On 6/9/2016 3:39 PM, Bernard Morgan via wrote: > The Stewarts's Y-DNA emerges from a common ancestor to the Gaelic tribes of north Ireland and western Scotland. And the originator of the DF41 branch is given a age range of about 2000-2500 years ago. > Given that the Stewarts claimed up to the 17th century to native Gaels of Scotland, is it correct that they are descended from a Anglo-Breton? > For this idea requires them accept a rhythmer's fantasy as to their origin and for their ancestors to have travel to Brittany before making the return trip (via a circuitous route) back to the homeland of the their ancient relatives. The law of parsimony would suggest we that they never left Scotland and that the Anglo-Breton origin is a product of 18th century Anglicization of Scotland History? > Any opinions? The version of the "Law of Parsimony" that you seem to be invoking here is that if a person lived in a given region and his descendant also lived in the same region, then it is more likely than not that the intervening generations did also. However, there are significant weaknesses to applying such a "law" to a specific case, particularly this one. 1. The important qualification "in the absence of evidence to the contrary" needs to be added. In this case, the strong evidence of a Breton origin of the Stewarts is clearly evidence to the contrary. Also, the Stewart claim to be "native Gaels" was politically motivated and demonstrably fraudulent. 2. The longer the intervening period, the less well this version of the Law of Parsimony" holds. 1000+ years is a LONG time. 3. Migrations from Ireland to Wales and from Wales to Brittany are well-documented during the intervening period, which included many migrations throughout the region. Stewart Baldwin