It's interesting, Dan, that the 1718 Smith family I am tracing and which we've talked about specifically, is also I1. This family is a Plantation family, arriving in Ulster from Argyllshire in the first half of the 17th c — the earliest family member, known about in some detail, was on one of the "first 5 ships' of 1718, and is always said in oral tradition to have, in infancy, survived the Siege of Derry. So, in some sense, I didn't necessarily expect an R1b haplogroup placement. I wonder if, since your Wilsons seem to have had a somewhat parallel history to my Smiths in many ways, perhaps there was a significant pocket of I1s who came to Ulster in Plantation times. I did, however, get an immediate R1b1b2 for my presumed reiver-descended Crozier. His antecedents weren't Planter but probably came to Fermanagh not long after. So both from Scotland but... Linda, could we assume that the Irish of pre-Plantation times would be hugely R1b1b2 as Daniel points out "most Celtic Irish [are]" and that those brought over from Scotland would not necessarily be? could in fact be left over Danes maybe? Wouldn't it be interesting to get all the 1718 and post Ulster families to DNA test and compare haplogroups, to see if it's possible to separate out Planters from indigenous Irish? But then sorting out the whys of I1 Argyllshire men from the R1b1b2 lowland reivers is another question. Too many intriguing questions!! BTW LInda, you said my Johnston might turn out to be a Celtic McShane. No chance, it seems, since my testor (a late 80s-something cousin) is I1 whose sub-haplogroup seems, if I am to believe the current talk, to be one of the so-called Poldean Johnstons of Scotland "whose Y-DNA signature" says Cliff Johnston, "is [so] distinctive...there is no mistaking it for any other surname's Y-DNA. Indeed, if one has only the shortest test available, the 12-markers test, one can tell if he is a Poldean Johnston immediately." The amazing part of this Johnston DNA test is that it might never have 'been,' had not been for a persistent Wilcox-cousin in Australia who developed the super 'super-search' Fermanagh website <http://www.fermanagh-gold.com/> for his fellow-subscribers to the Fermanagh-GOLD mailing list (and anyone else who needs Fermanagh data) — BTW, another Mailing list in the category of Linda Merle's!! David noticed I had "a Johnston" in MY family tree (big deal!–half the world has Johnstons in their trees!!); he'd DNA tested and he thought one of mine ought to, too. I begged off, already being swamped with DNA, with the comment that Johnstons are a dime a dozen and a chance of a match was wildly unlikely. Dave persisted, despite my brush off, saying things like... you had a Crozier who married a Johnston in Canada... I had a Wilcox from the same area of Ireland who married a Johnston there & emigrated to Australia... The mother of your Crozier who married the Johnston was a Wilcox... So seeing his greater wisdom, I gave in and the test of my Johnston cousin got done. Voilà a match! — both David and I from Poldean stock, if Cliff be right (and BTW, I have no reason to question him!). A 35/37 match with David and a 36/37 match with Cliff! I guess the message is — if you've got a decent paper trail and a few dollars to spend, despite all the unanswered questions we all have by times, it's wildly 'worth it' to test! Ruth On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:19 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Fascinating story, and yes we all got the same questions on DNA <grin>. I do know some kinds of I are considered 'indiginous' to Ireland because they've been there for so very very long -- thousands of years. So if you seek out a guru of your kind of DNA, maybe they can tell you what type this is. There may be a list specific to it. Or ask on the genealogy DNA list. There are a couple major players in the I-world there. > > Did you email the guy who matched you??? I am amazed at how many do not respond! Like, this is the WHOLE POINT -- find matches. Oh well...... > > Linda Merle > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Wilson" <[email protected]> > To: "Scotch-Irish Discussion List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2010 11:10:34 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Subject: [S-I] More on DNA > > I had to chuckle at the people and all the questions about Y-DNA, > because I had (have) the same questions. In general, the more markers > you have tested, the more confidence you can have in the results. The 25 > marker comparisons are almost useless as they give too many matches to > be realistic. FTDNA diplays your matches for 12, 25, 37 and 67 markers, > and I see that a number of those who matched exactly with 12 markers, > fell of the list when we looked at 37 markers. Ditto for the 67 markers. > > I have a good paper trail of my Wilsons back to Coleraine, some from > Ballywillan parish and some from Dunboe. In fact I even found their > names in the records of the First Dunboe Presbyterian church and walked > the old streets of Articlave and Ballywildrick - a bit spooky I'll > admit, but fun in any case. So, when I had my Y-DNA analyzed by FTDNA, > thought for sure it would come back as R1b1b2 as most Celtic Irish do, > but I was surprised when my haplogroup turned out to be I1a - Nordic! > that means my ancient ancestor probably came from Norway or Denmark and > was among the Vikings that eventually stayed in Ireland (or possibly > Scotland or England - the Danelaw, etc.) Using Y-SEARCH, and the matches > by FTDNA, I was able to find 4 perfect matches at 37 markers and one at > 67 markers with a genetic distance of 1 (we matched on 66 of 67 markers). > > FTDNA has some faculty at the University of Arizona who compute the > probabilities of matches, and they claim that the guy I matched on the > 67 markers had a common ancestor with me about 300 years ago, with a > probability of about .96. That's pretty high if you're not up on > probability theory. One of these days I'm going to sit down and figure > out how they came up with .96! > > Dan

Hi Ruth, There's some information here about I1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I1_%28Y-DNA%29 Most importantly it says: "When SNPs are unknown or untested and when short tandem repeat (STR) results show eight allele repeats at DNA Y chromosome Segment (DYS) 455, haplogroup I1 can be predicted correctly with a very high rate of accuracy, 99.3 to 99.8 percent, according to Whit Athey and Vince Vizachero. [ 11 ] [ 12 ] This is almost exclusive to and ubiquitous in the I1 haplogroup, with very few having seven, nine, or another number. Furthermore, DYS 462 divides I1 geographically. Nordtvedt considers 12 allele repeats to be more likely Anglo-Saxon and on the southern fringes of the I1 map, while 13 signifies more northerly, Nordic origins. Nordtvedt has repeatedly argued that, at least for I1, [ 13 ] SNP testing is generally not as beneficial as expanded STR results." Ken Nordtvedt is very active on the genealogy-DNA list and he is the specialist in this haplo group. As you can see above you should be able to distinguish between two types -- Anglo Saxon and Nordic. Probably there is more information in the archives of the genealogy DNA list including the logic of those who may dispute his analysis. >Linda, could we assume that the Irish of pre-Plantation times would be hugely R1b1b2 as Daniel points out "most Celtic Irish [are]" and that those brought over from Scotland would not necessarily be? What is "most Celtic Irish"??? WIthin Ireland there is, to a geneticist, a wide variation of percentages of different types of DNA regionally. So where are you talking about precisely? in the true north west most men are northwest Irish, a specific type of R1 but as you shift locations you get different percentages. And then of course what are the others? Various things including other types of R1. Second problem is 'what is Celtic'? Celtic is a CULTURE. It has nothing to do with DNA. The scientists still debate over whether it was brought to Ireland by actual migrations of people bearing it or taught. If you go now to almost anywhere on the planet you will find evidence of Euro-American culture (blue jeans, for example), but is that the result of a massive invasion of EuroAmericans or cultural transference. We know usually its cultural transference. But we don't know (or rather I don't know and my eyes glaze over listening to the arguments) how it came to Ireland. What seems true from what I have read, though perhaps I am out of date, is that most of the IRish population was in place a very long time ago, migrating up the coast of Europe over land bridges. At the Seine, which then emptied south into the Atlantic (flowing through what is now the English Channel), some went west to Scotland and some took the valley of the SEine and went up it and into what is now France. The interior of Wales was mountainous. These people eventually crossed over into Scotland, probably over a land bridge. However since God never towed either away from one another, they were always close, even after the ice age ended and the land bridges inundated, clever humans built boats and traveled freely among Ireland, Scotland, and the Nordic lands. The Nordic lands were settled in a different fashion. You can view these..... But some of these Nordic types of DNA were in Ireland for thousands of years. Does that mean they aren't "Celtic"? This is hogwash. Of course they were as Celtic as the next guy. We don't want to end up becoming some kind of 21st century 'bigot' who claims some poor smuck with an I1 chromo isn't really Irish when in fact he is. And for all we know, some came up from the Iberian area. They were not 'pure' haplotypes, even then. On the other hand too the eastern coast of England/Scotland was settled from the east, not the south, and it has seen waves of migrations, even in prehistoric times. There is much greater diversity there. People don't realize that our ancestors were very mobile. I was just reading about the world of Bede, an 8th century English historian who sheds much light on the Dark Ages at a time when the Anglo Saxons were still not very Christian and Christianity was still grappling with the neoclassic pagan heritage (ie re-writing Latin texbooks using Christian stories and not pagan). In the 700s people liked to go on pilgrimates to Rome. They'd cross to France and travel south, departing by boat from Marseilles. Took six months or more to get there. Many died on the way, but it was good to die on a pilgrimage. One person went on six such trips in his life. Later on, before the Vikings destroyed things, the Anglo Saxon/Irish Christians had great impact on Continental Europe -- many traveled there and even settled. We find many English manuscripts in Continental libraries from these dark age centuries. The DNA mixed a lot. The Irish came to England, the English to Ireland, etc, etc,e tc. The scientists always deal with statistics, so they can tell you 60 percent of your type of DNA is found here, etc...but you are not interested in the big picture. You want to know about one particular instance. Maybe you can never know when precisely your ancestor arrived in Ireland because his DNA will not tell you. Only that it was in Ireland because your ancestor was. You have to seek other information to even devise theories. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b_%28Y-DNA%29 - the migration of R1 is complicated and some do not believe in the Ibernian origin any more. How can you really separate planters from Irish? Scientists iare of the opinion that it is not possible. After all, God towed Ireland next to Scotland a very long time ago and since then people with legs and boats could travel back and forth. If you actually think the DNA is different in Scotland from the DNA in Ireland, see me about a bridge i'm selling. It is not. It dffers in percentages. Many Scots clans, we know, are founded by Irishmen. Their DNA doesn't 'change' just because they moved to Scotland. The scientists see different types of mutations coming from a common 'root', ie different branches, but also there is the constant patter of new people in both places. A person's chromosomes do not determine their ethnicity. An Irish ancestor living in Ireland could have strange DNA -- maybe he comes from Wales, where there were Irish colonies and where the Irish raided and took slaves. THe Romans imported slaves to work in Welsh copper mines -- you find all kinds of eastern Mediteranian DNA there. These people are called "Welsh coalminers". Their Y chromo is irrelevant. When ancestors were captured and lugged to Ireland, their descendents were "Irishmen". So if you want to know about your ancestor, you should study the records to see where he lived, how he lived, and what his religion and social class was. That will tell you who he was -- not his Y chromosome. A Johnston with a I2 Y chromo could culturally have been "Celtic' (whatever that means). he isn't related to the McShane clan that gave Queen Lizzie and some other O'Neills heart burn in the 1500s. That's all it says. A more detailed inspection by Ken Nordtvedt (or yourself) might suggest something about where he was before if you have matches. Or you can understand the mutation rates so you can tell who matches when the FTDNA software doesn't indicate they are matches. Or you understand the genomap well enough to ID the significance of 'upstream' mutations. I can't do this and must rely on others. What we see in projects like the Cumberland Gap project (descendents of people, often 'scotch irish', migrating west through the Gap into Kentucky) is a lot of north west Irish. What it shows is a lot of indiginous Irish assimilating into .... what? "Planter"? Meaning they were Protestant in Ireland? "Scotch Irish" meaning they assimilated in America? I donno <grin>. Linda Merle ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth McLaughlin" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, April 9, 2010 2:12:21 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA It's interesting, Dan, that the 1718 Smith family I am tracing and which we've talked about specifically, is also I1. This family is a Plantation family, arriving in Ulster from Argyllshire in the first half of the 17th c — the earliest family member, known about in some detail, was on one of the "first 5 ships' of 1718, and is always said in oral tradition to have, in infancy, survived the Siege of Derry. So, in some sense, I didn't necessarily expect an R1b haplogroup placement. I wonder if, since your Wilsons seem to have had a somewhat parallel history to my Smiths in many ways, perhaps there was a significant pocket of I1s who came to Ulster in Plantation times. I did, however, get an immediate R1b1b2 for my presumed reiver-descended Crozier. His antecedents weren't Planter but probably came to Fermanagh not long after. So both from Scotland but... Linda, could we assume that the Irish of pre-Plantation times would be hugely R1b1b2 as Daniel points out "most Celtic Irish [are]" and that those brought over from Scotland would not necessarily be? could in fact be left over Danes maybe? Wouldn't it be interesting to get all the 1718 and post Ulster families to DNA test and compare haplogroups, to see if it's possible to separate out Planters from indigenous Irish? But then sorting out the whys of I1 Argyllshire men from the R1b1b2 lowland reivers is another question. Too many intriguing questions!! BTW LInda, you said my Johnston might turn out to be a Celtic McShane. No chance, it seems, since my testor (a late 80s-something cousin) is I1 whose sub-haplogroup seems, if I am to believe the current talk, to be one of the so-called Poldean Johnstons of Scotland "whose Y-DNA signature" says Cliff Johnston, "is [so] distinctive...there is no mistaking it for any other surname's Y-DNA. Indeed, if one has only the shortest test available, the 12-markers test, one can tell if he is a Poldean Johnston immediately." The amazing part of this Johnston DNA test is that it might never have 'been,' had not been for a persistent Wilcox-cousin in Australia who developed the super 'super-search' Fermanagh website <http://www.fermanagh-gold.com/> for his fellow-subscribers to the Fermanagh-GOLD mailing list (and anyone else who needs Fermanagh data) — BTW, another Mailing list in the category of Linda Merle's!! David noticed I had "a Johnston" in MY family tree (big deal!–half the world has Johnstons in their trees!!); he'd DNA tested and he thought one of mine ought to, too. I begged off, already being swamped with DNA, with the comment that Johnstons are a dime a dozen and a chance of a match was wildly unlikely. Dave persisted, despite my brush off, saying things like... you had a Crozier who married a Johnston in Canada... I had a Wilcox from the same area of Ireland who married a Johnston there & emigrated to Australia... The mother of your Crozier who married the Johnston was a Wilcox... So seeing his greater wisdom, I gave in and the test of my Johnston cousin got done. Voilà a match! — both David and I from Poldean stock, if Cliff be right (and BTW, I have no reason to question him!). A 35/37 match with David and a 36/37 match with Cliff! I guess the message is — if you've got a decent paper trail and a few dollars to spend, despite all the unanswered questions we all have by times, it's wildly 'worth it' to test! Ruth