PDA

View Full Version : SNP L1066+ and Possible Connections



AncientCelt
12-12-2013, 07:12 PM
I just wanted to bounce something around out there in light of some new information found, as it might relate to our current L1066+ UAS grouping. I am connected to the Davidson/Davison surname, confirmed back to at least 1685. My next nearest match is connected to the Curley surname, confirmed to the 1800's I believe. The GD between us at 111 markers is 5. Only very recently did we begin to look at one possible origin for the Curley surname as Mac Cairill,(later Anglicized to McKerley/M'Kerley, etc) from Galloway Scotland. I am currently testing Big Y so hopefully we'll get some new snps under L1066 but I just wanted to put this out there in case anyone is doing research on L1066 and groupings. I've also seen surnames overlapping with Border Reiver surnames, mine included so maybe there are some early indications of origins. I guess we have a long way to go before we can start pinning down geographic locations for clusters under L1066 but I'm very interested in any thoughts, no matter how speculative.

Scarlet Ibis
12-13-2013, 11:18 AM
Thread moved by user request.

AncientCelt
12-13-2013, 01:30 PM
I'd like to add one more piece to this and that is a query looking at YCAII a/b and what appear to be definite connections (geographic Ossory/Kilkenny, etc.) This is from a ysearch pull of 8 markers including the 22/23 combo. I tried to pick as few markers as possible to pull back as many 22/23 matches. What I did was stick with markers common to all L1066 results, just to get to 8 total markers. There were a few more results only having one instance of a surname but I just left those off. There were 75 hits in total and there are some definite connections here.

Fitzpatrick 8
Dalton 7
Brennan 5
Venable 4
Molinario 4
mauldin 3
Brannon 3
Burke 2
Whalen 2
Brannan 2
Curley 2
Greene 2
Brophy 1
Stone 1
Murray 1
Brannen 1
Veler 1
D'Alton 1
McPhearson 1
Davison 1

TigerMW
12-13-2013, 09:47 PM
I just wanted to bounce something around out there in light of some new information found, as it might relate to our current L1066+ UAS grouping. I am connected to the Davidson/Davison surname, confirmed back to at least 1685. My next nearest match is connected to the Curley surname, confirmed to the 1800's I believe. The GD between us at 111 markers is 5. Only very recently did we begin to look at one possible origin for the Curley surname as Mac Cairill,(later Anglicized to McKerley/M'Kerley, etc) from Galloway Scotland. I am currently testing Big Y so hopefully we'll get some new snps under L1066 but I just wanted to put this out there in case anyone is doing research on L1066 and groupings. I've also seen surnames overlapping with Border Reiver surnames, mine included so maybe there are some early indications of origins. I guess we have a long way to go before we can start pinning down geographic locations for clusters under L1066 but I'm very interested in any thoughts, no matter how speculative.

I think every one knows that Ken Nordtvedt's old Irish IV/Continental haplotype signature is a subset of L1066 and L1066 actually fits under Z253 a couple of steps down.

There are L1066+ people in places like Switzerland so it makes this group quite interesting.

AncientCelt
12-13-2013, 11:26 PM
MIke,

Show me a snp under L21 that does not have representation on the continent. Do those snps were a continental badge? That's what I was getting at, it's clearly much heavier in the isles and I believe it's now been proven to be older in the Isles, would you agree or am I stating something that has not already been proven from the results thus far.

Meant to add, I agree, it is very interesting but then I have a bias to it. I've said in the past, it and the snps yet to be found under it will prove to be very significant.

I think I was a bit abrasive here,so please let me rephrase, Please show me an snp under L21 that does not have at least a few continental representations and I would be quite surprised. Also, we have clear examples from quite a ways back where various projects have pinned a Norman badge on one of the most ancient Celtic/Gaulish snps yet and have apparently made no effort to update that information. If anyone is going to post information out there for all the world to see, you also have a responsibility to correct it when it's been shown to be erroneous. I do not direct this to Mike, he's been a tireless warrior in the L21 research and I look forward to his assistance in the upcoming FGC and Big Y analysis. I'll just accept the fact I can't do anything about the others that continue to post false information out there because in all reality, this has been going on for hundreds of years, it's really nothing new. Happy holidays everyone and feel free to post your thoughts.

TigerMW
12-18-2013, 02:41 PM
MIke,

Show me a snp under L21 that does not have representation on the continent. Do those snps were a continental badge? That's what I was getting at, it's clearly much heavier in the isles and I believe it's now been proven to be older in the Isles, would you agree or am I stating something that has not already been proven from the results thus far.

Meant to add, I agree, it is very interesting but then I have a bias to it. I've said in the past, it and the snps yet to be found under it will prove to be very significant.

I think I was a bit abrasive here,so please let me rephrase, Please show me an snp under L21 that does not have at least a few continental representations and I would be quite surprised. Also, we have clear examples from quite a ways back where various projects have pinned a Norman badge on one of the most ancient Celtic/Gaulish snps yet and have apparently made no effort to update that information. If anyone is going to post information out there for all the world to see, you also have a responsibility to correct it when it's been shown to be erroneous. I do not direct this to Mike, he's been a tireless warrior in the L21 research and I look forward to his assistance in the upcoming FGC and Big Y analysis. I'll just accept the fact I can't do anything about the others that continue to post false information out there because in all reality, this has been going on for hundreds of years, it's really nothing new. Happy holidays everyone and feel free to post your thoughts.

Just to be clear, I didn't come up with that name, "Irish IV/Continental". I believe that was Ken Nordtvedt's description. I don't like to assign geographic or ethnic labels to SNPs. Notice that I call this one 253-2185-1066-T4. There is not even an "I", just the "T4" as a remnant of the original name.

Frequency distribution-wise, all of L21 is quite high across the Isles and parts of northern France. The rest of the continent is no L21 hotspot.

However, relative to the other large subclades of DF13, Z253 has a stronger showing in on the continent. We see it in France, Spain and in places like Switzerland. Different elements of Z253 are different though. L226 is probably one of the subclades with the least representation on the continent while L1066 is probably has one of the most (relative to L21 in general.)

BTW, An L1066 project has started up. http://www.familytreedna.com/public/L1066_Plus/

AncientCelt
12-25-2013, 01:04 AM
Mike,

Some Celts were mercenaries as you know, some were taken as slaves, of course there will be a handful of results on the Continent. If someone can show evidence that contradicts Mr. Jost's analysis of Z253, Z2534 and L1066 showing oldest in Scotland, I'd definitely be interested in seeing that. The Celts were forced to take surnames, many took names of their landlord's or some took English surnames. Conversely, you have clearly Celtic Clans, such as the McClure's and the MacCrackens all under Z253. You also have the Shiness Matheson's/McKenzies under Z2534. In fact, I just read about the English Law the forced the Irish to take surnames such as Green, Black, Cook, Smith, Butler, etc. These are not Normans, these are Celts that were forced to choose surnames. Time will tell, for now I'm trying to squash the slanted bias. As far as Ken, he was wrong. He's human, he makes mistakes, he just put the cart before the horse on that one and called the race far too early.

AncientCelt
12-27-2013, 01:14 AM
Not much action going on here but something came to mind and it shows I am definitely open to new information and alternate possibilities. As of this writing, nothing has changed showing L1066 is oldest in Scotland, however, what if some L1066 descendants were pushed back to Brittany/Amorica during the Saxon invasion. That's a historical fact, that Britons went to Brittany so what if some of them were L1066. Then, many years later, some of those L1066 descendants came back to the Isles as part of the Norman invasion army. So while I think it's ridiculous to consider L1066 Norman, when it's ancient Celtic, I do not think it's far fetched to think some of those L1066s came back to the Isles with the Normans and I could understand the Norman connection for some L1066.

Muircheartaigh
12-27-2013, 12:09 PM
Then, many years later, some of those L1066 descendants came back to the Isles as part of the Norman invasion army. So while I think it's ridiculous to consider L1066 Norman, when it's ancient Celtic, I do not think it's far fetched to think some of those L1066s came back to the Isles with the Normans and I could understand the Norman connection for some L1066.

Bill,

As every English schoolboy (and schoolgirl) knows, 1066 definitely is associated with the Normans. It's the year that William of Normandy crossed the channel and defeated King Harold at the Battle of Hastings.

AncientCelt
12-28-2013, 12:45 AM
Not sure where that came from, I'm talking about the SNP L1066, not the year. I was saying that in the year 1066, when the Normans came with William, which many American schoolboys know as well, there were Celts with the Normans. L1066 is not a Norman snp, but, it's possible a contingent that arrived with the Normans were Celts and maybe some of those were L1066. This could explain the geographic diversity for the SNP.

Edit to say, maybe that's why some others are confused, they are having trouble separating the year from the SNP, that's a thought.

