DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2008-10 > 1223508708


From: Daniel Jenkins <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] R1b1c7 in Ireland vs. Scotland
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 23:31:48 +0000
References: <c42.37b68d74.361e877c@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <c42.37b68d74.361e877c@aol.com>


Why not look at where R1b1b2e is found today in Scotland . I will bet most will be found in Glascow or nearby, where by 1830 better than 80% were Glascow Irish from Ulster . I cannot see how modern Y-DNA is going to explain what transpired more than 1000 years ago in the
British Isles between Ireland and Scotland . How many back and forths were there ?
I think the horse expired , due to the many beatings .

Dan Jenkins

> From: > Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 18:00:28 -0400> To: > Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] R1b1c7 in Ireland vs. Scotland> > In a message dated 10/8/2008 4:51:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > writes:> > John,> I gather that theTrinity figures of 16.9% for R1b1c7 in Northwest Ireland > and 21.5% for a GD=1were based on their 17 (or was it 19) marker test, while > Capelli's figures of 7.3% in western and central Scotland, or 16.7% at GD=1, > were based on only six markers? Seems to me that a six-marker test is highly > uunreliable.> I thought the claims that R1b1c7 is prevalent in Scotland were based on > better statistics. But even the Capelli figures, because of the much wider spread > between the two figures for Scotland, seem to confirm a Northwest Irish > origin for R1b1c7. Am I reading this correctly?> > > > The Capelli data as I recall mostly depends on two markers, DYS 390 = 25 and > DYS 392 = 14. So that can be misleading - there are R1b with those markers > who are not R1b1c7.> > I don't know that it is possible to confirm an origin in Ireland for R1b1c7 > even given the fact that it's most prominent there. The phrase > "spectacularly successful" is often used to describe a haplotype that flourishes > especially well in one location. Does that mean it originated there? David Wilson > might have some opinions on this. In his last post David mentioned it was > prominent in both Ireland and Scotland without assuming it originated in either > place.> > The latest dates for the TMRCA for R1b1c7 don't go back past 0 -500 AD. And > Nial in Ireland comes in at the later edge of this range. We know from the > Irish pedigrees not all Irish R1b1c7 is descended from Nial (the Connachta > clans of the west aren't). We don't know the true first ancestor of the tribes > in Ireland. If you believe O'Rahilly it's Tuathal Teachtmar, portrayed as > the invasion leader of the Connachta, or whatever they were called in his day. > O'Rahilly doesn't accept the pedigree of Nial as historical. He regards > all of the names earlier than Nial's father, Eochaidh Mugmedhoin, as > unreliable. Conn 'of the Hundred Battles' is an ancestral god and not an historical > figure. But O'Rahilly does think Tuathal Teachtmar may have been an historical > ancestor. Beyond that we know nothing because the pedigrees are gibberish.> > Let's say Tuathal Teachtmar was R1b1c7 and the first to arrive in Ireland. > You can't really base his age on the pedigrees since they're unreliable - > but Irish sources suggest he lived sometime in the 200's AD. Where did he > come to Ireland from? In Irish mythology Tuathal is portrayed as a returning > "exile" from Ireland. The story goes he escaped from Ireland as a child with > his mother (a Scot) and lived there until a young man before he returned to > reclaim his inheritance. The whole story is fairly nonsensical. Supposedly > there was an uprising of the plebian tribes of Ireland (ie, non Milesian) and > all the "royal" Milesians were slain except for the child Tuathal. That > banishment and return from exile is a common theme in Irish mythology. It may > mean nothing.> > David mentioned in his last post that the original M222+ might have lived > on the continent. He would not be reflected in TMRCA calculations because > what we're measuring in Ireland and Scotland could be a more recent common > ancestor. That would seem to be the bottleneck effect often theorized in DNA > discussions. I guess this is a long-winded and meandering way to try and say I > think it's possible the MRCA of R1b1c7 "might" just as easily have lived in > Scotland as in Ireland. > > Why the difference in population sizes? In Ireland the Connachta and Ui > Neill conquered and won territories and held them for centuries, in most > cases, from 400 AD. to the late 1500s. In Scotland (and especially the lowlands) > there were succeeding waves of conquerors (Anglos, Saxons, Vikings, Normans). > Early on the culture changed from tribal to feudal. There was no > opportunity for a strictly tribal entity to establish itself and flourish unchecked > for centuries.> > I don't know what the truth is. But I don't think we have this R1b1c7 thing > figured out yet.> > > John> > > > > > > > > > **************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination. > Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out! > (http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000001)>; > -------------------------------> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
_________________________________________________________________
See how Windows Mobile brings your life together—at home, work, or on the go.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093182mrt/direct/01/

This thread: