Hi Ruth: I was interested in your comment that R1b1b2 are "most Celtic Irish". I am R1b1b2, and my earliest known ancestor wasd born in Sligo, ca 1765. I have assumed, from some vague information, that my White ancestors came from England, ca 1710, as part of a plan to develop- the Linen Trade in Sligo. Is it likely that an R1b1b2 came from Southern England ? (or do you need much more of the DNA signature? I have taken the 67 marker DNA test at FTDNA). Regards Jum White Naples, Florida ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth McLaughlin" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:57 PM Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA What else can I say but THANK YOU! What a terrific response. I've read it twice and already learned much — it's so very interesting, as well as useful, because of your gift of writing so conversationally. I want to throughly 'digest' that Wikipedia quotation about I1 that you give and also I'll go looking for Ken Nordvedt. Will re-read what you've written tomorrow when I'm brighter than at this late hour! This is yet another post of yours that will join my file called "Great Linda Merle Posts." Thanks. Ruth in Ottawa On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:07 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 ------------------------------- 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 __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5023 (20100412) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

Hi Jim, "Celtic" is a culture, not a type of DNA. It has been associated with SOME types of R1 in the populist mind. Unfortunately 'populist' ideas are often misleading or inaccurate. Here the more you get into it, the more confusing it becomes. In the scientific field of genetics, such terms cannot be used without confusion. Here is a map of the breakdown of Y DNA haplogroups for Europe, by country: http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml As you can see -- England is 67% R1b. How come you might ask? People have written books on this so the real answer cannot be explained in one sentence in an email -- it changes as scientists update or debunk theories and additional DNA arrives that must be explained. The answer is found by studying the history of England. All this R1b is NOT 'Celtic'. Many of these people (probably fair to say an unknown percentage) are Germans (aka Angles, Saxons, Frisians, Jutes, Norse). The same is true for R1b in Ireland. Ie: some haplogroups came from elsewhere in Europe. You can find charts and maps that delineate the types of DNA in southern England -- Give it a google. I believe there are projects that study the DNA of each county in England, another way to examine it. Lastly, it's extremely important to learn that the haploygroups are primarily concerned with "Deep Ancestry". You can google for that if you like and get more information. This is thousands of years ago -- NOT in historical times. Assuming your ancestors had legs and could get on a boat -- they migrated all over in the last thousand years alone! Romans brought DNA to Europe. After the demise of the Roman Empire many Germanic tribes invaded Europe -- they invaded and occupied Rome, Spain, Gaul, England, parts of Scotland. They brought their DNA with them. Even since 500 AD, the migrations of peoples in the British Isles are rather constant: tribes migrating, later armies, merchants, settlers of all kinds. Studies done of migration in England alone show almost a 100% turnover of surnames in a hundred years ALL OVER! Welsh miners moved to the Durham coalmines, for one large migration that comes to mind. It is believed many Marcher lords/aka Normans, brought tenants to eastern Ireland to settle their estates. There were colonies of English in Munster in the Elizabethan era and a Flemish colony in Dublin in the early 1600s. There was a Welsh colony in Belfast. There were Irish colonies in what is now Wales in the Dark Ages -- now absorbed into the population. There was also a lot of Dutch coming into Ireland throughout the 1600s and later. These would be Frisian (R1B) and other types of continental R1bs. You have heard of William of Orange? Dutch! And after he won the Throne, he awarded his followers with estates, etc, in, among other places, Ireland. Regarding recent ancestry, if you and another man have a different haplogroup, you can eliminate each other as being recent ancestors. You narrow the field with the haplogroup. Statistics can help narrow the place down IF your ancestors fall into the statistically significant. It is also possible they 'came from' or 'went to' an area that is statistically not significant, as ... Frisian R1b in Ireland. Rare but several people I have talked to have it. The Royal line of the O'Neills is Frisian R1b. In Ireland, royal lineage, R1b -- NOT Irish in origin. But culturally, they are Celtic Irish (excepting ones who prefer to be Brits <grin>). Harping on the R1b (again still) ....my father is R1b and Frisian. So I can surmisewhere my ancestors were 2000 years ago -- in what was Frisia. However some English Frisian DNA was in England before 2000 years ago. So maybe not. In any case, as the 1841 and late censuses asked where people were born, I know the village where my ninteenth century ancestors came from. To date DNA hasn't turned up any matches at all, so DNA genealogy has not disclosed what basic English genealogy methodology has: where they came from exactly. You can use DNA to figure out where they came from exactly (in the 18th century or 19th), but knowing the haplogroup is a very preliminary step to doing this. It is a complex methodology. It's not simple. I wish it was. Trading families in particular moved frequently, putting out spurs into new towns and countries. You can discover that a family in Cork was related to families in far distant ports. They often settled sons as agents in new ports in new countries. Some Belfast merchants had agents (family members) in places as far away as Spain. See Agnew's book on Belfast merchants. However these families also left many more records. You may find a match with a man in Barcelona. How'd your family get there? The answer is in the records they left. To learn where to find them, Agnew's book on Belfast merchants. There may be studies specific to the linen trade in Dublin. Have you looked for these? Linda Merle ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim White" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 10:46:39 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA Hi Ruth: I was interested in your comment that R1b1b2 are "most Celtic Irish". I am R1b1b2, and my earliest known ancestor wasd born in Sligo, ca 1765. I have assumed, from some vague information, that my White ancestors came from England, ca 1710, as part of a plan to develop- the Linen Trade in Sligo. Is it likely that an R1b1b2 came from Southern England ? (or do you need much more of the DNA signature? I have taken the 67 marker DNA test at FTDNA). Regards Jum White Naples, Florida ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth McLaughlin" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:57 PM Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA What else can I say but THANK YOU! What a terrific response. I've read it twice and already learned much — it's so very interesting, as well as useful, because of your gift of writing so conversationally. I want to throughly 'digest' that Wikipedia quotation about I1 that you give and also I'll go looking for Ken Nordvedt. Will re-read what you've written tomorrow when I'm brighter than at this late hour! This is yet another post of yours that will join my file called "Great Linda Merle Posts." Thanks. Ruth in Ottawa On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:07 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 ------------------------------- 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 __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5023 (20100412) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com ------------------------------- 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

