Hi Geoff, I agree with your argument, that we of the M222 group likely could be related to the Niall dynasty. For instance, I am M222 and have tested to 111 STR markers. And, on the FTDNA Markers Map page, if I turn the map resolution down to 25 markers I see that my more distant genetic relatives are not only in the north of Ireland but also are widely distributed throughout western Ireland, too, Connacht in particular, and western Ireland is said to be where the Niall dynasty originated. And so while we might never be able to confirm a direct linkage to the Niall clann, there seems to be a strong likelihood that such a relationship could be true. That is, I think that we of the M222 group have a more solid claim to such ancestry than any other group. Doug On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Margaret and Geoff Melloy < mg_melloy@hotmail.com> wrote: > Despite all this, I'm not going to abandon my royal status lightly! > > Whatever the theories may be, I think the occurrence of separate > concentrations of traditionally Cenel nEogain and Cenel Conaill surnames in > two parallel branches of the SNP tree, under a possible candidate for Niall > 9H, suggests we might well be barking up the right tree. > > > Geoff. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: tuulen > Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 2:15 AM > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Niall haplotype 'dubious' - Professor Mark Thomas > > OK, so the Niall legacy might be no more than a myth. But the architecture > of the M222 group is indeed fascinating, as apparently it migrated widely. > > Doug > > > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Iain Kennedy > <ikennedy_msdn2@hotmail.com>wrote: > > > I would take a step back and compare and contrast > > > > 1. The supposed identification of Richard III - to be fully revealed in a > > paper by Turi King yet to appear > > 2. The task of doing a similar id of a Niall find from the current work > at > > Faughan Hill in the LIARI project - see Spring 2014 issue of Archaelogy > > Ireland and https://www.facebook.com/LateIronAgeAndRomanIreland?filter=1 > > 3. The task of proving this claim without a body. > > > > I can only speak for myself and say the TCD paper now looks very weak. > Its > > clearly outdated technically and it would be fascinating to see what > would > > happen if a leading academic revisited it, perhaps in a couple of years > > time when the new M222 branches are well fleshed out. > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 06:20:01 -0700 > > > From: john.plummer@snet.net > > > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > > > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Niall haplotype 'dubious' - Professor Mark Thomas > > > > > > Professor Thomas used a bad example. There are some very good > > scientists and very good genealogists involved in the R-M222 Project and > > there is good reason to believe in the Niall of the 9 Hostages origin. > > Project heads are very aware of non-paternal events and have identified > a > > number of them. They expect a percentage of these and allow for them. > > Although the study of David Wilson et al originally was based on > > population distributions, the study has gone far beyond that. Many > > surnames > > in the study are derived in the traditional Irish pedigrees from Niall. > > Not all, but that is to be expected because of the non-paternal effect > > and > > because not all name adoptions are documented. Moreover, the DNA of many > > clan chiefs has been obtained. Brian Sykes has been quite successful in > > this, for one. A few bogus or mistaken pedigrees have been uncovered, > but > > generally they appear accurate. > > > > > > Now, this is not to say that there are not some dubious > identifications. > > I have produced at least one incorrect one myself. I have used clusters > > of close matches among Welsh and other surnames to identify common > > ancestors. Say there is a cluster of 5 surnames examples of each of > which > > are found in Siddons classic reference as descendants of a particular > > tribe. That tribe will likely descend from an ancestor of a thousand > > years > > ago, possibly much earlier. But on at least one occasion I have used too > > few dna matches and too few tribal associations. Reviewing later with > > more > > information an entirely different result might appear. > > > > > > So, while Professor Thomas may, almost certainly is, correct in some > > instances, a blanket generalization should not be accepted. Each > > ancestral > > identification should be considered separately. > > > > > > John Plummer > > > > > > > > > On Monday, May 26, 2014 4:24 AM, Iain Kennedy < > > ikennedy_msdn2@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > List, > > > > > > I recently contacted Professor Mark Thomas at the UCL Genetics > > department who has been vocal in his criticism of 'bad DNA ancestry', > > particularly some of the claims from BritainsDNA about Viking, Pictish > DNA > > etc. > > > > > > I pointed out that FTDNA are making similar claims about 'matching > > Niall' and asked whether he might look into and comment on this too. As a > > result he has now updated his page here: > > > > > > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/companies > > > > > > and included the FTDNA marketing blurb under 'Dubious commercial > > claims'. I recommend you read the comments; although unsigned there is a > > small team who author the pages > > > > > > >From http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking > > > > > > "The primary authors are > > > > > > David Balding, Professor of Statistical Genetics, UCL > > > Debbie Kennett, Honorary Research Fellow, UCL > > > Mark Thomas, Professor of Evolutionary Genetics, UCL > > > Adrian Timpson, Research Associate, UCL > > > " > > > > > > I don't know whether Mark Thomas actually literally wrote the Niall > > section but he and Professor Balding can be taken to have endorsed the > > remarks. > > > > > > Note in particular the paper cited within the comments about Ghengis > > Khan and Niall, > > > > > > "Inferring Genetic Ancestry: Opportunities, Challenges, and > > > Implications" > > > > > > http://www.cell.com/ajhg/abstract/S0002-9297%2810%2900155-2?cc=y?cc=y > > > > > > on p667 I quote > > > > > > "We emphasize, however, that whenever formal inferences about > population > > history have been attempted with uniparental > > > systems, the statistical power is generally low. Claims of connections, > > therefore, between specific > > > uniparental lineages and historical figures or historical migrations of > > peoples are merely speculative." > > > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >