Hi Charles Good to hear from you again. I am aware of the rock-solid descent of McHenry from O'Cathain. The surname Cain is also, I think, linked to O'Cathain, but as far as I can recall, Barra McCain has identified four separate and independent surname origins. I think I may have discovered a 5th. I've just compared your haplotype with that of McHenry 27077. With 102 markers known, there are 4 off-modal matches and a gd of 17. To me that suggests a connection, but probably quite far back. The outstanding 9 McHenry markers should be released soon. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Cain Sent: 25 June 2011 14:54 To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [R-M222] 111-Marker RESULTS As one of the "Cain/Kanes" mentioned by Sandy (regarding off-modal matches in the trans-67 markers), let me make several comments: 1.The O'Kane history is recounted in some detail in a book by T.M. Mullin and J.E. Mullan titled "The Ulster Clans." 2. At least one origin of the McHenry surname is dated in this book to the early 1400s. Henry O'Cathain was the son of Dermot who died in 1428. Dermot's father was Cooey Na Gaal O'Cathain (have to like that name!). 3. Because of this reference, and because the largest non-Cain group of matches I find on FTDNA are the McHenrys, I am unsure of Sandy's hypothesis regarding a divorce between the McHenrys and O'Kanes. Whatever you find Sandy, I am really interested. 4. And finally, since my first North American ancestor arrived in 1740, I am a little rusty in the old language. So, how do you pronounce "O'Cathain?" Is the "th" silent? Charles Cain Quoting Sandy Paterson <alexanderpatterson@btinternet.com>: > I think they have 2 off-modal matches out of 111 markers. That doesn't > suggest that they are close kin. All M222 are of course kin, it's just a > question of how far back. > > I don't yet have a model for 111-markers, so you are correct that I don't > have a time-scale. However, I do have a model for 67 marker haplotypes so > I'll have a look and post. > > Sandy > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Bill Howard > Sent: 25 June 2011 13:00 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] 111-Marker RESULTS > > Sandy, > You have no comparison time scale to say that they are no longer obvious > kin. > The haplotypes might be distinctly different in the region above 37 markers, > but they could still be related within the genealogical time scale. > - Bye from Bill Howard > ' > On Jun 25, 2011, at 3:11 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote: > >> What I find interesting is that with the extension to 111-markers, the >> McHenrys and the Cains & variants are no longer obvious kin. >> > > 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