Hi Linda: I found your article fantastically interesting and informative. Can you advise further reading, to a DNA novice, for a person with NW Irish Heritage. My Haplogroup is "R1b12a1b". My earliest known ancestor was born in Sligo, Ireland, ca 1765. It is my speculation his g grandfather came from Devon, England, ca 1695-1725. Kindest Regards Jim White Naples, Florida ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA > 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 > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5014 (20100409) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com