversions. In terms of spread of M222 and other sub-claves with-in the Celtic populations, the surveying of cultural traditions may indeed lend perspective. Susan On 10/24/2011 10:04 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > Susan, Paul > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=10088.0 > > > My interpretation of the posting by MJOST on September 21 at 10:16:21 is > that all M222+ are expected to be DF23 and some L21+ are expected to be > DF23- > > But to me the most exciting information is that a Jay Flatley who is M222+ > has had a full-genome sequencing done. > > But there's more. If MJOST is correct, it means that L21+, although > ancestral to M222+, is not parental to M222+. DF23 is! And this raises the > interesting possibility that Niall may have been DF23+,M222-. > > > Sandy > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Susan Hedeen > Sent: 24 October 2011 13:42 > To: dna-r1b1c7; dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > > > Hi, Paul, yes I saw the DNA forums discussion; those discussions are > about all that is out there, and origination a bit fuzzy w/the anonymity > of the one contributor. I likewise agree with your points regarding the > evolution of M222 in terms of SNP identifications. On the ages of > these, what we have are projections based on all the various computer > analytical models which I think we all agree are not at present the > final answer. > > In terms of mutations, however, it is in my mind rightly or wrongly that > the STR's may have more to do with population migrations/and living > environs to a greater degree than what some believe-- at least for > those populations back then. To put it simplistically, and we all know > these things --if we look at the other animal populations, ie various > mamals, birds, reptiles, etc. we will see various types evolve > differently in different environments--most obviously the Galapagus, > Australia, Hawaii, etc. We also know this process was in affect among > humans and obvious when we consider the various races which developed > with in geographic areas. > > Thus we have to also accept that obviously the STR's with in a sub-clave > are subject. Mutation and evolution takes time, and it begins with one > progenitor and spreads out. I suspect this most strongly with the > very close matches evidenced between M222 McC group A and M222 Duncan > group B of the Donnachaidh project as it seems that this group very > likely rose from the Ancient McC's on the Island of Bute who were > subsequently chartered in 1506. Yes, populations were more mobile than > we often remember, however some core populations were more fixed for > extended periods of time. > > The idea that newly identified SNPs may help sift all of this -- yes, > maybe, but likely we will see it among the marker signatures more > readily than the SNP's if for no other reason than the STR's are more > inclined to mutate more frequently with those mutations also passed down > through the chain. > > The point being, we have to consider both, and this is not a new > discussion. Until testing for DF23 gets underway with significant data > accumulated, I'd say, yes the jury is out. Beyond the discussion on the > forums we know nothing about it nor the voracity of the claims made > there. DF23 could be one of those which is geographically confined and > thus, yes, it may help in that regard but likely will not help in the > absence of other SNP the rest of M222 in other environs/locations. > > I think what we are going to find out about M222 is that as some have > suggested it extended farther afield than Ulster (Connaught, Donegal > eastward across the sea to Scotland. Just what if it did migrate into > both Ireland and Scotland and flourished because A) those environs were > basically the end of the road for these Celtic populations, and it > flourished there because of the rich environment and the fact that it > was somewhat a protected environment. Yes there were invasions and wars > but the coalescence was allowed due to environment. > > What if all three SNP (L21, DF 23, and M222) migrated in? Does > discovering them among the descendants of those populations there in the > here and now necessarily preclude that or are we witnessing the > flourishing of populations? I don't know the answers to all of that; no > one else does, and I mention it only because there is such a thing as > putting all the eggs in one basket and when they hatch we find a goose, > a chicken, and a duck among perhaps a bunch of others. Susan > > On 10/24/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com > <mailto:dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > > (pabloburns@comcast.net<mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > > 2. Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > > (pabloburns@comcast.net<mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > > 3. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations (Sandy Paterson) > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

Hi, Paul, yes I saw the DNA forums discussion; those discussions are about all that is out there, and origination a bit fuzzy w/the anonymity of the one contributor. I likewise agree with your points regarding the evolution of M222 in terms of SNP identifications. On the ages of these, what we have are projections based on all the various computer analytical models which I think we all agree are not at present the final answer. In terms of mutations, however, it is in my mind rightly or wrongly that the STR's may have more to do with population migrations/and living environs to a greater degree than what some believe-- at least for those populations back then. To put it simplistically, and we all know these things --if we look at the other animal populations, ie various mamals, birds, reptiles, etc. we will see various types evolve differently in different environments--most obviously the Galapagus, Australia, Hawaii, etc. We also know this process was in affect among humans and obvious when we consider the various races which developed with in geographic areas. Thus we have to also accept that obviously the STR's with in a sub-clave are subject. Mutation and evolution takes time, and it begins with one progenitor and spreads out. I suspect this most strongly with the very close matches evidenced between M222 McC group A and M222 Duncan group B of the Donnachaidh project as it seems that this group very likely rose from the Ancient McC's on the Island of Bute who were subsequently chartered in 1506. Yes, populations were more mobile than we often remember, however some core populations were more fixed for extended periods of time. The idea that newly identified SNPs may help sift all of this -- yes, maybe, but likely we will see it among the marker signatures more readily than the SNP's if for no other reason than the STR's are more inclined to mutate more frequently with those mutations also passed down through the chain. The point being, we have to consider both, and this is not a new discussion. Until testing for DF23 gets underway with significant data accumulated, I'd say, yes the jury is out. Beyond the discussion on the forums we know nothing about it nor the voracity of the claims made there. DF23 could be one of those which is geographically confined and thus, yes, it may help in that regard but likely will not help in the absence of other SNP the rest of M222 in other environs/locations. I think what we are going to find out about M222 is that as some have suggested it extended farther afield than Ulster (Connaught, Donegal eastward across the sea to Scotland. Just what if it did migrate into both Ireland and Scotland and flourished because A) those environs were basically the end of the road for these Celtic populations, and it flourished there because of the rich environment and the fact that it was somewhat a protected environment. Yes there were invasions and wars but the coalescence was allowed due to environment. What if all three SNP (L21, DF 23, and M222) migrated in? Does discovering them among the descendants of those populations there in the here and now necessarily preclude that or are we witnessing the flourishing of populations? I don't know the answers to all of that; no one else does, and I mention it only because there is such a thing as putting all the eggs in one basket and when they hatch we find a goose, a chicken, and a duck among perhaps a bunch of others. Susan On 10/24/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com <mailto:dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net <mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > 2. Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net <mailto:pabloburns@comcast.net>) > 3. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations (Sandy Paterson)

Hi, Paul, yes I saw the DNA forums discussion; those discussions are about all that is out there, and origination a bit fuzzy w/the anonymity of the one contributor. I likewise agree with your points regarding the evolution of M222 in terms of SNP identifications. On the ages of these, what we have are projections based on all the various computer analytical models which I think we all agree are not at present the final answer. In terms of mutations, however, it is in my mind rightly or wrongly that the STR's may have more to do with population migrations/and living environs to a greater degree than what some believe-- at least for those populations back then. To put it simplistically, and we all know these things --if we look at the other animal populations, ie various mamals, birds, reptiles, etc. we will see various types evolve differently in different environments--most obviously the Galapagus, Australia, Hawaii, etc. We also know this process was in affect among humans and obvious when we consider the various races which developed with in geographic areas. Thus we have to also accept that obviously the STR's with in a sub-clave are subject. Mutation and evolution takes time, and it begins with one progenitor and spreads out. I suspect this most strongly with the very close matches evidenced between M222 McC group A and M222 Duncan group B of the Donnachaidh project as it seems that this group very likely rose from the Ancient McC's on the Island of Bute who were subsequently chartered in 1506. Yes, populations were more mobile than we often remember, however some core populations were more fixed for extended periods of time. The idea that newly identified SNPs may help sift all of this -- yes, maybe, but likely we will see it among the marker signatures more readily than the SNP's if for no other reason than the STR's are more inclined to mutate more frequently with those mutations also passed down through the chain. The point being, we have to consider both, and this is not a new discussion. Until testing for DF23 gets underway with significant data accumulated, I'd say, yes the jury is out. Beyond the discussion on the forums we know nothing about it nor the voracity of the claims made there. DF23 could be one of those which is geographically confined and thus, yes, it may help in that regard but likely will not help in the absence of other SNP the rest of M222 in other environs/locations. I think what we are going to find out about M222 is that as some have suggested it extended farther afield than Ulster (Connaught, Donegal eastward across the sea to Scotland. Just what if it did migrate into both Ireland and Scotland and flourished because A) those environs were basically the end of the road for these Celtic populations, and it flourished there because of the rich environment and the fact that it was somewhat a protected environment. Yes there were invasions and wars but the coalescence was allowed due to environment. What if all three SNP (L21, DF 23, and M222) migrated in? Does discovering them among the descendants of those populations there in the here and now necessarily preclude that or are we witnessing the flourishing of populations? I don't know the answers to all of that; no one else does, and I mention it only because there is such a thing as putting all the eggs in one basket and when they hatch we find a goose, a chicken, and a duck among perhaps a bunch of others. Susan On 10/24/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net) > 2. Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > (pabloburns@comcast.net) > 3. Re: Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations (Sandy Paterson) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 08:35:02 +0000 (UTC) > From: pabloburns@comcast.net > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <1745893154.1390637.1319358902221.JavaMail.root@sz0128a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Sandy, > I don't know much about mutation rates, which I thought were random. That "Dubhthach" chart I sent the list shows many mutations downstream of L21 that do not seem to have mutated at all, some that have mutated once more, and one (L625)that is seven steps away from L21. Obviously, we have much yet to discover. > What I was trying to say (but upon rereading my message I see I did not do well) was that testing DF23 will help determine the origins--geographical and in time--of M222. Being upstream from M222, DF23 must have divided into those who are DF23+ and M222+, and those who are DF23+ but M222-. If a focal point of the latter is determined, that MAY (stress the "may")be where the M222 mutation occurred. > Paul > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:09:58 +0000 (UTC) > From: pabloburns@comcast.net > Subject: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <366930687.1390709.1319360998028.JavaMail.root@sz0128a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Susan, > If you subscribe to DNA-Forums, there is a search mechanism that will turn up a thread that started last June, when DF23 was discovered. The DF series apparently is being reported by an anonymous researcher who used the WTY material and the 1000 Genomes Project. The thread says that Thomas Krahn was informed of DF23, but he was having trouble preparing test primers for DF23. That was several months ago, and presumably he has not yet been able to do so. > David Wilson weighs in on that thread to say he long has suspected that there are several SNPs between L21 and M222. If he is correct, and more are found upstream of M222 and none below, M222 will be proven to be quite young. But there are thousands of SNPs as yet undiscovered, so in my mind the jury is still out. However, many see SNPs, and not STRs, as the tools for deep ancestry > research. > After typing the above, I saw on another forum that L459 is now thought to be between L21 and all the downstream SNPs. In other words, the mutation chain is L21 to L459, which becomes the parent from which all the others in the former L21 group branch off. So our chain now is L21/L459/DF23/M222. > Paul > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:07:06 +0100 > From: "Sandy Paterson"<alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > To:<dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID:<000001cc916b$858d9b40$90a8d1c0$@com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi Paul > > I thought your e-mail was clear, and I interpreted it the way you've set out > below. > > What I was getting at is that M222+ is highly unlikely to be much more than > about 50 generations 'old' and that it is therefore possible that any SNP's > downstream of M222 may be classified as 'private' by whoever makes these > decisions. > > To clarify a point though, I don't think it's correct to say that mutation > rates are random. It's the mutation process that is random, not the rates of > mutation. For example, the outcome of a single toss of an unbiased coin is > random, but the rate of turning up 'heads' is known to be 0.5 > > I nevertheless agree with your thoughts that it may be useful to know more > about DF23 and whether there are separate DF23+,M222+ and DF23+,M222- > populations. > > I suppose we can hope that there is some M222+ in the Faroe Islands, > although it's not clear to me whether their full-genome plans extend to > Y-SNP's. Even if it does, it seems that about 87% of the male population is > of Scandinavian origin, so it may lead nowhere in furthering our > understanding of M222. > > > Sandy > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of pabloburns@comcast.net > Sent: 23 October 2011 09:35 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations > > Sandy, > I don't know much about mutation rates, which I thought were random. That > "Dubhthach" chart I sent the list shows many mutations downstream of L21 > that do not seem to have mutated at all, some that have mutated once more, > and one (L625)that is seven steps away from L21. Obviously, we have much yet > to discover. > What I was trying to say (but upon rereading my message I see I did not > do well) was that testing DF23 will help determine the origins--geographical > and in time--of M222. Being upstream from M222, DF23 must have divided into > those who are DF23+ and M222+, and those who are DF23+ but M222-. If a focal > point of the latter is determined, that MAY (stress the "may")be where the > M222 mutation occurred. > Paul > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 351 > ****************************************** >

Hi Paul I thought your e-mail was clear, and I interpreted it the way you've set out below. What I was getting at is that M222+ is highly unlikely to be much more than about 50 generations 'old' and that it is therefore possible that any SNP's downstream of M222 may be classified as 'private' by whoever makes these decisions. To clarify a point though, I don't think it's correct to say that mutation rates are random. It's the mutation process that is random, not the rates of mutation. For example, the outcome of a single toss of an unbiased coin is random, but the rate of turning up 'heads' is known to be 0.5 I nevertheless agree with your thoughts that it may be useful to know more about DF23 and whether there are separate DF23+,M222+ and DF23+,M222- populations. I suppose we can hope that there is some M222+ in the Faroe Islands, although it's not clear to me whether their full-genome plans extend to Y-SNP's. Even if it does, it seems that about 87% of the male population is of Scandinavian origin, so it may lead nowhere in furthering our understanding of M222. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of pabloburns@comcast.net Sent: 23 October 2011 09:35 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations Sandy, I don't know much about mutation rates, which I thought were random. That "Dubhthach" chart I sent the list shows many mutations downstream of L21 that do not seem to have mutated at all, some that have mutated once more, and one (L625)that is seven steps away from L21. Obviously, we have much yet to discover. What I was trying to say (but upon rereading my message I see I did not do well) was that testing DF23 will help determine the origins--geographical and in time--of M222. Being upstream from M222, DF23 must have divided into those who are DF23+ and M222+, and those who are DF23+ but M222-. If a focal point of the latter is determined, that MAY (stress the "may")be where the M222 mutation occurred. Paul

Susan, If you subscribe to DNA-Forums, there is a search mechanism that will turn up a thread that started last June, when DF23 was discovered. The DF series apparently is being reported by an anonymous researcher who used the WTY material and the 1000 Genomes Project. The thread says that Thomas Krahn was informed of DF23, but he was having trouble preparing test primers for DF23. That was several months ago, and presumably he has not yet been able to do so. David Wilson weighs in on that thread to say he long has suspected that there are several SNPs between L21 and M222. If he is correct, and more are found upstream of M222 and none below, M222 will be proven to be quite young. But there are thousands of SNPs as yet undiscovered, so in my mind the jury is still out. However, many see SNPs, and not STRs, as the tools for deep ancestry research. After typing the above, I saw on another forum that L459 is now thought to be between L21 and all the downstream SNPs. In other words, the mutation chain is L21 to L459, which becomes the parent from which all the others in the former L21 group branch off. So our chain now is L21/L459/DF23/M222. Paul

Sandy, I don't know much about mutation rates, which I thought were random. That "Dubhthach" chart I sent the list shows many mutations downstream of L21 that do not seem to have mutated at all, some that have mutated once more, and one (L625)that is seven steps away from L21. Obviously, we have much yet to discover. What I was trying to say (but upon rereading my message I see I did not do well) was that testing DF23 will help determine the origins--geographical and in time--of M222. Being upstream from M222, DF23 must have divided into those who are DF23+ and M222+, and those who are DF23+ but M222-. If a focal point of the latter is determined, that MAY (stress the "may")be where the M222 mutation occurred. Paul

Hi, Paul, I actually went looking for information regarding DF23 -- even went to FTDNA haplotree for a look. Not much out there to view, thus perhaps testing isn't fully underway and/or those who may have are few. I would think coming in between there should be many. Could they be yet identified w/either L21 or M222? Susan

Hi Paul Hi Paul Take a mutation rate of .0035 After 40 generations, you'd expected roughly (1 - .0035)^40 = .869 or 87% to be on modal. M222+ has about 90% on modal for both 67-marker haplotypes and 111-marker haplotypes. This makes it highly unlikely for it to be even 60 generations old (say 1800 years old), never mind 3800 odd years old. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of pabloburns@comcast.net Sent: 22 October 2011 10:46 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: [R-M222] Back to the Basics-M222 and Related Mutations A few days ago I posted a query on this forum about DF23 testing. DF23 is believed to be between L21 and M222, and therefore it should be very important to us in identifying the age of M222. I received no replies, so I am left wondering how many of us are even aware of it. A more important goal is to find a SNP that divides M222. This will not only help determine the age of it but also will help in pedigree determinations. Many researchers believe that M222 appeared in CE times and, being fairly young, there are no additional mutations. Bill Howard Mathematica program placed its age at about 1680 BC, but since L21 itself is thought to be only about 4000 years before present, and other SNPS below L21 and parallel to M222 have mutated several times (see http://compsec.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/121-draft6.png). It seems to me that there should be an additional mutation downstream of M222--if it is that old. After all, there are said to be at least 200 SNP mutations between any father and son, and although most will be on the other 22 chromosomes, surely in almost 4000 years one should have found its way to the Y one. I understand that only three or four M222s have been WTY tested, and no new SNPs were found. There may be other data bases I don't have access to (Family Finder??) Alberto Squecco keeps track of 23and Me testees, that is, those who send him their data. His M222 section at http://www.webalice.it/asquecco/Y_DNA-Forums.zip contains only 32 entries (the surnames are Wilson, Burns, Murphy, Quinn, Gorman, Young, Marin, Arrington Wells, McNut, Martin, McCalla, Burns, Byrne, Utah Bear (sic), Lally, Grierson, Grierson, Falk/Scott, Slaven, Taylor, McGonnigal, McGonnigal, McGonnigal, Mullin, Allen, Dunn, Roland, Millard, McLaughlin, McHugh, Moore, McGinley). The M222 mutation is at Squecco's position number 852 where an ancestral A mutated to derived G. I checked for a subsequent mutation downstream of that one, but one does not appear. Paul R1b1c7 Research and Links: http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Allan I would certainly be interested in clarifying who this family is. Cheers. Alan In a message dated 21/10/2011 18:06:53 GMT Standard Time, agoforth@moscow.com writes: The other day, when I was looking for something else, I came across a Robert Milligan (1784-1872) who came over from Dumfrieshire to Prince Edward Island in 1819 with his wife and family. His father John followed in 1825. There's quite a lot of information available for Robert and his family because he was one of he original four Presbyterian elders on the island. If any Milligans on the list would like this information, please contact me off-list. Thanks. R1b1c7 Research and Links: http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I see I made a typo in ref message, but when I corrected it I found "access forbidden." If interested in the L21 draft tree, try "Dubhthach"s posting on: http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/16559-ui-fidgenti/

A few days ago I posted a query on this forum about DF23 testing. DF23 is believed to be between L21 and M222, and therefore it should be very important to us in identifying the age of M222. I received no replies, so I am left wondering how many of us are even aware of it. A more important goal is to find a SNP that divides M222. This will not only help determine the age of it but also will help in pedigree determinations. Many researchers believe that M222 appeared in CE times and, being fairly young, there are no additional mutations. Bill Howard Mathematica program placed its age at about 1680 BC, but since L21 itself is thought to be only about 4000 years before present, and other SNPS below L21 and parallel to M222 have mutated several times (see http://compsec.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/121-draft6.png). It seems to me that there should be an additional mutation downstream of M222--if it is that old. After all, there are said to be at least 200 SNP mutations between any father and son, and although most will be on the other 22 chromosomes, surely in almost 4000 years one should have found its way to the Y one. I understand that only three or four M222s have been WTY tested, and no new SNPs were found. There may be other data bases I don't have access to (Family Finder??) Alberto Squecco keeps track of 23and Me testees, that is, those who send him their data. His M222 section at http://www.webalice.it/asquecco/Y_DNA-Forums.zip contains only 32 entries (the surnames are Wilson, Burns, Murphy, Quinn, Gorman, Young, Marin, Arrington Wells, McNut, Martin, McCalla, Burns, Byrne, Utah Bear (sic), Lally, Grierson, Grierson, Falk/Scott, Slaven, Taylor, McGonnigal, McGonnigal, McGonnigal, Mullin, Allen, Dunn, Roland, Millard, McLaughlin, McHugh, Moore, McGinley). The M222 mutation is at Squecco's position number 852 where an ancestral A mutated to derived G. I checked for a subsequent mutation downstream of that one, but one does not appear. Paul