MacEochaidh
12-28-2013, 06:32 AM
I'm L21>DF13>DF49>DF23 and my small branch of DF23 is called "Continental" because 2 of 7 are from France and Italy. My Dad was from Co. Wexford, Ireland. I don't think there is anyone out there that would say that DF23 originated in the Isles.

AncientCelt
12-29-2013, 03:08 PM
How did the discussion turn to DF23, I'm talking about L1066? Z253>Z2534>Z2185>L1066....Isles. Maybe not Z253 but most likely that even. Over 3000 years old, in the Isles, that's what the current testing results show. Don't know anything about DF23. I fail to see the connection to my purpose to starting this topic but I can see it's not going anywhere. I'll just let the evidence continue to mount and pretty much ignore the efforts to misdirect and post and publish misinformation. I'm done, obviously not going anywhere.

AncientCelt
12-29-2013, 03:09 PM
If an admin monitors this, you can just close or delete this thread, it's pointless.

MacEochaidh
12-31-2013, 03:14 AM
How did the discussion turn to DF23, I'm talking about L1066? Z253>Z2534>Z2185>L1066....Isles. Maybe not Z253 but most likely that even. Over 3000 years old, in the Isles, that's what the current testing results show. Don't know anything about DF23. I fail to see the connection to my purpose to starting this topic but I can see it's not going anywhere. I'll just let the evidence continue to mount and pretty much ignore the efforts to misdirect and post and publish misinformation. I'm done, obviously not going anywhere.

The question had been asked about SNPs under L21 that were refered to as "Continental". I gave an example, DF23 is an SNP under L21 and my branch is refered to as "Continental".

marosjor
12-31-2013, 02:53 PM
I'm L21>DF13>DF49>DF23 and my small branch of DF23 is called "Continental" because 2 of 7 are from France and Italy. My Dad was from Co. Wexford, Ireland. I don't think there is anyone out there that would say that DF23 originated in the Isles.

I think terms like "Continental" were added to clusters and SNP categories in an effort to be open minded about the origin of the cluster or SNP rather than assume they were only found in Ireland or the UK etc. Overall, I think we shouldn't use subjective terms like "Irish" or "Celtic" or "Continental" but use objective numbering systems like Mike Walsh does and many project grouping systems (including the Ireland yDNA Project). I believe that we need more information than we currently have to assign geographical (or cultural origins!) to many SNPs.

Regards,
Margaret

MikeABarry
01-02-2014, 11:25 PM
Hi I'm hoping to learn more about my distant origins through FTDNA Projects Z253 and L1066. At the moment I'm out there alone as I'm the only Chromo2 L1066+ and my YDNA is only similar to one other non Barry. I'm actively looking at how to identify sub clades through both YDNA marker sequences and SNP signature, I'm hopeful that this year will be a watershed as far as this sub clade of Z253 is concerned. I have already learned that Mike Walsh had predicted several sub groupings, I fall into L1066-T4, I suspect that there will soon be new groupings and associated SNPs maybe even a definitive SNP and hopefully some clarity over the Irish IV / Continental which seems to be embedded in this clade. Although surname really don't go to far back in history, I would like to find links to other with similar YDNA signatures as I have very little conventional facts on which to base my research, but its nice to know that I'm from stock that pre dated the Norman invasion by a few thousand years!!

mcg11
05-20-2014, 12:12 PM
I also am L 1066+. My name doesn't help me, I am a McGregor, since I am a partaker, not a descendant of the "Scottie" MacGregors. My closest "kin" appears to be a person by the name of Billingsley (lea) from England. My earliest ancestor was born in Aulich, Perthshire, Scotland c. 1650 AD. His name was: Patrick Gregor McGregory (MacGregorie).

At the Clan Gregor FtDNA website, there are a host of non-Macgregors with names such as Grieg, Greer, Gregory, McGregor etc. In Gaelic, the name Gregor is Giric. A man by this name was the grandson of McAlpine the first Scotti King of Scotland.However, it is believed he was of Pictish male descent? There is some discussion on the origin of the name Gregor. Is it Pictish or Scotti? Most modern Scotti historians dismiss or even question the existence of a man called Giric, and essentially, he has been removed from the history of Scotland at the present time.

I don't know if the Picts or Caledonians (pre Roman Scots) were L 1066+; possibly some of them were. I am personally stalled at this time in trying to learn more about my heritage. One thing though, based on Y STR dating analysis, L 1066 is at least 2 to 3K years old and possibly even older.

My gut "guesstimate" is that Z253 is of Iberian origin and L 1066 is a British Isle descendant of Z253.

Dubhthach
05-20-2014, 03:44 PM
Well iberian Z253 appears to be in it's own clade right? Namely DF73. My feeling is that Z253 is old and thus has a widespread distrubition. It wouldn't surprise me if it first arose in what is now France and then spread outwards from there (Southbound into Iberia, Northbound into Britain and Ireland)

mcg11
05-22-2014, 05:37 PM
I don't follow your comment re: DF73? Here is the ISOGG 2014 tree pertinent to Z253 and L1066: R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218
• • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f* -
• • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f1 L554
• • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2 S686/Z2534
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2* -
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2a L226/S168
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2b L643
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2c S893/Z2185
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2c* -
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2c1 CTS1202.1/L1066.1
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2c1* -
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2c1a CTS9881
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • R1b1a2a1a2c1f2d DF73/S923

Its not clear to me that Z253 is in clade DF73?? Maybe I misunderstood you?

Dubhthach
05-23-2014, 10:32 AM
Z253= R1b1a2a1a2c1f

DF73 = R1b1a2a1a2c1f2d

ergo DF73 is a subclade of Z253. What I specifically meant was that alot of the Iberian Z253+ is actually DF73+. eg "Iberian Z253+ appears to be in it's own clade, namely DF73+)

mcg11
05-23-2014, 10:59 AM
Z253= R1b1a2a1a2c1f

DF73 = R1b1a2a1a2c1f2d

ergo DF73 is a subclade of Z253. What I specifically meant was that alot of the Iberian Z253+ is actually DF73+. eg "Iberian Z253+ appears to be in it's own clade, namely DF73+)

I agree that DF73 is a subclade of Z253 as we've both shown. Apparently, according to Hoxgi, DF73 is under Z2189 and he states that in a post referring to your post on the DF 13 blog.

What we seem to have are at least three geographical distributions of subclades of Z253 (Z2534): L226 (irish), Z185 (Scottish/English) and Z189 (Iberian). Its not clear which is older, although, I might bet on Z185? The original source for these sub clades probably originated in the Hallstadt or La Tene regions of Europe. I don't think we can say for sure with our present understanding of Y STR's data sets and their geographical origins?

Muircheartaigh
05-23-2014, 01:33 PM
[QUOTE=mcg11;40777]I agree that DF73 is a subclade of Z253 as we've both shown. Apparently, according to Hoxgi, DF73 is under Z2189 and he states that in a post referring to your post on the DF 13 blog.

What we seem to have are at least three geographical distributions of subclades of Z253 (Z2534): L226 (irish), Z185 (Scottish/English) and Z189 (Iberian). Its not clear which is older, although, I might bet on Z185? The original source for these sub clades probably originated in the Hallstadt or La Tene regions of Europe. I don't think we can say for sure with our present understanding of Y STR's data sets and their geographical origins?[/QUOTE.

We also have what I think will turn out to be a rather large cluster immediately below Z253, predominantly Central Irish and labelled by Mike as 253-1716-11. The cluster has approximately 200 members with a variety of surnames, again predominantly Irish. We currently have the results of four members Big Y/FGC showing a string of approximately 25 good quality SNPs shared by all four members, and each member having additional 9 or 10 Good quality Variants each.

The SNPs which include S841 are all distinct from the other Z253 subgroups, suggesting that branching occurred immediately below Z253.

Ray Murta

mcg11
05-26-2014, 11:09 AM
Are the Z 253 Administrators aware of this cluster? Hoxgi responded to dubhthach post on the DF13 blog and only discussed the position of DF73.

The major issues for L 1066+, in my opinion, are dating, where it originated and how it spread. These are difficult questions at the present due to the difficulty of using STR's to accurately date TMRCA's. Preliminary TMRCA data, produced by counting SNP's, is also questionable due to infancy of that approach.

Your comment implies that S841 is not under Z2534? If so, this would possibly add some fuel to an Isles origin, but with close ties to Iberia, possibly positing forward and back migrations between the isles and Iberia?

Muircheartaigh
05-26-2014, 09:08 PM
Are the Z 253 Administrators aware of this cluster? Hoxgi responded to dubhthach post on the DF13 blog and only discussed the position of DF73.