Perhaps Dan Wilson will pop in here since it was he that I was quoting when I made the comment about R1b1b2 being mostly Celtic Irish. I think HE has a much better grasp of things-DNA than I ever will. And of course I know Linda does too. As I've said to somebody else this morning already, "I'm just flappin' around like a bird that's hit the window" when it comes to DNA. Trying hard to learn though! I'm waiting to see what Linda or Dan say to you. Ruth in Ottawa On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Jim White <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ruth: > I was interested in your comment that R1b1b2 are "most Celtic Irish".  I am > R1b1b2, and my earliest known ancestor wasd born in Sligo, ca 1765.  I have > assumed, from some vague information, that my White ancestors came from > England, ca 1710, as part of a plan to develop- the Linen Trade in Sligo. > > Is it likely that an R1b1b2 came from Southern England ? (or do you need > much more of the DNA signature? I have taken the 67 marker DNA test at > FTDNA). > > Regards > > Jim White > Naples, Florida

I had a 37 marker Y DNA done by FTYDNA and am R1b1b2. According to their site, the highest concentrations of R1b1b2 are in western Britain (Cornwall & Wales), Scotland, Isle of Man, and Ireland, all areas of predominately Celtic settlement. I've also been tested for R-L21 and have the 11-13 Combo. Now, there is some indication that R-L21* 11-13 Combo is thought to indicate Norman origin. Of course, the Normans were essentially Norwegians. All the areas where R1b1b2 is concentrated in Europe were, at one time or another, raided, invaded, and/or settled by the Norse or Danes. One of my families is McLaughlin, i.e., Son of Norway, Lo(a)chland being the Gaelic name of Norway, Lake Land. If only they had tested for DNA back in the 5th to 17th centuries. Woody Stephens -------------------------------------------------- From: "Ruth McLaughlin" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 1:27 PM To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [S-I] More on DNA > Perhaps Dan Wilson will pop in here since it was he that I was quoting > when I made the comment about R1b1b2 being mostly Celtic Irish. I > think HE has a much better grasp of things-DNA than I ever will. And > of course I know Linda does too. As I've said to somebody else this > morning already, "I'm just flappin' around like a bird that's hit the > window" when it comes to DNA. Trying hard to learn though! I'm waiting > to see what Linda or Dan say to you. > > Ruth in Ottawa > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Jim White <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Ruth: >> I was interested in your comment that R1b1b2 are "most Celtic Irish". I >> am >> R1b1b2, and my earliest known ancestor wasd born in Sligo, ca 1765. I >> have >> assumed, from some vague information, that my White ancestors came from >> England, ca 1710, as part of a plan to develop- the Linen Trade in Sligo. >> >> Is it likely that an R1b1b2 came from Southern England ? (or do you need >> much more of the DNA signature? I have taken the 67 marker DNA test at >> FTDNA). >> >> Regards >> >> Jim White >> Naples, Florida > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >