The Gael were a tribal people of which today dynastic surname (from 11th) trace membership of. There is little question (other from members of list) that the M222 mutation occurred in Ireland. The previous L21 mutation shows the road map of our ancestors' migration from the area of France and our R1b DNA traces back to the population of the North Caucasus. For the Scottish origins, some will be directly from Ireland, i.e., who Anglized their names in Scottish form (I grew up to think Morgans where Welsh settlers, no one mentioned the O'Morgans). Others, like those who can trace their origin in Scotland to medieval times, are Irish immigrants. Like the ones who gave their name 'Scots' to the land they colonized, it’s just a matter of then. Unfortunately there has been little focus on identifying tribal groups and their relationships to M222+, even within Scotland the clans (more like confederation) break down into stratum of different tribal memberships, each with their own Gaelic tribal name. I think it’s the targeted testing performed by Universities is what has yield the best results. I have too few Morgans/Morans to create of DNA map of origins. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:46:35 -0400 From: chantillycarpets@earthlink.net To: bernardmorgan@hotmail.com CC: pconroy63@gmail.com; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] j All you say is true, but, does any it have anything to do with the origins of M222. What we do or do not know regarding Ireland and the Irish of many cultures before there were nations all previous to the 5th century really has nothing to do with the origin of M222 except in answering an emotional question -- which is why is it so important for it to have developed in Ireland? Personally, I don't care where it formed up. If indeed it is Ireland, wonderful since that has been declared my genetic Celtic make up -- at least at the moment since M222 is presently defined there and my immigrant ancestors lived and farmed there previous to hopping the pond. Am I going to be upset if it formed up in Scotland, Brittany, near the Alps, in Iberia, Turkey, or Cashel, or any of the other places where Celtic society migrated in and out of? Absolutely not. The current popular theory seems to be short, yet is highly popular and considered as fact when indeed it is yet simply a theory based on statistical data which was quantified too soon in the game. I think that is all John and Bill and several others are saying, and I personally thought that previous to joining this group, and I will continue to believe it until the theory is really tested right along with others with a larger and more diverse testing pool. Susan On 8/19/2011 4:51 PM, Bernard Morgan wrote: > > I believe in the entire Nial saga ignored migrations aspect completely. > Someone had an emotional need to link the heroes, lore and legend. That > is my personal opinion, and I'll admit that I am no geneticist, either; > so that remark simply is an opinion, I will acquiesce to being ill > informed if anyone can conclusively prove me wrong. > Surely migration is an aspect, however I think reference to the Nial Saga (name of an actual Norse saga) ignores the written tradition of Ireland that began in the 5th century. In Ireland we are dealing with the third oldest written history in Europe. Hence the movement of the people of claim descent from Neill is well document and publish in numerous academic works, such as Prof. Brynes "Irish Kings and High kings". Writers like Beresford point out the vast majority of Irish manuscripts remain un-translated and it seem un-transcribed.