The major issues for L 1066+, in my opinion, are dating, where it originated and how it spread. These are difficult questions at the present due to the difficulty of using STR's to accurately date TMRCA's. Preliminary TMRCA data, produced by counting SNP's, is also questionable due to infancy of that approach.

Your comment implies that S841 is not under Z2534? If so, this would possibly add some fuel to an Isles origin, but with close ties to Iberia, possibly positing forward and back migrations between the isles and Iberia?

Yes the Z253 Administrators are aware of the cluster. Hoxi, (Greg), Mike Walsh and myself have been identifying potential candidates for the cluster since it was first associated with Z253 more than two years ago when it numbered around 30.It has now grown to around 200. The cluster signature is clearly defined and distinct from other Z253 groups. We now have 5 members with Big Y results confirming a long string of shared SNPs below Z253 suggesting a long period, perhaps in excess of 2500 years without branching of the line to the MRCA of the cluster. The cluster itself has previously been estimated to be around 1500 years old.

Regarding S841, it is one of the string of SNPs mentioned above, and parallel to, and not under Z2534.

Ray

mcg11
06-01-2014, 04:40 PM
I had an email discussion with Hoxi and he said they knew of the sub-clade and that it might also include non-irish entries. What is your best estimate of the age of Z253? I and Billingsley are both R L1066+ ( as is also Sammons, I believe, but not tested). I would guesstimate a TMRCA in excess of 2K BP and possibly even earlier between us?

Muircheartaigh
06-01-2014, 07:00 PM
I had an email discussion with Hoxi and he said they knew of the sub-clade and that it might also include non-irish entries. What is your best estimate of the age of Z253? I and Billingsley are both R L1066+ ( as is also Sammons, I believe, but not tested). I would guesstimate a TMRCA in excess of 2K BP and possibly even earlier between us?

I don't know of any reliable Variants that are shared between L1066 and the Cluster that I am analysing (253-1716-11) that lie below Z253. If that is the case our MRCA is Z253 or there abouts.

We now have Big Y results for five members of the cluster who share the 25 Variants below Z253. There are further good quality Variants down-stream of the 25 which confirms progressive branching of the five members. The additional Variants below the 25 long string of shared Variants number between 9 and 20 for each member. I have an additional 18 Variants below Z253 reported in my Full Genomes results which are in locations of the Y Genome not tested in the Big Y so we don't currently know how many of these are shared by the cluster members.

All in all this means that each member tested by Big Y has between 34 and 45 variant below Z253 and I have 58 variants from my tests including FGC results below Z253. I am waiting for Two of the Five members BAM files before I can finalize the analysis as it is only by examining each variant individually in the BAM file that we can confirm Quality and negativity, particularly those reported as 'High' in Big Y which turn out to be dodgy.

As far as TMRCA of L1066 and 253-1716-11 is concerned, I don't think we are yet in a position to accurately estimate mutation periods, but I have for some time suspected that the 253-1716-11 originated in the Irish Midlands prior to the introduction of surnames.

The age of Z253 based on the average number of Big Y Variants in the five sets of results using estimates previously mentioned in this Forum would be approximately 6000 years, which seems higher than any existing estimate.

Note. If I have access to your BAM and list of Novel Variants file I can do a search for any common Variants between L1066 and 253-1716-11 located below Z253.

Ray

mcg11
06-02-2014, 11:40 AM
I have not been SNP tested by FGC. A little too expensive as of now. I have 111 STR's, with different values at 632, 388, 393, 390 for example. I am currently awaiting results for MtDNA and family finder from FtDNA.

I am a McGregor by surname, but am not a genetic McGregor. I suspect I may be of "Caledonian" descent, whatever that means DNA wise? In any case my haplotype's founder was probably from the Isles?

I am beginning to suspect that Zhivotovskys evolutionary rate, may make more sense than previously thought? Certainly if Z253 is 6K or older it puts R L21 and P 312 back closer to middle ice age times of origin, which was the original thinking before the "new math".

I am pondering if I should go ahead with FGC, and if I do, I would certainly appreciate your help in interpreting my results. Thanks for the offer.

miiser
06-05-2014, 08:51 AM
I'm the Curley mentioned at the start of this thread. Building on AncientCelt's work to identify L1066's having the signature of DYS389i = 14 and YCAII = 22-23, we've identified a geographic cluster for a subclade of L1066. Some of these test kits are not members of L21, but were harvested from surname projects or y-search. Some have not tested L1066, but I'm confident that they all are based on their HTs. These kits include surnames Curley, Burke, Chapman/Campbell, McMahon, Flood, Ryan, and Dolan. I've traced the lineages for as many of these kits that I was able to, and mapped them on the attached image.

