DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2007-11 > 1195659493


From: "David Ewing" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] On Behalf of Something like ethnic specifics
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:38:13 -0700


Though the Y-chromosome is passed through the paternal line and all men have
it, it does not code for "maleness." It does contain a gene that codes for a
signal that causes the undifferentiated gonads in the embryo to become
testes rather than ovaries. The testes then began producing testosterone,
which has effects on a lot of different organ systems. These organ systems
and their responses to testosterone are coded on autosomes, not on the
Y-chromosome. The Y-chromosome only provides a "switch that turns on
maleness;" the maleness itself is coded in the autosomes. Neither the
Y-chromosome or "maleness" have anything to do with hair color or any other
observable feature that could be imputed to be an ethnic or racial
characteristic.

Consider this. Imagine that an R1b1c7 man had accompanied Marco Polo to
China in 1266. How did an R1b1c7 man meet Marco Polo? Who knows, maybe an
Irish boy was captured by Viking slavers in 800 A.D. and sold to an Italian
slave-owner, and his progeny remained in Italy. Suppose further that this
R1b1c7 man fathered a son with a Chinese woman, and that this son and his
descendants fathered sons with Chinese women, all the way down to the
present. At 30 years a generation, we would be talking about 25 generations.
So how many great grandparents do each of us have 25 generations ago?
Calculate this by raising 2 to the 25th power: 33,554,432. Unbelievable, eh?
Over 33 million 23rd great grandparents for each of us. This means that the
23rd great grandson of the R1b1c7 man who went to China with Marco Polo
would be 1/33,554,432th Irish and 33,554,431/33,554,432th Chinese. That is
99.97% Chinese. But he will be R1b1c7. So are you and he both in the same
ethnic group? Of course not. He is Chinese. You are whatever you claim to
be.

Now, I don't think there were 33 million Chinese in 1266, and even if there
were, undoubtedly there would have been more than a few marriages between
cousins down through 25 generations, including probably some intermarriages
with some part-Irish cousins. Indeed, if the "pure" Irish ancestor of our
R1b1c7 fellow who traveled with Marco Polo was taken to Italy in 800 AD, in
the 15 generations between him and our traveler, there would have been so
much intermarriage with Italians that for all practical purposes he would
have been by then "pure" Italian, whatever that means. But still he would
have been R1b1c7.

I should be very surprised indeed if we tested everyone that we would not
find R1b1c7 represented amongst the Eskimo, Austrailian Aborigines,
Polynesians (I think some of these have been found already), American
Indians and African Americans (I am sure some of these have been found),
Chinese and practically every other ethnic group you can imagine. So how can
R1b1c7 be an ethnic group?

Niall lived 600-odd years ago. The common ancestor off all R1b1c7 men lived
more like 4000 years ago. I consider it extremely unlikely that Niall is my
ancestor, and though I acknowledge that if he was in fact R1b1c7 he is a
cousin of some degree, I do not consider that such evidence as we have
constitutes proof that Niall was R1b1c7. Maybe he was, maybe not. There are
sure a bunch of modern-day O'Neills that are not R1b1c7. Who is to say they
are not the "true" descendants of Niall and the R1b1c7s among us are
descended from folks who were living in Ireland and Scotland long before the
Gaels (including Niall's ancestors) showed up?

This thread: