Until what feels like about 3 weeks ago, it was possible to download 111-marker haplotypes only (meaning one could exclude 12,25,37 and 67-marker haploypes) from FTDNA public sites. This facility seems to have disappeared. Is this a general problem, or is it only me? Also, I see that McHenry, kit number 27077, has been waiting for the results for the last 9 markers in batch 68-111 for over 2 months now. Is this all fall down? I don't like the symptoms. Sandy

In a message dated 8/27/2011 8:10:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rreid002@insight.rr.com writes: Such a beginning is found in the old Irish annals and the old writ, Ceart Ui Neill, out of Donegal, Ireland. The MacTavishes come from the Cenel nDuach a branch of the Cenel Conaill, descended from the Pictish Kings of Ros Guill and Irguill, now part of Donegal, and also from Dal-araidhe, now part of Antrim and Down. The Greek (Roman)historian, mapmaker and mathmetician, Ptolemy, mentions the tribe under the name of Ouenniknoi (Windukatii), and the lineage is tracable in such texts as the Irish Annuls of Ulster and Four Masters. This writer seems to be combining Lacey's Cruithin origin for the Cenel Conaill with his own guesses at the origin of his Scottish surname. The Ceart Ui Neill, the Rights of O'Neill mentions a sub-chieftain of the O'Donnells as Mac Giolla Shamhais from Ros Buill. The same name also appears in the Topographical Poems. To MacGillatsamhais the stout, Belong Ros-Guill2 and Ros-Iorguil,I reckon; O'Donovan's notes: 210. Gillatsamhais.-This name is now either unknown or lurks under some anglicised form. The most analogical anglicised form of it would be MacIltavish. The line is only traceable if you assume they are indeed descended from the Cenel Duach of Donegal. The pedigree of the Cenel Duach can be found in the Rawlinson B.502 genealogies and is as presented by the writer except for the inclusion of Fergus Cennfoda (or maybe that's something he took from Lacey or an entry in the Annals of Ulster in 586). Of course each name in the pedigree is a prince - one even married a daughter of King Loarn of Scotland. They held some early importance within the Cenel Conaill. One was King of Tara in the late 500s. At any rate it seems to be a classic example of someone latching onto an Irish surname in early records and assuming that is the origin of their own surname centuries later in another country. John

Again, Clan MacTavish Seannachie website: Tavis, Tavis or Taus is considered, and accepted in multiple sources, as the progenitor, epytom and founder of Clan MacTavish. However, this is incorrect. The MacTavish consider themselves much older than the traditional stories of Argyllshire, promulgated by the old seannachies, and newer writers still insist upon the old stories, when none have looked beyond those traditional stories for any possible alternate origin. Such a beginning is found in the old Irish annals and the old writ, Ceart Ui Neill, out of Donegal, Ireland. The MacTavishes come from the Cenel nDuach a branch of the Cenel Conaill, descended from the Pictish Kings of Ros Guill and Irguill, now part of Donegal, and also from Dal-araidhe, now part of Antrim and Down. The Greek (Roman)historian, mapmaker and mathmetician, Ptolemy, mentions the tribe under the name of Ouenniknoi (Windukatii), and the lineage is tracable in such texts as the Irish Annuls of Ulster and Four Masters. A Traditional Royal Genealogic Table of the Cenél nDuach (or Windukatii Picts) (Given in the various Irish annals and Ceart Ui Neill) 1. Conall Gulban � King of Tir Connell, of whom the Cenél Conaill (Supposed Son of King Niall Noígiallach) ↓ 2. Duí, alias Fergus Cennfoda - married Erca Loarn, Dau. of Loarn Mor, she was Princess of Dalriada. He founded the branch Cenél nDuach of Cenel Conaill, a Prince of the Cenél Conaill, King of Goll and Irgoll, and Prince of Dal-araidhe. ↓ 3. Ninnid(h), King of Goll and IrGoll. His offspring are called ‘Siol Ninnidh’. (flourished 561-563) ↓ 4. Báetán (Baedan), King of Teimar [sic Tara], High King of Ireland (d. 584-586)| ↓ 5. Conall, Prince of the Cenel nDuach & Tory Island, of Siol Ninnidh ↓ 6. Sechnusach, Prince of the Cenel nDuach of Siol Ninnidh ↓ 7. Duí (2nd ?), Prince of the Cenel nDuach of Siol Ninnidh (has but brief mention) ↓ 8. Corcc, or Uricc (alias Orc Doith) of Cenel nDuach & of Siol Ninnidh King of Gull and Irogull, flourished 658 ( Orc, the Boar, and Doith is a latter interpretation of Dui, or Duach. Orc Doith literally means: The Boar of Duach) ↓ 9. Duinechaid, Prince of the Cenel nDuach & Siol Ninnidh, killed 691 ↓ 10. Nuada (alias Anmchadh), King of Guill and Irguill (d. 718-722) Last of the Royal Succession ↓ The descendants are: The MacGilletsamhais (Siol Ninnidh) over Gull and Irgull -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 3:00 AM To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 Today's Topics: 1. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Sandy Paterson) 2. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Bill Howard) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:39:51 +0100 From: "Sandy Paterson" <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <000301cc63c3$572225d0$05667170$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Right, it's coming back to me. Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the mean marker value of the group. I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be hard-pressed to track down the exchange. As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but the answer would be biased high. I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued the discussion off-list. So. I think the above supports your contention that we should be concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and > also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of > the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether > M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families > are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland > and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, > separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, > aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have > Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, > and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as > they were one breeding population for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or > Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some > Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is > the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person > about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were > extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval > rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided > distribution of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need > M222+to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, > North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, > South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, > Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman > French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave > from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere > between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and > South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and > to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman > French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:00:24 -0400 From: Bill Howard <weh8@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <D358BD1E-E6FA-496B-B2CA-C72BA359D745@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Just a short note about the determination of the time of origin of groups of haplotypes, be they a SNP group or a surname group. ? The RCC correlation technique now has a time scale determined from pedigrees. ? t appears to be linear over tens of thousands of years. This means that the mutation rate has not changed significantly over that time period. ? Haplotype analysis of only one set of markers is meaningless; it must be compared with others. ? By the nature of this comparison, we can only determine the TMRCA of the oldest pair. But we want the time of origin of the progenitor, not of a pair of people. ? If you form a phylogenetic tree, it contains ALL the testees that are in the group you select. ? You can plot the run of descendant lines as a function of time. It will be an exponential plot due to the growing number in the population whose markers have separately mutated. ? A plot of the Log of the number (Log N) against the date will be very nearly a straight line. ? You merely have to extrapolate that straight line to the point where Log N=0. That's when the progenitor lived. The main point here is that the straight line results by using every testee on the plot, not just the ones who are more distant, AND this leads to only a very short extrapolation on the plot, so it can be trusted. The R^2 value of the plot is of the order of 0.98, yielding a very nice relation that you can work with and trust. The downside? Easy -- you need a very large number of testees in the group to assure that you are not just determining the TMRCA of the group you chose. How do you know when you have included enough testees? Well, as the number of testees you analyze gets larger and larger, the inclusion of more results tends to push the TMRCA further back in time, even with the extrapolation. If you run the tree process on larger and larger numbers, you will see the effect. But if you have two large groups, one of which contains, say 340 testees and the other contains 680 testees, and IF the derived date of the former is LONGER AGO than the one derived from the latter, then you know you have had enough in the sample because the "law of diminishing returns" has set in. That happened when John McLaughlin and derived Figure 3 in our paper on M222. We mentioned that effect there. It can be found at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/M222Paper .pdf and it has been submitted to the journal Familia, connected to the Ulster Historical Foundation where the readership in Ulster and Scotland who carry M222 tends to peak up! I truly think that this is now the best way to determine the TMRCA of groups of haplotypes. The more the group shares the identified characteristic of a group, the more meaningful the determination will be. You should not apply the process to a random group of testees because the result will not be meaningful. ----------- By the way, prior to publishing my Paper 1 introducing the RCC approach, Whit Athey and I had considerable discussions about how to determine the TMRCA of a surname cluster whose membership was known to be incomplete. This is EXACTLY the case here. In my Paper 1, it was determined that to determine the time of origin, you had to find the TMRCA of KNOWN members of the cluster by a factor of about 52.7/43.3 = 1.22 in order to estimate the TMRCA of a cluster if all the members were present. When there are more testees in the sample, that factor will be lower, as we see in the case of the M222 extrapolation (below).My Paper 1 is at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Howard1.p df Now, go to Figure 3 of the M222 paper. There you will see the last measured point was at a date of about 1300 BC. The same sort of extrapolation applied here would take you to the TMRCA of the M222 SNP, about 1680 years ago (SD~ 300 years). If I had done this process on a number of surname clusters using a phylogenetic tree approach, it would have given about the same result but would have been more trustworthy. But I had not known of the tree approach at the time I wrote that paper introducing the RCC correlation technique. This is just a more clever way to determine the SNP => using the number of descendant lines on the phylogenetic tree. Every testee contributes to the resulting straight line on the tree! ---------- - Bye from Bill Howard On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:39 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > Right, it's coming back to me. > > Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. > > DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance > method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was > an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the > pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower > than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. > > He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of > group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the > putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the > mean marker value of the group. > > I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the > impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the > marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, > but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the > founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. > > Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be > hard-pressed to track down the exchange. > > As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of > the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group > (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but > the answer would be biased high. > > I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful > exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it > seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued > the discussion off-list. > > So. > > I think the above supports your contention that we should be > concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. > > Sandy > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh boy here we go again! > > Sandy, > > I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. > > What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested > sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we > could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, > which might provide more clues?! > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < > alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul >> >> I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. >> My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and >> also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. >> >> I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of >> the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. >> >> Sandy >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy >> Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 >> To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Cc: lochlan@aol.com >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of >> Ireland - > oh >> boy here we go again! >> >> Susan, >> >> Yes, it has been discussed many times. >> >> One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether >> M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families >> are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland >> and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, >> separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, >> aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have >> Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, >> and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as >> they were one breeding population for millennia. >> >> Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or >> Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some >> Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in >> is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first >> person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill >> families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants >> were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and > very >> early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided >> distribution of >> M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need >> M222+to be >> able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: >> 1. Conroy (myself) >> 2. Galyean >> 3. Gillespie >> 4. McCord >> 5. Cruden >> >> Check out this chart: >> http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg >> >> And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, >> North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, >> South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, >> Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. >> >> As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman >> French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one >> wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source >> somewhere between > coastal >> between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and >> South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, >> and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman >> French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < >> chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for >>> awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it >>> before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) >>> >>> http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 >>> 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 >> >> 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 ******************************************

Clan MacTavish Seannachie websie: The Modern MacTavishes claim descent from the line of Kings of the Kingdom of IrGuill and Ros Guill, via descent from Conn of the Hundred Battles, being a tribe of Picts (Cruithne) mentioned in the second century by Ptolemy in his map materials. They were the Windukatii (Ouenniknioi) Picts, who later fell under the dynastic Ui Niells of the North. -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 3:00 AM To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 Today's Topics: 1. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Sandy Paterson) 2. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Bill Howard) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:39:51 +0100 From: "Sandy Paterson" <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <000301cc63c3$572225d0$05667170$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Right, it's coming back to me. Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the mean marker value of the group. I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be hard-pressed to track down the exchange. As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but the answer would be biased high. I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued the discussion off-list. So. I think the above supports your contention that we should be concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and > also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of > the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether > M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families > are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland > and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, > separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, > aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have > Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, > and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as > they were one breeding population for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or > Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some > Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is > the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person > about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were > extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval > rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided > distribution of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need > M222+to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, > North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, > South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, > Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman > French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave > from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere > between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and > South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and > to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman > French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:00:24 -0400 From: Bill Howard <weh8@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <D358BD1E-E6FA-496B-B2CA-C72BA359D745@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Just a short note about the determination of the time of origin of groups of haplotypes, be they a SNP group or a surname group. ? The RCC correlation technique now has a time scale determined from pedigrees. ? t appears to be linear over tens of thousands of years. This means that the mutation rate has not changed significantly over that time period. ? Haplotype analysis of only one set of markers is meaningless; it must be compared with others. ? By the nature of this comparison, we can only determine the TMRCA of the oldest pair. But we want the time of origin of the progenitor, not of a pair of people. ? If you form a phylogenetic tree, it contains ALL the testees that are in the group you select. ? You can plot the run of descendant lines as a function of time. It will be an exponential plot due to the growing number in the population whose markers have separately mutated. ? A plot of the Log of the number (Log N) against the date will be very nearly a straight line. ? You merely have to extrapolate that straight line to the point where Log N=0. That's when the progenitor lived. The main point here is that the straight line results by using every testee on the plot, not just the ones who are more distant, AND this leads to only a very short extrapolation on the plot, so it can be trusted. The R^2 value of the plot is of the order of 0.98, yielding a very nice relation that you can work with and trust. The downside? Easy -- you need a very large number of testees in the group to assure that you are not just determining the TMRCA of the group you chose. How do you know when you have included enough testees? Well, as the number of testees you analyze gets larger and larger, the inclusion of more results tends to push the TMRCA further back in time, even with the extrapolation. If you run the tree process on larger and larger numbers, you will see the effect. But if you have two large groups, one of which contains, say 340 testees and the other contains 680 testees, and IF the derived date of the former is LONGER AGO than the one derived from the latter, then you know you have had enough in the sample because the "law of diminishing returns" has set in. That happened when John McLaughlin and derived Figure 3 in our paper on M222. We mentioned that effect there. It can be found at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/M222Paper .pdf and it has been submitted to the journal Familia, connected to the Ulster Historical Foundation where the readership in Ulster and Scotland who carry M222 tends to peak up! I truly think that this is now the best way to determine the TMRCA of groups of haplotypes. The more the group shares the identified characteristic of a group, the more meaningful the determination will be. You should not apply the process to a random group of testees because the result will not be meaningful. ----------- By the way, prior to publishing my Paper 1 introducing the RCC approach, Whit Athey and I had considerable discussions about how to determine the TMRCA of a surname cluster whose membership was known to be incomplete. This is EXACTLY the case here. In my Paper 1, it was determined that to determine the time of origin, you had to find the TMRCA of KNOWN members of the cluster by a factor of about 52.7/43.3 = 1.22 in order to estimate the TMRCA of a cluster if all the members were present. When there are more testees in the sample, that factor will be lower, as we see in the case of the M222 extrapolation (below).My Paper 1 is at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Howard1.p df Now, go to Figure 3 of the M222 paper. There you will see the last measured point was at a date of about 1300 BC. The same sort of extrapolation applied here would take you to the TMRCA of the M222 SNP, about 1680 years ago (SD~ 300 years). If I had done this process on a number of surname clusters using a phylogenetic tree approach, it would have given about the same result but would have been more trustworthy. But I had not known of the tree approach at the time I wrote that paper introducing the RCC correlation technique. This is just a more clever way to determine the SNP => using the number of descendant lines on the phylogenetic tree. Every testee contributes to the resulting straight line on the tree! ---------- - Bye from Bill Howard On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:39 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > Right, it's coming back to me. > > Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. > > DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance > method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was > an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the > pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower > than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. > > He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of > group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the > putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the > mean marker value of the group. > > I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the > impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the > marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, > but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the > founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. > > Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be > hard-pressed to track down the exchange. > > As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of > the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group > (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but > the answer would be biased high. > > I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful > exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it > seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued > the discussion off-list. > > So. > > I think the above supports your contention that we should be > concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. > > Sandy > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh boy here we go again! > > Sandy, > > I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. > > What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested > sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we > could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, > which might provide more clues?! > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < > alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul >> >> I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. >> My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and >> also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. >> >> I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of >> the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. >> >> Sandy >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy >> Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 >> To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Cc: lochlan@aol.com >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of >> Ireland - > oh >> boy here we go again! >> >> Susan, >> >> Yes, it has been discussed many times. >> >> One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether >> M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families >> are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland >> and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, >> separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, >> aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have >> Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, >> and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as >> they were one breeding population for millennia. >> >> Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or >> Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some >> Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in >> is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first >> person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill >> families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants >> were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and > very >> early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided >> distribution of >> M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need >> M222+to be >> able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: >> 1. Conroy (myself) >> 2. Galyean >> 3. Gillespie >> 4. McCord >> 5. Cruden >> >> Check out this chart: >> http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg >> >> And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, >> North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, >> South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, >> Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. >> >> As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman >> French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one >> wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source >> somewhere between > coastal >> between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and >> South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, >> and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman >> French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < >> chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for >>> awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it >>> before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) >>> >>> http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 >>> 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 >> >> 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 ******************************************

Found this in the Encyclopedia of the Celtic Tree web site: Vennicnii / Ουεννικνιοι - Name of the peoples of the ancient city Ireland by Ptolemy in his Geography, living in the north-west of the island (County Donegal). Their name is Latinized into Vennicni regularly and may be a compound * veni -icnos "the son of the clan ", or based on the Celtic root * venicos" members of the clan . " Some see a possible relationship between Ireland and Vennicnii Venicon Scotland. Ptolemy, Geography, II, 2, 3: "The living Ouenniknioi the west coast, next to them are in order, the Robogdioi. The west coast is bordered by the western ocean." Ptolemy, Geography, II, 2, 5: "Erdinoi live near the coast of Ouenniknioi and live between the two magnates, and then Auteinoi Gagganoi, below which are Ouellaboroi. -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 3:00 AM To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 Today's Topics: 1. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Sandy Paterson) 2. Re: The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! (Bill Howard) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 08:39:51 +0100 From: "Sandy Paterson" <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <000301cc63c3$572225d0$05667170$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Right, it's coming back to me. Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the mean marker value of the group. I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be hard-pressed to track down the exchange. As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but the answer would be biased high. I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued the discussion off-list. So. I think the above supports your contention that we should be concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and > also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of > the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether > M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families > are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland > and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, > separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, > aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have > Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, > and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as > they were one breeding population for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or > Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some > Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is > the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person > about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were > extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval > rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided > distribution of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need > M222+to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, > North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, > South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, > Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman > French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave > from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere > between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and > South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and > to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman > French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:00:24 -0400 From: Bill Howard <weh8@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <D358BD1E-E6FA-496B-B2CA-C72BA359D745@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Just a short note about the determination of the time of origin of groups of haplotypes, be they a SNP group or a surname group. ? The RCC correlation technique now has a time scale determined from pedigrees. ? t appears to be linear over tens of thousands of years. This means that the mutation rate has not changed significantly over that time period. ? Haplotype analysis of only one set of markers is meaningless; it must be compared with others. ? By the nature of this comparison, we can only determine the TMRCA of the oldest pair. But we want the time of origin of the progenitor, not of a pair of people. ? If you form a phylogenetic tree, it contains ALL the testees that are in the group you select. ? You can plot the run of descendant lines as a function of time. It will be an exponential plot due to the growing number in the population whose markers have separately mutated. ? A plot of the Log of the number (Log N) against the date will be very nearly a straight line. ? You merely have to extrapolate that straight line to the point where Log N=0. That's when the progenitor lived. The main point here is that the straight line results by using every testee on the plot, not just the ones who are more distant, AND this leads to only a very short extrapolation on the plot, so it can be trusted. The R^2 value of the plot is of the order of 0.98, yielding a very nice relation that you can work with and trust. The downside? Easy -- you need a very large number of testees in the group to assure that you are not just determining the TMRCA of the group you chose. How do you know when you have included enough testees? Well, as the number of testees you analyze gets larger and larger, the inclusion of more results tends to push the TMRCA further back in time, even with the extrapolation. If you run the tree process on larger and larger numbers, you will see the effect. But if you have two large groups, one of which contains, say 340 testees and the other contains 680 testees, and IF the derived date of the former is LONGER AGO than the one derived from the latter, then you know you have had enough in the sample because the "law of diminishing returns" has set in. That happened when John McLaughlin and derived Figure 3 in our paper on M222. We mentioned that effect there. It can be found at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/M222Paper .pdf and it has been submitted to the journal Familia, connected to the Ulster Historical Foundation where the readership in Ulster and Scotland who carry M222 tends to peak up! I truly think that this is now the best way to determine the TMRCA of groups of haplotypes. The more the group shares the identified characteristic of a group, the more meaningful the determination will be. You should not apply the process to a random group of testees because the result will not be meaningful. ----------- By the way, prior to publishing my Paper 1 introducing the RCC approach, Whit Athey and I had considerable discussions about how to determine the TMRCA of a surname cluster whose membership was known to be incomplete. This is EXACTLY the case here. In my Paper 1, it was determined that to determine the time of origin, you had to find the TMRCA of KNOWN members of the cluster by a factor of about 52.7/43.3 = 1.22 in order to estimate the TMRCA of a cluster if all the members were present. When there are more testees in the sample, that factor will be lower, as we see in the case of the M222 extrapolation (below).My Paper 1 is at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Howard1.p df Now, go to Figure 3 of the M222 paper. There you will see the last measured point was at a date of about 1300 BC. The same sort of extrapolation applied here would take you to the TMRCA of the M222 SNP, about 1680 years ago (SD~ 300 years). If I had done this process on a number of surname clusters using a phylogenetic tree approach, it would have given about the same result but would have been more trustworthy. But I had not known of the tree approach at the time I wrote that paper introducing the RCC correlation technique. This is just a more clever way to determine the SNP => using the number of descendant lines on the phylogenetic tree. Every testee contributes to the resulting straight line on the tree! ---------- - Bye from Bill Howard On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:39 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > Right, it's coming back to me. > > Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. > > DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance > method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was > an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the > pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower > than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. > > He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of > group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the > putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the > mean marker value of the group. > > I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the > impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the > marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, > but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the > founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. > > Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be > hard-pressed to track down the exchange. > > As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of > the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group > (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but > the answer would be biased high. > > I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful > exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it > seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued > the discussion off-list. > > So. > > I think the above supports your contention that we should be > concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. > > Sandy > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland > - oh boy here we go again! > > Sandy, > > I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. > > What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested > sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we > could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, > which might provide more clues?! > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < > alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul >> >> I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. >> My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and >> also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. >> >> I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of >> the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. >> >> Sandy >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy >> Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 >> To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Cc: lochlan@aol.com >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of >> Ireland - > oh >> boy here we go again! >> >> Susan, >> >> Yes, it has been discussed many times. >> >> One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether >> M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families >> are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland >> and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, >> separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, >> aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have >> Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, >> and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as >> they were one breeding population for millennia. >> >> Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or >> Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some >> Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in >> is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first >> person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill >> families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants >> were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and > very >> early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided >> distribution of >> M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need >> M222+to be >> able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: >> 1. Conroy (myself) >> 2. Galyean >> 3. Gillespie >> 4. McCord >> 5. Cruden >> >> Check out this chart: >> http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg >> >> And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, >> North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, >> South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, >> Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. >> >> As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman >> French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one >> wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source >> somewhere between > coastal >> between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and >> South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, >> and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman >> French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < >> chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for >>> awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it >>> before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) >>> >>> http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 >>> 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 >> >> 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 > > 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 ------------------------------ End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 284 ******************************************

Just a short note about the determination of the time of origin of groups of haplotypes, be they a SNP group or a surname group. • The RCC correlation technique now has a time scale determined from pedigrees. • t appears to be linear over tens of thousands of years. This means that the mutation rate has not changed significantly over that time period. • Haplotype analysis of only one set of markers is meaningless; it must be compared with others. • By the nature of this comparison, we can only determine the TMRCA of the oldest pair. But we want the time of origin of the progenitor, not of a pair of people. • If you form a phylogenetic tree, it contains ALL the testees that are in the group you select. • You can plot the run of descendant lines as a function of time. It will be an exponential plot due to the growing number in the population whose markers have separately mutated. • A plot of the Log of the number (Log N) against the date will be very nearly a straight line. • You merely have to extrapolate that straight line to the point where Log N=0. That's when the progenitor lived. The main point here is that the straight line results by using every testee on the plot, not just the ones who are more distant, AND this leads to only a very short extrapolation on the plot, so it can be trusted. The R^2 value of the plot is of the order of 0.98, yielding a very nice relation that you can work with and trust. The downside? Easy -- you need a very large number of testees in the group to assure that you are not just determining the TMRCA of the group you chose. How do you know when you have included enough testees? Well, as the number of testees you analyze gets larger and larger, the inclusion of more results tends to push the TMRCA further back in time, even with the extrapolation. If you run the tree process on larger and larger numbers, you will see the effect. But if you have two large groups, one of which contains, say 340 testees and the other contains 680 testees, and IF the derived date of the former is LONGER AGO than the one derived from the latter, then you know you have had enough in the sample because the "law of diminishing returns" has set in. That happened when John McLaughlin and derived Figure 3 in our paper on M222. We mentioned that effect there. It can be found at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/M222Paper.pdf and it has been submitted to the journal Familia, connected to the Ulster Historical Foundation where the readership in Ulster and Scotland who carry M222 tends to peak up! I truly think that this is now the best way to determine the TMRCA of groups of haplotypes. The more the group shares the identified characteristic of a group, the more meaningful the determination will be. You should not apply the process to a random group of testees because the result will not be meaningful. ----------- By the way, prior to publishing my Paper 1 introducing the RCC approach, Whit Athey and I had considerable discussions about how to determine the TMRCA of a surname cluster whose membership was known to be incomplete. This is EXACTLY the case here. In my Paper 1, it was determined that to determine the time of origin, you had to find the TMRCA of KNOWN members of the cluster by a factor of about 52.7/43.3 = 1.22 in order to estimate the TMRCA of a cluster if all the members were present. When there are more testees in the sample, that factor will be lower, as we see in the case of the M222 extrapolation (below).My Paper 1 is at: http://mysite.verizon.net/weh8/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/Howard1.pdf Now, go to Figure 3 of the M222 paper. There you will see the last measured point was at a date of about 1300 BC. The same sort of extrapolation applied here would take you to the TMRCA of the M222 SNP, about 1680 years ago (SD~ 300 years). If I had done this process on a number of surname clusters using a phylogenetic tree approach, it would have given about the same result but would have been more trustworthy. But I had not known of the tree approach at the time I wrote that paper introducing the RCC correlation technique. This is just a more clever way to determine the SNP => using the number of descendant lines on the phylogenetic tree. Every testee contributes to the resulting straight line on the tree! ---------- - Bye from Bill Howard On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:39 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > Right, it's coming back to me. > > Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. > > DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance method of > estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was an unbiased > estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the pair-wise TMRCA's > within the group. Since that is necessarily lower than the group TMRCA, it > means that the self-variance method it is biased low. > > He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of group > TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the putative marker > value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the mean marker value of > the group. > > I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the > impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the marker > value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, but although > we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the founder markers, we > don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. > > Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be hard-pressed > to track down the exchange. > > As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of the > two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group (read Conroy > and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but the answer would be > biased high. > > I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful > exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it seems to > have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued the discussion > off-list. > > So. > > I think the above supports your contention that we should be concentrating > on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. > > Sandy > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh > boy here we go again! > > Sandy, > > I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. > > What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested > sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could > see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might > provide more clues?! > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < > alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul >> >> I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. >> My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also >> that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. >> >> I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the >> outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. >> >> Sandy >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy >> Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 >> To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Cc: lochlan@aol.com >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - > oh >> boy here we go again! >> >> Susan, >> >> Yes, it has been discussed many times. >> >> One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 >> is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of >> Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern >> Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a >> water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost >> every >> time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots >> may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's >> pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population >> for millennia. >> >> Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western >> Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the >> Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of >> the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to >> point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially >> as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and > very >> early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution >> of >> M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be >> able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: >> 1. Conroy (myself) >> 2. Galyean >> 3. Gillespie >> 4. McCord >> 5. Cruden >> >> Check out this chart: >> http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg >> >> And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North >> East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West >> France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, >> Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. >> >> As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French >> families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the >> Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between > coastal >> between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South >> East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South >> Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to >> Scotland, England and Ireland. >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < >> chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for >>> awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it >>> before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) >>> >>> http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 >>> 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 >> >> 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 > > 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

Right, it's coming back to me. Sometime during the past 6 months there was a shortish discussion in genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com between Dave Johnston and Ken Nordtvedt. DJ wrote that he could show mathematically that the self-variance method of estimating group TMRCA in fact produced an answer that was an unbiased estimate NOT of the group TMRCA, but of the mean of the pair-wise TMRCA's within the group. Since that is necessarily lower than the group TMRCA, it means that the self-variance method it is biased low. He went on to reason that in order to get an unbiased estimate of group TMRCA, variance should be calculated with reference to the putative marker value of the eponymous group "founder" rather than the mean marker value of the group. I don't wish to incorrectly attribute views to DJ or KN, but I got the impression that KN agreed with DJ, but added the caveat that the marker value of the founder is unknown. Yes, we can calculate modals, but although we can regard the modals as the 'best estimates' of the founder markers, we don't actually know them. That was my interpretation of the discussion. Unfortunately, my computer crashed soon after that, so I'd be hard-pressed to track down the exchange. As I recall, DJ suggested that simply estimating the pairwise TMRCA of the two seemingly most distantly related haplotypes within a group (read Conroy and Doherty in M222), would probably be insightful, but the answer would be biased high. I think the discussion between DJ and KN was probably the most useful exchange I've ever read on the subject on TMRCA estimation, but it seems to have died off without much follow-up. Perhaps they continued the discussion off-list. So. I think the above supports your contention that we should be concentrating on the extremes rather than the group in its entirety. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also > that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the > outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 > is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of > Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern > Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a > water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost > every > time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots > may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's > pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population > for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western > Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the > Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of > the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to > point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially > as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution > of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North > East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West > France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, > Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French > families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the > Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South > East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South > Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to > Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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

I've long since come to the conclusion that the best estimates of the M222 TMRCA will come from the pairwise TMRCA's of the most distantly related pairs of haplotypes. In fact I've tried your haplotype with that of one of the Doherty's (I think it was), but I think I should have more than just one pair. The problem of course is that you have to be confident in your pairwise TMRCA estimates. I am for relatively closely related haplotypes, but I have good reason to cast a jaundiced eye on my estimates of distantly related TMRCA's. So for now, I'm stuck. My gut feel is that it shouldn't be necessary to exclude Ui Neill families per se, on the basis that there's no logical reason to think that they wouldn't include outliers. I agree though that there doesn't seem to be much point in over-angsting about McLaughlin and O'Doherty haplotypes. Neither are even close to being outliers. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 19:33 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also > that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the > outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 > is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of > Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern > Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a > water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost > every > time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots > may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's > pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population > for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western > Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the > Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of > the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to > point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially > as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution > of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North > East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West > France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, > Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French > families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the > Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South > East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South > Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to > Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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

Hi Paul I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Cc: lochlan@aol.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Susan, Yes, it has been discussed many times. One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population for millennia. Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution of M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: 1. Conroy (myself) 2. Galyean 3. Gillespie 4. McCord 5. Cruden Check out this chart: http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. Cheers, Paul On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > 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

Sandy, See Figure 3 of the paper that John McLaughlin and I wrote. The M222 TMRCA was determined in that paper and I think it's good to about 300 years. It is a very new approach using the phylogenetic tree and its descendants connections. - Bye from Bill Howard On Aug 25, 2011, at 3:06 PM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > I've long since come to the conclusion that the best estimates of the M222 > TMRCA will come from the pairwise TMRCA's of the most distantly related > pairs of haplotypes. In fact I've tried your haplotype with that of one of > the Doherty's (I think it was), but I think I should have more than just one > pair. > > The problem of course is that you have to be confident in your pairwise > TMRCA estimates. I am for relatively closely related haplotypes, but I have > good reason to cast a jaundiced eye on my estimates of distantly related > TMRCA's. So for now, I'm stuck. > > My gut feel is that it shouldn't be necessary to exclude Ui Neill families > per se, on the basis that there's no logical reason to think that they > wouldn't include outliers. I agree though that there doesn't seem to be much > point in over-angsting about McLaughlin and O'Doherty haplotypes. Neither > are even close to being outliers. > > Sandy > >

Sandy, I just visually scanned the chart I linked to. What I'd like to see is analysis done of a 67-Marker, M222 SNP Tested sample, that excludes the well known Ui Neill families - that way we could see what relationships can be determined from the outliers, which might provide more clues?! On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Sandy Paterson < alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > Hi Paul > > I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. > My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also > that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. > > I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the > outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. > > Sandy > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 > To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh > boy here we go again! > > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 > is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of > Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern > Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a > water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost > every > time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots > may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's > pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population > for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western > Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the > Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of > the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to > point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially > as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very > early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution > of > M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be > able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North > East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West > France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, > Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French > families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the > Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal > between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South > East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South > Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to > Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > > 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 > > 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 >

Paul, I am feeling very vindicated by your opinion which perhaps not as specifically, I share, and I believe others perhaps less vocal than some of us may share this as well. It seems perhaps in light of the most recent studies that marker correlation except in large averaging pools (and maybe not even then) is unlikely to settle the issue due to the inconstancy of mutation. That's a song I've been singing for awhile as well, albeit I'm not as knowledgeable on the subject as many may be. Added to this issue is factoring in the location of the oldest known ancestor bit as it ofter reflects pools of coalescence due to recent migration while disregarding migrations previous to family/cultural/social anecdotal stories and/or record keeping. As an investigative tool among all the others, however, it is a valuable consideration. Although surnames recently may be correlated, the same issue is true when regarding surnames and lineages. Frankly some are well researched while others are at best, best guesses, and in all cases before record keeping is rarely anything but speculation. That issue is also fraught with name changes, phonetic spellings and all the rest. In both cases the bias often is the wish list that most of us fall victim to at one time or another. We are left with some histories recorded of the oral versions, which as we all know are written from the perspective of the scribe(s), and one may hope only that there is no bias there which is highly unlikely. Interesting and complicated and the observation -- fascinating. Susan On 8/25/2011 12:11 PM, Paul Conroy wrote: > Susan, > > Yes, it has been discussed many times. > > One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether > M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families > are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland > and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout > history, separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting > travel, aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to > have Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still > earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and > distinguish, as they were one breeding population for millennia. > > Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or > Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some > Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is > the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person > about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were > extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval > rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very early colonists in the US, > they have created a very lopsided distribution of M222+. But to > determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be able to > account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: > 1. Conroy (myself) > 2. Galyean > 3. Gillespie > 4. McCord > 5. Cruden > > Check out this chart: > http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg > > And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, > North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, > South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, > Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included > in this project. > > As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman > French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave > from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere > between coastal between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to > South England and South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the > Belgae tribes, and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later > again as Norman French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen > <chantillycarpets@earthlink.net > <mailto:chantillycarpets@earthlink.net>> wrote: > > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com > <mailto:DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com> with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of > the message > >

Susan, Yes, it has been discussed many times. One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population for millennia. Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution of M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to be able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: 1. Conroy (myself) 2. Galyean 3. Gillespie 4. McCord 5. Cruden Check out this chart: http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. Cheers, Paul On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > 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 >

DOES MAKE GOOD SENSE! THANK YOU, DON MILLIGAN, "OUTLIER FROM NITHSDALE, SCOTLAND TO DONEGORE, CO. ANTRIM CIRCA 1630". -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Sandy Paterson Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 10:58 AM To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Hi Paul I'm interested to know why you include Gillespie in the group of outliers. My interest in them is that I share DYS481,487 = 26,14 with them, and also that Gillespie and Ewing share DYS442 = 11. I agree with your general approach though - a better understanding of the outliers is likely to provide a better understanding of M222. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy Sent: 25 August 2011 17:11 To: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Cc: lochlan@aol.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] The origin of R-M222 and the peopling of Ireland - oh boy here we go again! Susan, Yes, it has been discussed many times. One of the topics most near and dear to many on this forum is whether M222 is Irish or Scottish, and especially whether particular families are of Irish or Scottish descent. The truth is that Western Scotland and Northern Ireland were almost the same country throughout history, separated by a water super-highway, that far from inhibiting travel, aided it. Almost every time a Scottish family can be shown to have Irish roots, those Irish roots may have been Scottish still earlier, and vice-versa - so to me it's pointless to try and distinguish, as they were one breeding population for millennia. Also, as I don't seem to be related closely to Northern Ireland or Western Scotland - though I do seem to possibly have share some Off-Modals to the Nith Valley Cluster - what I'm more interested in is the deep structure of the M222 group. I think I was the first person about 3 or 4 years ago, to point out that the Ui Neill families were extraordinary fecund, especially as their descendants were Medieval rulers in Ireland and Scotland, and very early colonists in the US, they have created a very lopsided distribution of M222+. But to determine the true source of the entire group, we need to M222+be able to account for the placing of all the outliers, such as: 1. Conroy (myself) 2. Galyean 3. Gillespie 4. McCord 5. Cruden Check out this chart: http://dna.cfsna.net/R-M222.jpg And all the unrepresented East Ireland, West Ireland, South Ireland, North East Scotland, Central England, South England, Northern France, South West France, North West France (Brittany), Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden - which to date are barely included in this project. As I fairly closely some Daltons and some Stewards - both Norman French families - it's my opinion that M222 came in more than one wave from the Continent to the Isles, and probably has a source somewhere between coastal between Brittany and Holland. Coming over first to South England and South East Ireland and possibly West Ireland as the Belgae tribes, and to South Ireland as the Erainn tribes, then later again as Norman French, to Scotland, England and Ireland. Cheers, Paul On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Susan Hedeen < chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > The debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for > awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it > before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) > > http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2 > 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 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 debates we've been reviewing regarding M222 have been around for awhile. See this discussion. I'm sure you have probably seen it before, but almost dejavu (spelling an example of phonetics) http://www.worldfamilies.net/forum/index.php?topic=8846.10;wap2

Please Unsubscribe me from this list. I find it is not useful for me. Thank you, mycroft@centrcata.com On Aug 24, 2011, at 4:55 PM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh (Bernard Morgan) > 2. Re: DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 276 (Susan Hedeen) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:32:18 +0000 > From: Bernard Morgan <bernardmorgan@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > To: dna-r1b1c7 <dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <SNT128-W619F3BC813DB53CEA5C100BB110@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > >>> >>> Is there any connection between: >>> Mac Duinnshl?ibhe and O'Duinn >>> >>> Which list the same person as: >>> 1. *Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi* >>> 2. *Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi* >>> >>> Which could be translated as "Cormac Dunne of the >>> Mountains", as opposed to >>> "Cormac of the Mountain Fort" >> > > Do I take it that Mac Duinnshl?ibhe does not yield O'Duinn? I found a Dunlavey at YSearch.org and he is I*. I wonder how he compares to the halpotype of the MacGuinness of Iveagh. > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 09:51:32 -0400 > From: Susan Hedeen <chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 276 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Cc: dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <4E5501E4.9060808@earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Since the two lands are completely linked through migrations, here is a > summarized brief look at Scotland. The site for further exploration is > at http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2html > > Certainly some from this site has already been here, however for those > who haven't been consider it simply an addition to the discussion > regarding heritages. > > *A Brief History of Scotland * > > Presented by Peter N. Williams, Ph.D. > <http://www.britannia.com/wales/peter.html> > > *Chapter 1: Celtic Scotland* > > There is evidence of human settlement in parts of present day Scotland > <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2.html#> that dates back to > 6,000 BC. The inhabitants were hunters and fishermen. About two thousand > years later, a second group arrived -- the Neolithic people. Some of > their stone houses remain in Orkney; the well-preserved stone-built > village, Skara Brae <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2.html#>, > attests to the wealth and stability of its builders. On the mainland, > chambered tombs also show the sophisticated engineering of a settled, > cooperative community. Then came the Beaker folk, named after the shape > of their pottery. It is to these people that we owe the mysterious > groups of huge stone circles and standing stones dotted hither and yon > across the landscape. > > The Bronze Age, or rather, the early and late Bronze Ages, from about > 2,000 to 600 BC, introduced swords, knives, chisels, buckles, cauldrons > and buckets, all evidence of a high level of civilization and creature > comfort that was enhanced by the metal craft learned in the so-called > subsequent Iron Age. Such objects were used by the indigenous Picts, who > lived in the region north of the Firth of Forth, and the Celts, who had > come to live in regions of Britain and Ireland further south. > > It is to the invading Romans > <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2.html#> that we owe our > written history of Britain; before their arrival, it simply wasn't the > Celtic custom to entrust their history to anyone but the holy men and it > was not to be written. The Romans, however, were always anxious to set > down their military triumphs in writing, and from their historians a > picture of Britain and its inhabitants began to emerge. In the fourth > century, a Latin poem describes the people of Tartessos on the Atlantic > coast of Iberia trading with the inhabitants of two large islands, Ierne > and Albion (Ireland and Scotland), people who spoke a Celtic language. > > Ptolemy's geography (written about 150 AD includes a group of five > islands lying between Scotland and Ireland. On them was built, a new > structural form, the broch (a fortified dwelling), an immense round > stone tower. The best preserved is found on Mousa in Shetland. Because > they are perched on hills and headlands, the brochs seem to have been > built by resident lords to protect their settlements from sea-borne > raiders. > > In 55 and 54 BC following his success in subduing most of Gaul, Caesar > turned his attention to the islands of Britain. However, for a few years > afterwards, the Roman armies were fully occupied in suppressing the > revolt of the Gauls on the continent under Vercingetorix, and so Britain > was more-or-less left on its own, apart from its trading links with the > Continent. > > Under the Emperor Claudius, Rome again began to look westwards to the > misty lands over the sea, to a land full of legendary mineral wealth as > well as good grain-growing pastures. Overcoming what amounted to only > token resistance in the southeast, the Romans set up the frontier, the > Fosse Way, running from Lincoln in the north to Essex in the southwest. > Their prosperous villas attest to settled, peaceful conditions in the > agricultural lands to the southeast. It was in the more mountainous > areas west of the line, however, that the much sought-after minerals > lay. And it was there that resistance was fiercest. > > The accounts given by Tacitus (written approximately half a century > after those of Ptolemy) are particularly important, for his > father-in-law was Agricola, appointed Governor of the Roman province of > Britain. Agricola invaded what is now southern Scotland in 81 A.D. > Before that, Roman garrisons had been established at Caerwent (near > present-day Chepstow) in the south and Deva (Chester) in the north to > keep a close eye on the Celtic tribesmen to the west, where the Romans > found it necessary to destroy the Druid center of Wales on the Menai > Straits. > > > *84 AD - MONS GRAUPIUS* > Farther north, under Agricola, the Roman armies vanquished one tribe > after another until a final, decisive battle against Calgacus "the > swordsman" at Mons Graupius in 84 A.D. This ended effective resistance > (the Western Isles and the Highlands were left alone and up until the > Clearances of the 18th century remained very much Celtic countries in > language and culture). Though Agricola may have wished to add Ireland to > his conquests, no Roman expedition was ever taken across the Celtic Sea > to that large, relatively unknown western island. > > The Romans gave the country north of present-day Stirlingshire the name > *Caledonia*. Much of the terrain is rugged and mountainous. In fact, > three fifths of Scotland are mountain, hill and wind-swept moorland, > unsuitable for agriculture and therefore not interesting to the Romans. > In the Welsh language > <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2.html#>, widely spoken > throughout the area when the Romans arrived, it was known as *Coed > Celyddon* (the Caledonian Forest), inhabited by spectres and madmen, > including *Myrddyn Wyllt* (Mad Merlin). Tacitus refers to the > inhabitants of the region as britanni. > > It was not only the nature of the terrain that caused the Romans to > abandon their attempts at conquest but the unimagined terrors of this > Celtic world. After the Roman armies had been recalled to Rome, > following Mons Graupius, their strategy towards Scotland was mainly a > defensive one. In 121 AD, upon a visit to Britain, the Emperor Hadrian > had this still-impressive wall built from Solway in the West Coast to > Tyne in the east. > > Twenty years later, the turf-built Antonine Wall, stretching from the > Clyde to the Forth, followed its more famous stone predecessor. The > Caledonians quickly learned to master the art of guerrilla warfare > against a scattered, and no-doubt homesick Roman legion in the North, > including those led by their aging and frustrated commander Severus. It > wasn't long before the Antonine Wall was abandoned, and the troops of > Rome withdrew south to the well known and much longer, stronger > defensive barrier built by Hadrian. Trouble at home meant that by the > end of the fourth century, the remaining Roman outposts in Scotland were > abandoned. Any civilized benefits of Roman rule enjoyed by southern > Britain were thus denied to their northern neighbors who were having > troubles of their own. > > At the time of the withdrawal, Scotland (Alba or Alban) was divided > between four different races. The Picts of Celtic, perhaps of Scythian > stock, predominated lived from Caithness in the north to the Forth in > the south. The Britons of Strathclyde stretched from the Clyde to the > Solway and further south into Cumbria. The late arriving Teutonic > Anglo-Saxons, held the lands to the east south of the Forth into > Northumbria and the kingdom of Dalriada, to the west, including > present-day Argyll <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2.html#>, > (the land of the Gael). The Scots, from Northern Ireland occupied > Kintyre and the neighboring islands in the third and fourth centuries. > In perhaps typical Celtic fashion, the Picts and Scots spent more time > fighting against each other than against their common enemies. > > *_Chapter 1: Celtic Scotland Continued_* > <http://britannia.com/celtic/scotland/scot2a.html> > > > > > On 8/24/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com wrote: >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Cenel Conaill And the Donegal Kingdoms, AD 500-800 - D?l >> Fiatach (Paul Conroy) >> 2. Re: MacLysaght and Woulfe (Lochlan@aol.com) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 17:58:38 -0400 >> From: Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Cenel Conaill And the Donegal Kingdoms, AD >> 500-800 - D?l Fiatach >> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Message-ID: >> <CA+2t2c6PNFie4UjCfcz4sDWis=QKpZdHccXRHPytJNR0yNKP-w@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Here's a link on the Erainn peoples in Ireland, which could also tie >> together a few things: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn >> >> In early Irish genealogical tracts the ?rainn are regarded as an ethnic >>> group, distinct from the Laigin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laigin> and >>> Cruthin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruthin>. Population groups in >>> Munster classed as ?rainn include the Corcu Lo?gde<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Lo%C3%ADgde> in >>> southwest County Cork<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Cork>, the >>> M?scraige<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BAscraige> in Counties Cork >>> andTipperary<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Tipperary>, the Corcu >>> Duibne<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Duibne> in County Kerry<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Kerry>, >>> and the Corcu Baiscinn<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Baiscinn> in >>> west County Clare<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Clare>. The D?l >>> Riata<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_Riata> and D?l Fiatach<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_Fiatach> >>> (or Ulaid<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulaid>) in Ulster<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster> are >>> also considered ?rainn. The ?rainn appear to have been a powerful group in >>> the proto-historic period, but in early historical times were largely >>> reduced to politically marginal status, with the notable exception of the >>> enigmatic Osraige<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osraige>. The most >>> important of the Munster ?rainn, the Corcu Lo?gde, retained some measure of >>> prestige even after they had become marginalized by the E?ganachta<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B3ganachta> in >>> the 7th or 8th century.[7]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-6> It >>> is likely that the sometimes powerful U? Liath?in<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U%C3%AD_Liath%C3%A1in> and >>> their close kin the U? Fidgenti<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U%C3%AD_Fidgenti> originally >>> belonged to the ?rainn/D?irine as well, but were later counted among the >>> E?ganachta for political reasons.[8]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-7> >>> [9]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-8> Another >>> prominent ?rainn people of early Munster are believed to have been the >>> Mairtine<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mairtine>, who by the early >>> historical period have completely vanished from the Irish landscape, >>> although they may be in part ancestral to the later D?isi Tuisceart<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9isi_Tuisceart> >>> and D?l gCais<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_gCais>.[10]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-9> >>> The D?isi Muman<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9isi_Muman> may also >>> have had ?rainn origins, but this has long been disputed. >> >> Note that Osraige is Ossory - where my family comes from. >> >> It seems likely the Iverni were related to the >> Darini<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darini> of >>> eastern Ulster<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster>.[11]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-10> The >>> name "Darini" implies descent from an ancestor called D?ire<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1ire>, >>> (**D?rios*)[4]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-OR-3> as >>> claimed by several historical peoples identified as ?rainn, including the >>> D?l Riata and D?l Fiatach in eastern Ulster[12]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-11> as >>> well the ?rainn of Munster. An early name for Dundrum, County Down<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dundrum,_County_Down>, >>> is recorded as *D?n Droma D?irine*, and the name D?irine<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1irine> was >>> applied to the Corcu Lo?gde, further suggesting a relationship between the >>> Darini and the Iverni.[4]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-OR-3> >> >> The genealogies trace the descent of the ?rainn from two separate eponymous >>> ancestors, Ailill ?rann and ?ar mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Dar_mac_Dedad>. >>> Legendary relatives of the latter include the Cland Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cland_Dedad> (offspring >>> of Deda mac Sin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deda_mac_Sin>), a Munster >>> people who appear in the Ulster Cycle<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Cycle>, >>> led by C? Ro?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%BA_Ro%C3%AD>, son of D?ire >>> mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1ire_mac_Dedad>, and the >>> legendary High King<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_King_of_Ireland> Conaire >>> M?r<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaire_M%C3%B3r>, grandson of Iar and >>> ancestor of the S?l Conairi<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%ADl_Conairi>. >>> The historical sept of the U? Maicc Iair ("grandsons of the son of Iar") and >>> the MAQI IARI of ogham inscriptions also appear to be related.[13]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-12> The >>> personal name *Iar* is simply another variant of the root present in >>> Iverni and ?rainn.[14]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-13> Finally, >>> the name *?th*, given in the genealogies as the ultimate ancestor of the >>> Corcu Lo?gde (D?irine) and offering some confusion about their parentage and >>> relation to the Iverni, in fact preserves the same Indo-European root * >>> *peiH-* ("to be fat, swell"),[15]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-14> thus >>> in effect completing a basic picture of the Iverni/?rainn and their kindred >>> in later historical Ireland. >> >> C? Ro?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%BA_Ro%C3%AD> = Conroy >> Conaire = Conroy >> >> T. F. O'Rahilly<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._F._O%27Rahilly> identified >>> the ?rainn with the mythological Fir Bolg<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fir_Bolg> and >>> the historical Belgae<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgae> of Gaul<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaul> >>> and Britain<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain>. He proposed >>> that they invaded from Britain and spoke a Brythonic<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brythonic_languages> language, >>> which he named Ivernic and identified with a language referred to in a >>> number of early sources as *Iarnnb?lrae*, *Iarnb?lrae*, and *Iarmb?rla*, >>> which, if treated as Old Irish<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Irish>, >>> means "Iron-speech". The 9th-century Irish dictionary *Sanas Cormaic<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanas_Cormaic> >>> * ("Cormac's glossary") describes *Iarnnb?lrae* as a recently extinct >>> language which was "dense and difficult", and records two words which >>> derived from it.[4]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-OR-3> However, >>> by the proto-historical period the ?rainn were evidently Goidelic<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goidelic>-speaking, >>> as evidenced by the fact that ogham<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogham> inscriptions >>> in Primitive Irish<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_Irish> are most >>> abundant in Counties Cork and Kerry.[16]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn#cite_note-15> >> >> More on C? Ro?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%BA_Ro%C3%AD>: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C?_Ro? >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Gerry, >>> >>> I posted the following about 1 year ago on this list: >>> >>> Going back to the original subject, I see more info on "Conaire M?r" >>> (Conroy the Great) here: >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaire_M%C3%B3r >>> >>> Specifically that: >>> A descendant of ?ar mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Dar_mac_Dedad>, >>> Conaire belonged to the legendary Clanna Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad>, >>> the legendary royal family of the ?rainn<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rainn>. >>> His descendants in Ireland and Scotland<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland> were >>> known as the S?l Conairi<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%ADl_Conairi>. >>> The last king in the direct male line from Conaire M?r was Alexander III >>> of Scotland<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_III_of_Scotland>. >>> >>> The Clanna Dedad has an interesting geneology:<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaire_M%C3%B3r> >>> Descent of the Clanna Dedad >>> >>> Skipped generations are given in the notes. >>> >>> - Sen mac Rosin<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sen_mac_Rosin&action=edit&redlink=1> >>> [22]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-21> >>> - Dedu mac Sin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dedu_mac_Sin> a quo *Clanna >>> Dedad* >>> - ?ar mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Dar_mac_Dedad> >>> - Ailill Anglonnach<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ailill_Anglonnach&action=edit&redlink=1> >>> - ?ogan [23]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-22> >>> - Etersc?l<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etersc%C3%A9l> >>> - Conaire M?r<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaire_M%C3%B3r> a >>> quo *S?l Conaire* >>> - Mug L?ma >>> - Conaire C?em<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaire_C%C3%B3em> >>> [24]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-23> >>> - Eochaid (Cairpre) Riata (Rigfhota), a quo >>> - *D?l Riata<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_Riata> >>> * >>> - Erc of Dalriada<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erc_of_Dalriada> >>> [25]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-24> >>> - Fergus M?r<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fergus_M%C3%B3r> >>> - Domangart R?ti<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domangart_R%C3%A9ti> >>> - Gabr?n mac Domangairt<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabr%C3%A1n_mac_Domangairt>, >>> a quo >>> - *Cen?l nGabr?in* >>> - *House of Alpin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Alpin> >>> * >>> - *House of Dunkeld<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Dunkeld> >>> * >>> - Comgall mac Domangairt<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comgall_mac_Domangairt>, >>> a quo >>> - *Cen?l Comgaill* >>> - Loarn mac Eirc<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loarn_mac_Eirc>, >>> a quo >>> - *Cen?l Loairn* >>> - *House of Moray<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Moray> >>> * >>> - *Mormaers of Moray<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormaers_of_Moray> >>> * >>> - ?engus M?r mac Eirc, a quo >>> - *Cen?l n?engusa<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cen%C3%A9l_n%C3%93engusa> >>> * >>> - Cairpre M?sc<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cairpre_M%C3%BAsc&action=edit&redlink=1>, >>> a quo >>> - *M?scraige<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BAscraige> >>> * >>> - Corc Duibne, a quo >>> - *Corcu Duibne<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Duibne> >>> * >>> - Cairpre Bascha?n, a quo >>> - *Corcu Baiscind<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Baiscind> >>> * >>> - D?ire mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1ire_mac_Dedad> / >>> Dairi Sirchrechtaig / D?ire Doimthech<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1ire_Doimthech> >>> - C? Ro? mac D?ire<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%BA_Ro%C3%AD_mac_D%C3%A1ire> >>> - Lugaid mac Con Ro?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugaid_mac_Con_Ro%C3%AD> >>> - Fuirme mac Con Ro? [26]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-25> >>> - (F)Iatach Find<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiatach_Finn>, >>> a quo >>> - *D?l Fiatach<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_Fiatach> >>> * >>> - *D?irine<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1irine>* >>> - *Corcu Lo?gde<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcu_Lo%C3%ADgde> >>> * [27]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-26> >>> [28]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-27> >>> - Conganchnes mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conganchnes_mac_Dedad> >>> - Conall Anglonnach mac Dedad<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conall_Anglonnach&action=edit&redlink=1> >>> ,[29]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-28> a >>> quo >>> - *Conaille Muirtheimne<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conaille_Muirtheimne> >>> * >>> - Eochaid (Echdach/Echach) mac Sin [30]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-29> >>> - Deitsin/Deitsini >>> - Dl?thaich/Dluthaig >>> - D?ire/Dairi >>> - Fir furmi [31]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-30> >>> - Fiatach Finn<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiatach_Finn> >>> [32]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-31> / >>> Fiachach Fir Umai [33]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clanna_Dedad#cite_note-32> >>> - *D?l Fiatach<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A1l_Fiatach> >>> * >>> >>> >>> So the Dal Fiatach are actually related to the Dal Riata, both of North >>> Eastern Ireland. >>> >>> They are also related to tribes in the South West of Ireland: >>> 1. Corcu Duibne - West Co Kerry, Dingle Penninsula and related areas - >>> O'Shea, O'Falvey and O'Connell >>> 2. Corcu Lo?gde - West Co Cork - O'Driscoll (R-M222), Coffey<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffey> >>> , O'Leary<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Leary>, Hennessy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hennessy_(disambiguation)> >>> , Flynn<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn>, Dinneen<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinneen> >>> . O'Hea<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hea>, Cronin<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronin> >>> , Dunlea<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dunlea&action=edit&redlink=1> >>> 3. Corcu Bascind - South Co Clare - O'Baskin, MacDermot, >>> O'Donnell/MacDonnell (R-M222), MacMahon >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Paul >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Gerry<gerry@ringofgullion.com> wrote: >>> >>>> John, >>>> >>>> I might be able to shed some light on the Y-DNA of the D?l Fiatach, from >>>> two >>>> sources. One is the McEvoy study and the other is some research that Jerry >>>> Kelly, of this list, has just done for me. >>>> >>>> ========================================================================= >>>> 1) McEvoy et al. >>>> >>>> John posted this some time ago which he culled from the McEvoy study: >>>> Dunleavy Haughey MCGUINNESS >>>> >>>> 5 M222 of 12 14 M222 of 19 24 M222 of 99 >>>> Ulster (1) Most in Ulster Ulster >>>> (11) >>>> Leinster (2) Associated with Donegal&Armagh Connacht (10) >>>> Munster (1) O hEochaidh Leinster >>>> (3) >>>> Connacht (1) >>>> >>>> I post the McGuinnes just to emphasize what John posted below. They are >>>> generally not M222, but HG I. >>>> >>>> McEvoy normalized all of his names to one spelling. He normalized Haughey >>>> and McGuinness, so we don't know the original spellings of >>>> Haughey/Hoey/Hoy. >>>> >>>> As John noted above, the Haughey spelling is common in Donegal and Armagh >>>> while Hoey/Hoy is common in Louth and the surrounding counties. >>>> >>>> The Annals say that the Mac Dunveavys were expelled by the Normans from >>>> Ulidia and some went to Donegal (McInulty sp?). It is also said that some >>>> of >>>> the ? hEochaidh went with them since they were really the same family, >>>> (see >>>> Jerry Kelly's work below). >>>> >>>> So, if any of McEvoy's M222 Haughey were from Donegal, they were from D?l >>>> Fiatach, which was their region of Ulidia. This points to the D?l Fiatach >>>> being M222. >>>> >>>> If any of McEvoy's Haughey were from the Louth area, they were really >>>> Hoey/Hoy/? hEochaidh. The ? hEochaidh were from D?l Fiatach. My family is >>>> Hoy from mid-Louth and is M222. This points to the D?l Fiatach being M222. >>>> >>>> Note. A NPE from say, Donegal for my Louth family, is not likely since my >>>> M222 matches are half Irish and half Scots, which makes sense for a family >>>> based near Downptrick. >>>> >>>> >>>> =========================================================================== >>>> 2) Jerry Kelly's research. >>>> >>>> I thrashed around for months trying to understand what the Annals that I >>>> had >>>> access to, meant about my family. I gave up and went to Jerry Kelly who is >>>> a >>>> fluent Irish speaker and also understands the nuances of the Annals. >>>> >>>> He found that the ? hEochaidh/Mac Duinnshl?ibhe were on the main branch of >>>> the D?l Fiatach rulers and that the Mac Duinnshl?ibhe had barely split >>>> from >>>> the ? hEochaidh before the Normans arrived. >>>> >>>> ?So for instance when after 1137 the Dal Fiatach kingship was confined >>>> to the descendants of Donn Sleibe Mac Eochada (slain in 1091), the >>>> rigdamnai >>>> set themselves apart from the rest of the family by using the name Mac >>>> Duinnshleibhe (Donleavy)." Byrne, page 128 >>>> >>>> The ? hEochaidh family, (Sloinne ? hEochaidh as Jerry taught me) took the >>>> name from Eochaidh mac Ardghair, who died in 979. Before that it was just >>>> "son of, son of, ..." >>>> >>>> Jerry used the non-translated Irish Annals to trace the line back reliably >>>> to 455 and less reliably earlier. >>>> >>>> So the ? hEochaidh/Mac Duinnshl?ibhe line were the ruling family of D?l >>>> Fiatach back to the time of Patrick. Jerry has another story of how the >>>> family got to Louth with the help of the O'Loughlins and O'Carrols, but >>>> that >>>> is for another time. >>>> >>>> ========================================================================== >>>> >>>> Conclusion. >>>> >>>> With McEvoy's Haugheys and Jerry's work with the Annals and my M222 test >>>> and >>>> unusual matches, I pretty sure that the D?l Fiatach were M222, at least on >>>> the main line. >>>> >>>> We also know that in tribal societies, the bottom tier doesn't reproduce >>>> itself and the top tier over produces. So some people fall down each >>>> generation and eventually, on the male line, everyone is related. So if >>>> the >>>> ruling line is M222, so are all. >>>> >>>> Gerry Hoy >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com >>>> [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Lochlan@aol.com >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 11:58 PM >>>> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >>>> Subject: [R-M222] Cenel Conaill And the Donegal Kingdoms, AD 500-800 >>>> >>>> Here are a few quotes from Lacey's book. He believes the northern Ui >>>> Neill >>>> (Cenel Conaill, Cenel Eoghain and Cenel Enda) did not move north into >>>> Donegal as stated by all Irish historians but were Cruithin, natives of >>>> the >>>> territory. I do not know yet if he ties this into the Venicnii of >>>> Ptolemy >>>> (I only have one chapter copied) but he does mention a Winducatti in the >>>> Dunfanaghy area of Donegal which might be the same tribe. Much of his >>>> argument is based on Tirechan's Collectanea, dated to 690 AD. He tries >>>> to >>>> connect the Cenel Conaill to the Ui Eachach Cobha and the Cenel Eoghain >>>> to the Dal Fiatach, two familiar tribes from Ulster. In that he seems >>>> completely off-base. >>>> >>>> Can anyone connect M222 to either of these tribes? >>>> >>>> The Ui Eachach Cobha in particular were said to be Cruithin as an off >>>> shoot >>>> of the Dal nAraidi. The historical chieftains were the Maguinnes of Co. >>>> Down, whose chieftains were I haplogroup according to Patrick Guinness, >>>> associated with the Trinity DNA project. If anyone has the slightest >>>> idea >>>> what Dal Fiatach DNA looks like I haven't heard about it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 20:12:31 -0400 (EDT) >> From: Lochlan@aol.com >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe >> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Message-ID:<3dad.6b0571ea.3b859bef@aol.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" >> >> >> >> In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:50:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, >> jerrykelly@irishtribes.com writes: >> >> But, from what I can tell, however, MacLysaght did not have ready access >> to Leabhar na nGenelach (The Book of Genealogies) by Dubhaltach Mac >> Fhirbhisigh. He could only get at parts of it through O'Donovan's TRIBES AND >> CUSTOMS OF HY MANY and TRIBES AND CUSTOMS OF HY FIACHRACH. After waiting for >> 350 years, Mac Fhirbhisigh's great work was finally published by De B?rca >> Books in 2003. So, when Woulfe and MacLysaght disagree on a family origin, >> I go to Mac Fhirbhisigh to see who's right. >> >> The MacFirbis genealogies have been online for quite a while. >> Un-translated of course with a weak index at the end. Not for the faint of heart. >> >> _http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm_ >> (http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm) >> >> >> >> I read a story once that said that MacLysaght had a copy of O'Hart's Irish >> pedigrees open on his desk at all times. I don't know if that's true or >> not. It was not comforting to hear. >> >> >> John >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> >> End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 276 >> ****************************************** >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 279 > ******************************************