Hello Richard, I had come across questions raised about the Siol Muireadhaigh pedigrees, which I hadn't spent much time investigating. (I have been focused on the Southern Ui Neill.) One of the typical claims is that Siol Muireadhaigh overran the lands of Ui Maine and hence fake pedigrees incorporated the Ui Maine nobles into Siol Muireadhaigh. Yet DNA results are showing this in some cases to be false. In the case of Ua Lorcain there is no Siol Muireadaigh pedigree, however there was a Ua Lorcain family on the other side of the Shannon. (Then again I wonder about Clann Lorcain of Cenel Fiachach.) On a personal side I have another problem particular to my surname. There are two Irish forms O'Muireagain and O'Murchadhain, both are diminatives. Murchadhain is from singular Murchadh or in plural Murchaidh (Murphy). O'Muireagain is also sometimes written O'Muireadhaigh (Murray) and I wonder if there is a linkage. I confident that the O'Muireadhaigh of Clann Tlamain are the same O'Muireagain of Cenel Maine. Regards, Bernard. > From: richardmurray@persona.ca > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:30:26 -0400 > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Siol Muireadhaigh in Ui Maine clothing > > Hello Bernard, > > I have waited all week for someone with a decent understanding of DNA and > Haplogroup application vis a vis genealogy, to comment on your question; > "Are Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh outsiders from Meath? And > mis-associated with both the Ui Maine and Ui Briuin?". > > My meager understanding of these matters, perhaps, leave me prone to asking, > (in some minds), stupid questions. None the less, I can understand your > question in regard the Ui Maine, however, I am mystified at how one should > dis-associate this Clann from the Ui Briuin. > > Best regards, > > Richard Murray > Kit # 47050 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernard Morgan" <bernardmorgan@hotmail.com> > To: "dna-r1b1c7" <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 4:55 PM > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Siol Muireadhaigh in Ui Maine clothing > > > > To muddy the waters, IHM has this list of kings of the Caille Fallamhain: > > For 851, Congalach filius Irgalaig, rex Coille Follamhain, died. > For 882, Maelduin, son of Aenghus, lord of Caille Fallamhain, died. > For 890, … Innreachtach, son of Maelduin, lord of Caille Follamhain, were > slain …. > For 921, Fiachra m. Cathalain ri Coille Follamhain. > For 1016/17, Gilla Crist ua Lorcáin, ri Caille Follamhain, was slain. > For 1017, ua Clérchéin, tigherna Caille Follamhain. > > We know there are two O’Larkins families from the Midlands: the kings of > Caille Follamhain and another belonging to Clann Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin. > This Clann Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin is the family I am wondering are in > realty Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh of Ui Briuin for they are > (Larkins) M222+. However I note a Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin was king of > Caille Follamhain and would be a possible forefather to Ua Lorcáin (Ua > Clérchéin). > > Are Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh outsiders from Meath? And > mis-associated with both the Ui Maine and Ui Briuin? > > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Bernard, I have waited all week for someone with a decent understanding of DNA and Haplogroup application vis a vis genealogy, to comment on your question; "Are Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh outsiders from Meath? And mis-associated with both the Ui Maine and Ui Briuin?". My meager understanding of these matters, perhaps, leave me prone to asking, (in some minds), stupid questions. None the less, I can understand your question in regard the Ui Maine, however, I am mystified at how one should dis-associate this Clann from the Ui Briuin. Best regards, Richard Murray Kit # 47050 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernard Morgan" <bernardmorgan@hotmail.com> To: "dna-r1b1c7" <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 4:55 PM Subject: Re: [R-M222] Siol Muireadhaigh in Ui Maine clothing To muddy the waters, IHM has this list of kings of the Caille Fallamhain: For 851, Congalach filius Irgalaig, rex Coille Follamhain, died. For 882, Maelduin, son of Aenghus, lord of Caille Fallamhain, died. For 890, … Innreachtach, son of Maelduin, lord of Caille Follamhain, were slain …. For 921, Fiachra m. Cathalain ri Coille Follamhain. For 1016/17, Gilla Crist ua Lorcáin, ri Caille Follamhain, was slain. For 1017, ua Clérchéin, tigherna Caille Follamhain. We know there are two O’Larkins families from the Midlands: the kings of Caille Follamhain and another belonging to Clann Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin. This Clann Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin is the family I am wondering are in realty Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh of Ui Briuin for they are (Larkins) M222+. However I note a Innrachtaigh mic Maelduin was king of Caille Follamhain and would be a possible forefather to Ua Lorcáin (Ua Clérchéin). Are Clann Innrachtaigh mic Muireadhaigh outsiders from Meath? And mis-associated with both the Ui Maine and Ui Briuin? R1b1c7 Research and Links: http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The other day, when I was looking for something else, I came across a Robert Milligan (1784-1872) who came over from Dumfrieshire to Prince Edward Island in 1819 with his wife and family. His father John followed in 1825. There's quite a lot of information available for Robert and his family because he was one of he original four Presbyterian elders on the island. If any Milligans on the list would like this information, please contact me off-list. Thanks.

Very interesting - thanks. You may already be aware of this, and so too maybe are the Grierson/Milligan researchers, but just in case, there is a close match between McAmis 62770 and Milliken 23702. I make it a GD of 5 over 67 markers, with 4 off-modal matches. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of lmerle@comcast.net Sent: 20 October 2011 19:50 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] R-M222 off modal matches Hi Sandy, I admin the McCamish/McAmis/McCarmish/McKemmish project. Results here: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/McAmis/default.aspx?section=yresults It has two groupings: A large group around Banbridge area of County Down who often spell the name McCOmish. We got a fellow on the project. M222 but no close relationship to descendants of three brothers who left for America about 1770. We tested several American cousins to make sure we had their siggie and not an NPE. Eventually we found a 67 marker match with an Australian man who had an excellent paper trail to a man born in Tyrone in the early 1800s. We had to do a LOT of genealogy to find this guy, as he was not interested in genealogy. We knew about his ancestor, since I'd researched the surname in Ireland. He was part of a smaller grouping who tended to live in the old barony of Dungannon. Parts of which are in Tyrone and some in Derry. So we assume our lads came from that area. They use the same first names as well, so they were the ones I was betting on all along. A number of other McCamish lines migrated to Australia in the 1800s, one via Scotland. You see them in the Scots censuses, but they're Irish born. There was also, in the very early 1600s, a pod of them in Clones, Monaghan, but they seem to have disappeared. It's possible they moved to Down, but there is other evidence of a group who used the name BE (Before the English). I can't say surname, because as most of you know, Ulster Irish didn't use English-style inheritable surnames till forced to, much like the Welsh and Scots and the southern Irish. For Ulster Irish the Plantation is often mentioned -- early 1600s, but frankly, many areas, especially central Ulster, remained unattractive to British settlers and military (not good farming-land; full of Irish). Then they were run out or killed in the Rising in 1641. Most British surnames in the area do not go back before the mid 1600s, when a few new people arrived to replace the dead ones. Due to the depositions and the attempts to prosecute those who rebelled I suspect few struggled to retain any surname that some Englishman had pegged on him before the Rising. People ten! ded to use clan-names, but in an area where most everyone is an O'Neill or one of their allied clans, that's rather like the Scottish fisher villages where everyone ended up named "John Fisher" (story told in the front essay of Black "Surnames of Scotland). Useless. So people adopted other surnames, but I suspect after 1650. IN fact Bell "Surnames of Ulster" says the Irish in some locales were still not using fixed surnames in 1900. So those who think surnames will sort out the DNA are not going to get too far into the past in Ulster. I have evidence of a name that could be McCamish (spelling was real bad back then too <girn>), in central Tyrone, living on lands that had originally been granted to the descendants of the O'Cahan chiefs at the time of the Rising. He was a cowman for Tristan Beresford, a local landlord. Another one declined to do jury duty in Derry in 1621 and was fined. These were both clearly Irish guys: the one was accused of being 'out' in the Rising. The earlier dude was living in a place and time where there were not living Scots. Derry was an English colony and in 1621, not much of one at all. His first name was something like Murtagh. The McCamish DNA often matches or nearly matches other locals -- you got them in your email. They're all Irish central Ulster surnames. Given that this was the heart of the O'Neill kingdom (Dungannon), you're looking at loyal O'Neill clansman, I suspect, trying to extend their lives spans by not alerting the local government to their clan identity. I did a fair amount of research on the name, including the published Parliamentary Papers. They actually have a LOT of Irish names as many of the military reports sent to Queen Lizzie, King Jamie, and Charlie (before his head came off), were sent to Parliament and recorded. There was also some thought that the McCamishes might be McCormicks. So far I've not found a clan of McCormicks that they match. I would like to test a McCormick from Inishowen, because some thought they originated there (though perhaps this individual was faery-struck!), where it is known one clan remained after the O'Donnells took over. Moville area. When we started out no one matched the McCamishes, but now there are any number who do. The one common denominator is central Ulster. We also linked an earlier migration of McCamishes to central Pennsylvania (in situ by 1751) to the Tyrone McCamishes through DNA. The three brothers seem to have arrived about 1770. Had a family member return two years ago and I created an O'Neill tour for him of the three capitals, etc, etc. The big house of the estate where the erstwhile relative lived in the early 1800s is now a hotel, so he got to stay there. House is more recent, though. If anyone has an interest in the tour locations, let me know and I'll send it on. We could also organize a 'real' tour for next summer if enough were interested. I know a tour agent who would probably be able to arrange it. The US McCamishes assimilated into the "Scotch Irish" and believed their ancestors were Ulster Scots. However the name is not used in Scotland, except occasionally by Stewarts and McGregors (I have a list), whose DNA doesn't match. The leaders of Clan Gunn, up there in Pictland in Northeastern Scotland, used "McCamish", but they were broken in the 1400s by other highland clans. And it was Pictland -- not a lot of M222 there. No matches. They might have matches on the Isle of Mann, where the surname was used. It was once an Irish colony, so I would suspect they'd be Irish of some stripe. Haven't found any to test. In the case of McCamish/McKemmish, we have a 67 marker match to a descendant of a man who lived in Tyrone in the early 1800s. Other research supports this. So it, at least, is native to the area. Linda Merle Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:09:53 +0100 From: "Sandy Paterson" <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: [R-M222] R-M222 off modal matches To: <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Hi Walter No, I haven't leapt anywhere. But this list is interesting : >> Brown Cannon Carnes Carroll Cawthon Coyne (2) Creegan Daugherty Folan Gilmore Golden Graham Heflin Holt Hughes Kanary Kennedy Lawson MacAulay MacKenzie Manley Mawhorter McAdams McCall McGrath McKemmish McLaughlin (2) Munnelly Neel Queen Quinn Rice Sinclair Soakell Taylor Thrasher Towey Whitehead Wilson Yakes Young which, of course, doesn't prove anything except that it is likely that we are not English. Include 37 marker matches (excluding the duplicates who tested to 67) and the list becomes increasingly Celtic. >> I recently acquired a copy of Black's book 'The Surnames of Scotland'. Most of the above surnames are in the book (that doesn't mean they originated in Scotland, merely that they are found there). Also, Black mentions a Robert Fremansone, burgess of Jeddeworthe, 1296 (Bain II, p 197). Jeddeworthe is in Co Lanark, Scotland. Sandy R1b1c7 Research and Links: http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Sandy, I admin the McCamish/McAmis/McCarmish/McKemmish project. Results here: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/McAmis/default.aspx?section=yresults It has two groupings: A large group around Banbridge area of County Down who often spell the name McCOmish. We got a fellow on the project. M222 but no close relationship to descendants of three brothers who left for America about 1770. We tested several American cousins to make sure we had their siggie and not an NPE. Eventually we found a 67 marker match with an Australian man who had an excellent paper trail to a man born in Tyrone in the early 1800s. We had to do a LOT of genealogy to find this guy, as he was not interested in genealogy. We knew about his ancestor, since I'd researched the surname in Ireland. He was part of a smaller grouping who tended to live in the old barony of Dungannon. Parts of which are in Tyrone and some in Derry. So we assume our lads came from that area. They use the same first names as well, so they were the ones I was betting on all along. A number of other McCamish lines migrated to Australia in the 1800s, one via Scotland. You see them in the Scots censuses, but they're Irish born. There was also, in the very early 1600s, a pod of them in Clones, Monaghan, but they seem to have disappeared. It's possible they moved to Down, but there is other evidence of a group who used the name BE (Before the English). I can't say surname, because as most of you know, Ulster Irish didn't use English-style inheritable surnames till forced to, much like the Welsh and Scots and the southern Irish. For Ulster Irish the Plantation is often mentioned -- early 1600s, but frankly, many areas, especially central Ulster, remained unattractive to British settlers and military (not good farming-land; full of Irish). Then they were run out or killed in the Rising in 1641. Most British surnames in the area do not go back before the mid 1600s, when a few new people arrived to replace the dead ones. Due to the depositions and the attempts to prosecute those who rebelled I suspect few struggled to retain any surname that some Englishman had pegged on him before the Rising. People tended to use clan-names, but in an area where most everyone is an O'Neill or one of their allied clans, that's rather like the Scottish fisher villages where everyone ended up named "John Fisher" (story told in the front essay of Black "Surnames of Scotland). Useless. So people adopted other surnames, but I suspect after 1650. IN fact Bell "Surnames of Ulster" says the Irish in some locales were still not using fixed surnames in 1900. So those who think surnames will sort out the DNA are not going to get too far into the past in Ulster. I have evidence of a name that could be McCamish (spelling was real bad back then too <girn>), in central Tyrone, living on lands that had originally been granted to the descendants of the O'Cahan chiefs at the time of the Rising. He was a cowman for Tristan Beresford, a local landlord. Another one declined to do jury duty in Derry in 1621 and was fined. These were both clearly Irish guys: the one was accused of being 'out' in the Rising. The earlier dude was living in a place and time where there were not living Scots. Derry was an English colony and in 1621, not much of one at all. His first name was something like Murtagh. The McCamish DNA often matches or nearly matches other locals -- you got them in your email. They're all Irish central Ulster surnames. Given that this was the heart of the O'Neill kingdom (Dungannon), you're looking at loyal O'Neill clansman, I suspect, trying to extend their lives spans by not alerting the local government to their clan identity. I did a fair amount of research on the name, including the published Parliamentary Papers. They actually have a LOT of Irish names as many of the military reports sent to Queen Lizzie, King Jamie, and Charlie (before his head came off), were sent to Parliament and recorded. There was also some thought that the McCamishes might be McCormicks. So far I've not found a clan of McCormicks that they match. I would like to test a McCormick from Inishowen, because some thought they originated there (though perhaps this individual was faery-struck!), where it is known one clan remained after the O'Donnells took over. Moville area. When we started out no one matched the McCamishes, but now there are any number who do. The one common denominator is central Ulster. We also linked an earlier migration of McCamishes to central Pennsylvania (in situ by 1751) to the Tyrone McCamishes through DNA. The three brothers seem to have arrived about 1770. Had a family member return two years ago and I created an O'Neill tour for him of the three capitals, etc, etc. The big house of the estate where the erstwhile relative lived in the early 1800s is now a hotel, so he got to stay there. House is more recent, though. If anyone has an interest in the tour locations, let me know and I'll send it on. We could also organize a 'real' tour for next summer if enough were interested. I know a tour agent who would probably be able to arrange it. The US McCamishes assimilated into the "Scotch Irish" and believed their ancestors were Ulster Scots. However the name is not used in Scotland, except occasionally by Stewarts and McGregors (I have a list), whose DNA doesn't match. The leaders of Clan Gunn, up there in Pictland in Northeastern Scotland, used "McCamish", but they were broken in the 1400s by other highland clans. And it was Pictland -- not a lot of M222 there. No matches. They might have matches on the Isle of Mann, where the surname was used. It was once an Irish colony, so I would suspect they'd be Irish of some stripe. Haven't found any to test. In the case of McCamish/McKemmish, we have a 67 marker match to a descendant of a man who lived in Tyrone in the early 1800s. Other research supports this. So it, at least, is native to the area. Linda Merle Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:09:53 +0100 From: "Sandy Paterson" <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: [R-M222] R-M222 off modal matches To: <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Hi Walter No, I haven't leapt anywhere. But this list is interesting : >> Brown Cannon Carnes Carroll Cawthon Coyne (2) Creegan Daugherty Folan Gilmore Golden Graham Heflin Holt Hughes Kanary Kennedy Lawson MacAulay MacKenzie Manley Mawhorter McAdams McCall McGrath McKemmish McLaughlin (2) Munnelly Neel Queen Quinn Rice Sinclair Soakell Taylor Thrasher Towey Whitehead Wilson Yakes Young which, of course, doesn't prove anything except that it is likely that we are not English. Include 37 marker matches (excluding the duplicates who tested to 67) and the list becomes increasingly Celtic. >> I recently acquired a copy of Black's book 'The Surnames of Scotland'. Most of the above surnames are in the book (that doesn't mean they originated in Scotland, merely that they are found there). Also, Black mentions a Robert Fremansone, burgess of Jeddeworthe, 1296 (Bain II, p 197). Jeddeworthe is in Co Lanark, Scotland. Sandy

Hi Marie It was interesting to me mostly in the context of the discussion of the origins of the surname Freeman. These are all surnames that showed up with matches with Freeman. They seem to be mostly a mixture of Irish and Scots surnames. I was really just trying to put the point across that a Scots origin for Freeman is probably just as likely as an Irish origin. Golden is also interesting in this context. In Scotland you find Goldie, Golding and McGoldrick (I haven't come across Golden over here). Gaelic is of course also spoken in Scotland, although I understand there are some differences. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marie Kerr Sent: 20 October 2011 16:46 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] R-M222 off modal matches Sandy, Could you explain why this list is interesting? My father, James J. Golden, is on it. His parents were natives of Rathlacken, a tiny town in northern Co. Mayo. The name is one of the various Anglicized versions of MacUalhairg, e.g., Golding, Goulding, and (Mac)Goldrick). They were definitely Irish (native Gaelic speakers and all that). My grandfather had a strong aversion to the English because of their heavy-handedness: among other things for the Anglicization they imposed (the Irish were forbidden to teach, speak and write Gaelic), the Famine...