The peopling of Europe and the cautionary tale of Y chromosome lineage R-M269 Here, we have confirmed with the broadest analysis to date that the spatial distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup M269 can be split by R-S127 into European and western Eurasian lineages. Contrary to the results of Balaresque, we see no relationship between diversity and longitude (figure 2 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#F2>) for R-M269. The presence of two sets of populations in the Balaresque paper appears to be causal to the observed relationship: the underestimated diversity of the Irish population and the inclusion of the Turkish chromosomes, the majority of which potentially belong to the non-European clade R-M269(xS127). When these elements are properly taken into account, jointly or independently, the correlation no longer exists. This correlation is the central tenet to the hypothesis that R-M269 was spread with expanding Neolithic farmers. Morelli /et al/. [22 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-22>] (hereafter 'Morelli') found STR motifs that split R-M269 into eastern and western lineages. We observed that 71 per cent of the Myres /et al/. R-M269(xS127) chromosomes for which STR information is available have the eastern motif (DYS393-12/DYS461-10), while 80 per cent of the R-S127 chromosomes of Myres /et al/. have the western motif (DYS393-13/DYS461-11). No R-S127 chromosomes displayed the eastern motif, while 5 per cent of R-M269(xS127) chromosomes displayed the western motif (all of which were either L23 (S141) or M412 (S127)-derived). In both cases, however, these motifs differed from those suggested by Morelli by having one repeat less at the DYS461 locus. The dichotomy observed by Morelli based on a two STR motif is therefore corroborated, at least in part, by the presence of this SNP. Dating of Y chromosome lineages is notoriously controversial [25 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-25>,41 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-41>--44 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-44>], the major issue being that the choice of STR mutation rate can lead to age estimates that differ by a factor of three (i.e. the evolutionary [25 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-25>] versus observed (genealogical) mutation rates [33 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-33>,45 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-45>]). Interestingly, despite the fact that Myres /et al/. and Balaresque used different STR mutation rates and dating approaches, their TMRCA estimates overlap: 8590--11 950 years using a mutation rate of 6.9 × 10^-4 per generation, and 4577--9063 years using an average mutation rate of 2.3 × 10^-3 , respectively. Separately, Morelli calculated the TMRCA based only on Sardinian and Anatolian chromosomes, and estimated the R-M269 lineage to have originated 25 000--80 700 years ago) [22 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-22>], based on the same evolutionary mutation rate [25 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-25>,41 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-41>] as Myres /et al/. In seeking to find a suitable set of STRs with which to estimate the average coalescence time, /T/, of sub-haplogroup R-S127, we have shown that not all STRs are of equal use in this context. We concentrated on estimating the duration of linearity, /D/, using different sets of STRs. Our analyses suggest that the /D/ of an STR is key to its ability to uncover deep ancestry. Duration of linearity refers to the length of time into the past over which ASD and /T/ continue to be linearly related for a specific STR. Goldstein /et al/. [26 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-26>] showed that /D/ is affected by two properties of the STRs used to calculate ASD: the mutation rate and range of possible alleles that the STR can take. When we manipulated our choice of STR marker based on /?/(/R/)/2/?/ (a surrogate for /D/; table 1 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#T1>), we found that different sets of STRs gave different values for /T/. It is clear, then, that coalescence estimates explicitly depend on the STRs that one uses. Our analysis confirms that this phenomenon is not specific to the R-M269 haplogroup nor to methods using ASD. Figure 4 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#F4>/b/ shows that STRs with high /D/ produce larger estimates of /T/. What is clear is that estimates of /T/ implicitly depend on the STRs that are selected to make this inference. Using BATWING on an HGDP population for which 65 Y-STRs are available, we have shown that the median estimate of TMRCA can differ by over five times when STRs are selected on the basis of the expected duration of linearity (electronic supplementary material, figure S4). While researchers take into account STR mutation rates when estimating divergence time with ASD, commonly used STRs do not have the specific attributes that allow linearity to be assumed further into the past. The majority of haplogroup dates based on such sets of STRs may therefore have been systematically underestimated. Previous Section <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#sec-7>Next Section <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ack-1> 5. Conclusion The distributions of the main R-S127 sub-haplogroups, R-S21, R-S145 and R-S28, show markedly localized concentrations (figure 3 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#F3>). If the R-M269 lineage is more recent in origin than the Neolithic expansion, then its current distribution would have to be the result of major population movements occurring since that origin. For this haplogroup to be so ubiquitous, the population carrying R-S127 would have displaced most of the populations present in western Europe after the Neolithic agricultural transition. Alternatively, if R-S127 originated prior to the Neolithic wave of expansion, then either it was already present in most of Europe before the expansion, or the mutation occurred in the east, and was spread before or after the expansion, in which case we would expect higher diversity in the east closer to the origins of agriculture, which is not what we observe. The maps of R-S127 sub-haplogroup frequencies for R-S21, R-S145 and R-S28 show radial distributions from specific European locations (figure 3 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#F3>). These centres have high absolute frequencies: R-S21 has a frequency of 44 per cent in Friesland, and R-S28 reaches 25 per cent in the Alps; and in the populations where they are at the highest frequency, the vast majority of R-S127 belong to that particular sub-lineage. For example, half of all R-M269 across southern Europe is R-S28-derived, and around 60 per cent of R-M269 in Central Europe is R-S21-derived. At the sub-haplogroup level, then, R-M269 is split into geographically localized pockets with individual R-M269 sub-haplogroups dominating, suggesting that the frequency of R-M269 across Europe could be related to the growth of multiple, geographically specific sub-lineages that differ in different parts of Europe. A recent analysis of radiocarbon dates of Neolithic sites across Europe [46 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-46>] reveals that the spread of the Neolithic was by no means constant, and that several 'centres of renewed expansion' are visible across Europe, representing areas of colonization, three of which map intriguingly closely to the centres of the sub-haplogroups foci (electronic supplementary material, figure S3). Future work involving spatially explicit simulations, together with accurate measures of Y chromosome diversity, are needed to investigate how the current distribution of sub-haplogroups may have been produced. In this context, recent work by Sjödin & François [47 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-47>] rejected a Palaeolithic dispersion for R1b-M269 using spatial simulations based on the dataset of Balaresque. Nevertheless, we note that additional work is still necessary as these authors were not aware of the limitation of the Balaresque dataset presented here, and did not fully explore the impact of the different molecular characteristics of the investigated loci on their analysis. Age estimates based on sets of Y-STRs carefully selected to possess the attributes necessary for uncovering deep ancestry (for example, from the almost 200 recently characterized here [33 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-33>]), and from whole Y chromosome sequence comparisons, will provide robust dates for this haplogroup in the future. For now, we can offer no date as to the age of R-M269 or R-S127, but believe that our STR analyses suggest the recent age estimates of R-M269 [20 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-20>] and R-S116 [21 <http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full#ref-21>] are likely to be younger than the true values, and the homogeneity of STR variance and distribution of sub-types across the continent are inconsistent with the hypothesis of the Neolithic diffusion of the R-M269 Y chromosome lineage. > > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:12:22 -0400 > From: Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> > Subject: [R-M222] R-L21 M222+ Percentages in Europe by Country and/or > Region > To: dna-r1b1c7<DNA-R1B1C7@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: > <CA+2t2c4kwCWg+yB1XP60SsccSQFCNwfFeMm7Maun4Ga81aimnA@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Here is a must read supplementary data spreadsheet, which lays out the > percentages of R1b and particularly R-L21 M222+ per country and/or region: > http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.DC1 > > Look at Tab "TableS1-HG frequencies" and then Column "T" > > I've extracted out the data on M222 and created images of it: > 1. http://i56.tinypic.com/343jkuo.png - Summary of both studies results > > 2. http://i52.tinypic.com/2d8i1jb.png - Summary of each study separately > > > Some interesting highlights on the frequency of M222+ are that: > 1. EAST Ireland 20-25% of R1b is M222+ > 2. West Scotland (14.29%)> North East Scotland (10.45%)> North West > Scotland (6.25%) > 3. France 6.24% > 4. Germany 5.26% > 5. Sweden 1.44% > 6. Norway 1.45% > > Enjoy! > > Cheers, > Paul > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:45:27 -0400 > From: Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <CA+2t2c6jQL+zVpHOSCkxm-rLdF4VgCzVXkfXNZ7xy=y1TBLrsQ@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Jerry, Gerry, > > Is there any connection between: > Mac Duinnshl?ibhe and O'Duinn > > When I check the aforemnetioned URL, I get the following: > http://www.isos.dias.ie/libraries/NLI/NLI_MS_G_12/english/index.html > > Which list the same person as: > 1. *Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi* > 2. *Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi* > > Which could be translated as "Cormac Dunne of the Mountains", as opposed to > "Cormac of the Mountain Fort" > > What say ye?? > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Jerry Kelly<jerrykelly@irishtribes.com>wrote: > >> Thanks, John. And good point about O'Hart. It was a massive work, but (in >> my opinion) badly misguided in trying to translate all Irish names to >> English phonetic gobbledeegook, thereby breaking the clear, easy link with >> the past. I wonder whether that contributed to its mistakes. In the last >> week or so, Gerry Hoy and I found another one. In reality, the Mac >> Duinnshl?ibhe sloinne / surnamed family descends from the ? hEochaidh >> sloinne, but O'Hart had it the other way around. >> >> Many thanks for showing us Mac Firbhisigh's Leabhar na nGenelach on-line. >> I did not know it was there. I'm amazed by the quality of the photos, >> excellent condition of the manuscript, and beauty of Mac Firbhisigh's >> handwriting. You can see how carefully he prepared his work for the >> printing press at Louvain. Too bad they didn't go forward with the project. >> Bu?ochas le Dia that we have it finally now in the De B?rca edition (2003) >> so we don't have to go nuts with the nodanna (shorthand). >> >> Le gach dea-ghu? / Best, >> Jerry >> >> >> Treibheanna ?ireannacha >> www.irishtribes.com >> >> >> --- On Tue, 8/23/11, Lochlan@aol.com<Lochlan@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> From: Lochlan@aol.com<Lochlan@aol.com> >>> Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe >>> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >>> Date: Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 8:12 PM >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:50:06 P.M. Central Daylight >>> Time, >>> jerrykelly@irishtribes.com >>> writes: >>> >>> But, from what I can tell, however, MacLysaght did >>> not have ready access >>> to Leabhar na nGenelach (The Book of >>> Genealogies) by Dubhaltach Mac >>> Fhirbhisigh. He could only get at parts of it through >>> O'Donovan's TRIBES AND >>> CUSTOMS OF HY MANY and TRIBES AND CUSTOMS OF HY >>> FIACHRACH. After waiting for >>> 350 years, Mac Fhirbhisigh's great work was finally >>> published by De B?rca >>> Books in 2003. So, when Woulfe and MacLysaght >>> disagree on a family origin, >>> I go to Mac Fhirbhisigh to see who's right. >>> >>> The MacFirbis genealogies have been online for quite a >>> while. >>> Un-translated of course with a weak index at the end. >>> Not for the faint of heart. >>> >>> _http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm_ >>> >>> (http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I read a story once that said that MacLysaght had a >>> copy of O'Hart's Irish >>> pedigrees open on his desk at all times. >>> I don't know if that's true or >>> not. It was not comforting to hear. >>> >>> >>> John >>> 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 >> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:10:00 +0100 > From: "Sandy Paterson"<alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > To:<dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID:<000001cc6299$ce156a10$6a403e30$@com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Oh aye the noo. Thanks for a breath of sanity. > > Sandy > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Conroy > Sent: 24 August 2011 20:45 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > > Jerry, Gerry, > > Is there any connection between: > Mac Duinnshl?ibhe and O'Duinn > > When I check the aforemnetioned URL, I get the following: > http://www.isos.dias.ie/libraries/NLI/NLI_MS_G_12/english/index.html > > Which list the same person as: > 1. *Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi* > 2. *Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi* > > Which could be translated as "Cormac Dunne of the Mountains", as opposed to > "Cormac of the Mountain Fort" > > What say ye?? > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Jerry Kelly > <jerrykelly@irishtribes.com>wrote: > >> Thanks, John. And good point about O'Hart. It was a massive work, but > (in >> my opinion) badly misguided in trying to translate all Irish names to >> English phonetic gobbledeegook, thereby breaking the clear, easy link with >> the past. I wonder whether that contributed to its mistakes. In the last >> week or so, Gerry Hoy and I found another one. In reality, the Mac >> Duinnshl?ibhe sloinne / surnamed family descends from the ? hEochaidh >> sloinne, but O'Hart had it the other way around. >> >> Many thanks for showing us Mac Firbhisigh's Leabhar na nGenelach on-line. >> I did not know it was there. I'm amazed by the quality of the photos, >> excellent condition of the manuscript, and beauty of Mac Firbhisigh's >> handwriting. You can see how carefully he prepared his work for the >> printing press at Louvain. Too bad they didn't go forward with the > project. >> Bu?ochas le Dia that we have it finally now in the De B?rca edition > (2003) >> so we don't have to go nuts with the nodanna (shorthand). >> >> Le gach dea-ghu? / Best, >> Jerry >> >> >> Treibheanna ?ireannacha >> www.irishtribes.com >> >> >> --- On Tue, 8/23/11, Lochlan@aol.com<Lochlan@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> From: Lochlan@aol.com<Lochlan@aol.com> >>> Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe >>> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >>> Date: Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 8:12 PM >>> >>> >>> In a message dated 8/23/2011 12:50:06 P.M. Central Daylight >>> Time, >>> jerrykelly@irishtribes.com >>> writes: >>> >>> But, from what I can tell, however, MacLysaght did >>> not have ready access >>> to Leabhar na nGenelach (The Book of >>> Genealogies) by Dubhaltach Mac >>> Fhirbhisigh. He could only get at parts of it through >>> O'Donovan's TRIBES AND >>> CUSTOMS OF HY MANY and TRIBES AND CUSTOMS OF HY >>> FIACHRACH. After waiting for >>> 350 years, Mac Fhirbhisigh's great work was finally >>> published by De B?rca >>> Books in 2003. So, when Woulfe and MacLysaght >>> disagree on a family origin, >>> I go to Mac Fhirbhisigh to see who's right. >>> >>> The MacFirbis genealogies have been online for quite a >>> while. >>> Un-translated of course with a weak index at the end. >>> Not for the faint of heart. >>> >>> _http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm_ >>> >>> (http://clanmaclochlainn.com/macfirb.htm) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I read a story once that said that MacLysaght had a >>> copy of O'Hart's Irish >>> pedigrees open on his desk at all times. >>> I don't know if that's true or >>> not. It was not comforting to hear. >>> >>> >>> John >>> 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 >> > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:13:55 -0700 (PDT) > From: Jerry Kelly<jerrykelly@irishtribes.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <1314216835.74888.YahooMailClassic@web1113.biz.mail.sk1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > A Ph?il a chara, > > Go raibh maith agat. / Thank you. > > We have to resort to Irish grammar to translate these. Donn Sliabh ('Brown Mountain') would be the original warrior-name in the nominative form, the form used when the noun is the subject of a sentence. In those days, the adjective could precede or succeed the noun, unlike today when it usually comes after the noun. > > The usual genitive form of Donn Sliabh in that period was Duinn Sl?ibe or Duinn Sl?ibi ('Of Brown Mountain'), today's Duinnshl?ibhe. > > So I would translate Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi as Cormac (Chariot-Son) son of Brown Mountain and Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi as Cormac grandson of Brown Mountain. > > To write Cormac Dunn ('Brown Cormac') of the Mountain in that period, we'd need to write either Donn Cormac na Sl?ibhi/e or Cormac Donn na Sl?ibhi/e. > > To write Brown Cormac of a (any old) mountain in that period, we'd need to write either Donn Cormac Sl?ibhe/i or Cormac Donn Sl?ibhi/e. > > To write Brown Cormac of the mountains in that period, we'd write either Donn Cormac na Sl?ibti/e or Cormac Donn na Sl?ibte/i. > > You point out correctly that d?n is the nominative of fort and d?in is its genitive. > > Go raibh s? sin cabhrach. / Hope that's helpful. > > Le gach dea-ghu? / Best, > Jerry > > Treibheanna ?ireannacha > www.irishtribes.com > > > --- On Wed, 8/24/11, Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From: Paul Conroy<pconroy63@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh >> To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com >> Date: Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 3:45 PM >> Jerry, Gerry, >> >> Is there any connection between: >> Mac Duinnshl?ibhe and O'Duinn >> >> When I check the aforemnetioned URL, I get the following: >> http://www.isos.dias.ie/libraries/NLI/NLI_MS_G_12/english/index.html >> >> Which list the same person as: >> 1. *Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi* >> 2. *Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi* >> >> Which could be translated as "Cormac Dunne of the >> Mountains", as opposed to >> "Cormac of the Mountain Fort" >> >> What say ye?? >> >> Cheers, >> Paul > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 277 > ****************************************** >

Replied out of forum. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Kelly Sent: 24 August 2011 21:29 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh Sandy a chara, You speak Lallans!! That is so cool. What does "Oh aye the noo" mean? Le gach dea-ghuí / Best, Jerry --- On Wed, 8/24/11, Sandy Paterson <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> wrote: > From: Sandy Paterson <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] MacLysaght and Woulfe and Mac Firbhisigh > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Date: Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 4:10 PM > Oh aye the noo. Thanks for a breath > of sanity. > > 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

In a message dated 8/24/2011 2:14:42 P.M. Central Daylight Time, pconroy63@gmail.com writes: Here is a must read supplementary data spreadsheet, which lays out the percentages of R1b and particularly R-L21 M222+ per country and/or region: _http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1 044.DC1_ (http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/suppl/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.DC1) It looks like most of the Irish data from the original Trinity study plus haplotypes from Ysearch used by the Balaresque study. Even though they used Ysearch samples the Balaresque study used only 9 STRS. The Trinity study of course used 17. The authors say "we independently re-sampled the Moore et al. dataset 10 000 times, selecting sub-samples of 75 haplotypes from which we estimated the variance using the same nine STRs used in the Balaresque paper. I wonder how they did that? We observed that the Irish haplotypes used in the Balaresque analysis had a very low STR variance (0.208) compared with those included in our analysis (0.35; originally published by Moore et al. [38]). Balaresque used a sample of Irish haplotypes downloaded from the online Ysearch database (_http://www.ysearch_ (http://www.ysearch) . org). To test if the Ysearch haplotypes were representative of the Irish R-M269 of Moore et al. [38], we independently resampled the Moore et al. dataset 10 000 times, selecting sub-samples of 75 haplotypes from which we estimated the variance using the same nine STRs used in the Balaresque paper (detailed methodology and justification can be found in the electronic supplementary material). The median variance of these 10 000 repetitions was 0.354 with a 95 per cent CI of (0.285– 0.432). When we repeated the regression analysis with this different variance estimate, the correlation was no longer significant (R2 ¼ 0.09, p ¼ 0.19). Testing the variance calculations from the Irish population Balaresque et al used haplotypes downloaded from the online Ysearch database (_http://www.ysearch.org_ (http://www.ysearch.org) ) which is a repository for genetic genealogists to upload and compare haplotypes (P. Balaresque pers. comm.). We note, however, that 17-STR haplotypes, including the 9 STRs used in Balaresque et al’s analysis, are available for 681 Irish R-M269 derived individuals in Moore et al (3), which is, in fact, the study which Balaresque et al use to estimate R-M269 frequency in Ireland. A subset of the Moore et al samples were re-analysed in the current study for SNPs downstream of R-M269, and the original haplotype data are used here to calculate variance. It seems the English data came from their own study and Myres et al. Figure S1 shows the positions of populations used, both from the current study and Myres et al (1). Three English populations were generated by combining data between the two studies, where they came from the same area and the resultant population was greater than 30: North- West England (ENG-NW); South-West England (ENG-SW); and South-East England (ENGSE). Two additional populations were made by combining populations within the Myres et al dataset: South-East Denmark (DEN-SE) and Switzerland (SWI-SC). I don't see a reference to the Scottish data but the Capelli census of the British Isles is footnoted. The Sykes database is out there too. Both are only 6-7 marker sets. The Myres et al supplementary spreadsheet shows only 24 M222 samples, 6 from England, 16 from Ireland, which of course does not equal 24. They list 9 markers. It appears they are relying on SNP tests. Mostly this looks like samples that have been around for a while in various studies. The academics are still using skimpy haplotypes. Paul did some nice working putting all the figures together. I don't know if there is any mapping software that could show the results graphically. John

> > > > Is there any connection between: > > Mac Duinnshléibhe and O'Duinn > > > > Which list the same person as: > > 1. *Cormac mac Duinn Sleibhi* > > 2. *Cormac o Duinn Sleibhi* > > > > Which could be translated as "Cormac Dunne of the > > Mountains", as opposed to > > "Cormac of the Mountain Fort" > Do I take it that Mac Duinnshléibhe does not yield O'Duinn? I found a Dunlavey at YSearch.org and he is I*. I wonder how he compares to the halpotype of the MacGuinness of Iveagh.