1933

There's a pretty strong geographic pattern of central Ireland around Lough Ree in counties Roscommon, Galway, Longford, Cavan, and Westmeath. The other interesting thing about this cluster is that, other than Curley, these kits are all single isolated kits or small young groups within their own surnames. They do not appear to belong to the major ancient lineages of their well known surname clans. Also, some of the surnames follow a pattern of arriving or appearing in this region around the 1500's. The MRCA estimate for this subclade is centered in the neighborhood of 800 AD.

My guess is that this cluster represents an ancient Celtic tribe long present in the area, with the various descendant branches acquiring surnames around the 1500's, the surname adoption possibly being prompted by English settlement.

mcg11
06-05-2014, 10:57 AM
I am Z5hg3 in YSearch and have the 19-23 at YCAII a/b mentioned in ancients celts early posts. My TMRCA goes back at least 2-3K yeears and possibly earlier. A L1066+ Billingsley has many similar mutations to me as does Sammons.(who hasn't been tested for L1066, just Z253, but is quite similar to me also). My earliest ancestor was born c. 1650 and probably was named c. 1400 to 1500.

Someone, on a thread I read, said the Picts are descendants of the Caledonians; I don't think so, I think the Picts came from France to Eastern Ireland and Eastern Scotland in two stages: 1. c. 500 BC, after being driven out of NW France, by Celtic tribes and 2. c. 50 BC to 200 AD, being driven from NW Brittany by the Romans.

The Caledonians in Scotland are of much older stock in the Islands, and may well have started out in Italy, Iberia to The Isles. Rathna on an L51xL11 thread espouses this idea and it makes sense to me, given the nature of Z253?

miiser
06-05-2014, 06:55 PM
I am Z5hg3 in YSearch and have the 19-23 at YCAII a/b mentioned in ancients celts early posts. My TMRCA goes back at least 2-3K yeears and possibly earlier. A L1066+ Billingsley has many similar mutations to me as does Sammons.(who hasn't been tested for L1066, just Z253, but is quite similar to me also). My earliest ancestor was born c. 1650 and probably was named c. 1400 to 1500.

Someone, on a thread I read, said the Picts are descendants of the Caledonians; I don't think so, I think the Picts came from France to Eastern Ireland and Eastern Scotland in two stages: 1. c. 500 BC, after being driven out of NW France, by Celtic tribes and 2. c. 50 BC to 200 AD, being driven from NW Brittany by the Romans.

The Caledonians in Scotland are of much older stock in the Islands, and may well have started out in Italy, Iberia to The Isles. Rathna on an L51xL11 thread espouses this idea and it makes sense to me, given the nature of Z253?

Hi mcg, Just to clarify, the sub group that Ancient Celt was referring to has YCAII of 22-23, not 19-23. 19-23 is the typical value within Z253. 22-23 is a subgroup of L1066 having a unique allele of this marker.

I don't think there's enough data to say for sure where L1066 originated. But it sure looks like it's been in central Ireland for a very long time, almost definitely pre Norman. Soghain has been put out there as an idea. Based on the geographic distribution and age, this seems the most straightforward and natural conclusion, not requiring any excruciating contortions of the data in order to explain the group's distribution.

mcg11
06-05-2014, 07:42 PM
Hi mcg, Just to clarify, the sub group that Ancient Celt was referring to has YCAII of 22-23, not 19-23. 19-23 is the typical value within Z253. 22-23 is a subgroup of L1066 having a unique allele of this marker.

I don't think there's enough data to say for sure where L1066 originated. But it sure looks like it's been in central Ireland for a very long time, almost definitely pre Norman. Soghain has been put out there as an idea. Based on the geographic distribution and age, this seems the most straightforward and natural conclusion, not requiring any excruciating contortions of the data in order to explain the group's distribution.

You are correct re: 19/23, it is the modal for Z253. I have a real problem with central Ireland as the home of L1066? For one there are a group of Iberians who test positive of Z253. so that makes it a flip for Z53? Names don't mean anything when we're talking 2K to 3K years at the least. Its much older than pre Norman as the haplotypes of Billingsley and myself show.

CTS9881 could be more recent, its a subclade of L1066. It would seem, based on names again, that Ireland could well be the source for that sub clade.

My gut feeling is that we are dealing with ancient miners who mined in Ireland and Wales predominantly and persons associated with that trade? So, I'm not sure we are dealing with Irish only here ( or Ireland as the ancestral source)?? FWIW, My mom was a Hunter, born in Scotland, and her mom came from Ireland (Mains); so I have a bit of the auld sod in me!

miiser
06-05-2014, 08:12 PM
You are correct re: 19/23, it is the modal for Z253. I have a real problem with central Ireland as the home of L1066? For one there are a group of Iberians who test positive of Z253. so that makes it a flip for Z53? Names don't mean anything when we're talking 2K to 3K years at the least. Its much older than pre Norman as the haplotypes of Billingsley and myself show.

CTS9881 could be more recent, its a subclade of L1066. It would seem, based on names again, that Ireland could well be the source for that sub clade.

My gut feeling is that we are dealing with ancient miners who mined in Ireland and Wales predominantly and persons associated with that trade? So, I'm not sure we are dealing with Irish only here ( or Ireland as the ancestral source)?? FWIW, My mom was a Hunter, born in Scotland, and her mom came from Ireland (Mains); so I have a bit of the auld sod in me!

I think maybe you misunderstand what I meant by saying "pre-Norman". Everything before the Normans is pre-Norman, including Romans, Celts, Vikings, Picts, and earlier. I was just saying that the 22/23 cluster had probably been in Ireland as a Celtic tribe or possibly something earlier, precluding the possibility of a group arriving more recently.

Yes, there are some scattered Z253 outside of the Isles, but I can't see this as strong evidence of an earlier origin outside of the Isles. All in all, the number of non Isle individuals is still quite small, and those outside of the Isles could certainly have migrated there later. If there were an old origin of Z253 or L1066 hanging around on the continent or elsewhere for thousands of years, we really should expect to see more of them in those locations. While I acknowledge that a population distribution does not 100% correlate with origin, it is certainly a prime indicator, and the concentration of Z253 in the Isles should not be easily dismissed unless there is strong evidence to the contrary.

However, we are getting off subject. In my first post, I was not attempting to argue the origins of L1066 or Z253. I was simply announcing the discovery of a central Ireland cluster for the YCAII = 22/23 subclade within L1066.

mcg11
06-06-2014, 01:00 PM
Miiser,I see you've started a new thread re: the new L1066+ subclade. That's fine. It seems to me that we are still at Square one as to the origins of L1066+? I have no idea where my earliest ancestor was from. I can only trace my family back to 1650 or so in Scotland.

I can think of two alternative theories: 1. Following Rathna's work, imagine a beginning of the ancestor of Z253 in northern Italy and a migration north to the Switzerland area, subsequently migrating through France to Iberia and then to the Isles, with much back and forth after that and a migration throughout the isles. 2. Remnants of the storegga Tsunami settled/moved to the highlands of Scotland for safety c. 8K to 7.5K BP. Z253 is born c. 6K BP and L1066 thereafter.

I don't know the geography of Ireland all that well, but the same may be said if there is some high country. Wherever in the Isles it was, I don't think a lot of population growth occurred until 6K BP at which time the climate in northern Europe stabilized and southern Europe became warmer and drier.

miiser
06-06-2014, 06:46 PM
Miiser,I see you've started a new thread re: the new L1066+ subclade. That's fine. It seems to me that we are still at Square one as to the origins of L1066+? I have no idea where my earliest ancestor was from. I can only trace my family back to 1650 or so in Scotland.

I can think of two alternative theories: 1. Following Rathna's work, imagine a beginning of the ancestor of Z253 in northern Italy and a migration north to the Switzerland area, subsequently migrating through France to Iberia and then to the Isles, with much back and forth after that and a migration throughout the isles. 2. Remnants of the storegga Tsunami settled/moved to the highlands of Scotland for safety c. 8K to 7.5K BP. Z253 is born c. 6K BP and L1066 thereafter.

I don't know the geography of Ireland all that well, but the same may be said if there is some high country. Wherever in the Isles it was, I don't think a lot of population growth occurred until 6K BP at which time the climate in northern Europe stabilized and southern Europe became warmer and drier.

Yeah, I just didn't want the discovery of the 22/23 cluster to get lost in the conversation. If you want to discuss the origins of your lineage and Z253 and L1066, I can give a few thoughts here.

Getting back to 1650 in Scotland is actually pretty good, better than many others are able to achieve. When you ask "where my earliest ancestors are from", this is somewhat of an open ended question. The earliest paternal ancestor would be Adam, who was from Africa or the Garden of Eden, depending on who you ask. But I'll assume you're trying to figure out where your ancestor lived in the period immediately preceding 1650 in Scotland.

Do you have any matches in the time range of 1000 - 1600 AD? This is where I would start. Z253 and L1066 are both quite old, pre history. So we're never going to have much historical detail on where these groups are from. The short answer is that there's no conclusive information on where these groups originated, only speculation. And we probably never will have conclusive data for this question.

The distribution of both these groups is focused on Ireland, so to me the most natural guess is that they likely originated in Ireland. There is also some variance data suggesting Scotland may be the origin of L1066 and Z253. But the sample size on which this is based is quite small, and the difference in variance of Ireland versus Scotland is not much, so I don't consider this very strong evidence of a Scottish rather than Irish origin. I also think the evidence is pretty good that L1066 and probably Z253, as well as some of their closer cousins in L21, have been in the Isles for a long time, so they're probably not a more recent arrival from Normandy, Scandinavia, etc. I haven't seen any compelling evidence that this group originated anywhere outside of the British Isles.

So, this is just a guess. But if you're asking me to guess, I'll guess. For your lineage being in Scotland in 1650, my best guess is that Z253 and L1066 have been in Ireland since pre history, or maybe arrived there not long after their MRCA origins as a proto Celtic people. After populating Ireland pretty effectively, some of this group spread out to the surrounding areas. Somewhere along the line, one of these guys ended up in Scotland and spawned your lineage. Don't really have enough information to say much beyond this. If you want, you can give me your kit number and I'll take a look at your matches and see if there's any obvious pattern there.

Josh1377
08-18-2014, 10:41 AM
Hi all, I am "newbie" here so I apologize in advance if this should be a new topic or should be posted elsewhere; I am somewhat unfamiliar with posting etiquette so please forgive any error I may have made in that regard. Here is my backstory...

I just recently discovered that I tested positive for L1066.1 via the GENO 2.0 test. At first glance of those results, the reference population data provided by GENO 2.0 somewhat matched up with my paternal and maternal family trees (First Reference Population: German, Second: Romanian).

However, I was somewhat disappointed to discover that this the general opinion has set the most likely origins for L1066.1 in either Ireland or Scotland. I say this because it conflicts with my Paternal family history, which is very distinctly Norwegian. That being said, I am reaching out through this thread for some insight that may shed light on where the shift occurred.

Indeed, both my Grandparents have (what could be considered as) strong Norwegian roots, with both their lines (and some distant relatives) establishing strong ties to the modern day Oppland and Telemark areas of Norway. Family lore actually places my paternal (my YDNA) ancestor there before the Viking period through a long stream of farm names. I note this because the Viking Slave trade idea just doesn't fit with what has been passed down through the years either.

Simply put, I am at a loss as to how my ancestors would have made the leap from Ireland or Scotland to the central areas of Norway. Scotland is slightly more believable than Ireland due to the strong historical ties between Norway and Northern Scotland (e.g. Orkney Islands).

To date I have participated in the FTDNA's Family Finder kit, Ancestry.com's DNA (the results of which were really useless), and I have ordered a 23andme test kit as well (just to cover all my bases). My FTDNA kit number is: N117590 and any insight this group may provide on my particular case would be greatly appreciated!

AncientCelt
08-19-2014, 12:08 AM
Hi all, I am "newbie" here so I apologize in advance if this should be a new topic or should be posted elsewhere; I am somewhat unfamiliar with posting etiquette so please forgive any error I may have made in that regard. Here is my backstory...

I just recently discovered that I tested positive for L1066.1 via the GENO 2.0 test. At first glance of those results, the reference population data provided by GENO 2.0 somewhat matched up with my paternal and maternal family trees (First Reference Population: German, Second: Romanian).

However, I was somewhat disappointed to discover that this the general opinion has set the most likely origins for L1066.1 in either Ireland or Scotland. I say this because it conflicts with my Paternal family history, which is very distinctly Norwegian. That being said, I am reaching out through this thread for some insight that may shed light on where the shift occurred.

Indeed, both my Grandparents have (what could be considered as) strong Norwegian roots, with both their lines (and some distant relatives) establishing strong ties to the modern day Oppland and Telemark areas of Norway. Family lore actually places my paternal (my YDNA) ancestor there before the Viking period through a long stream of farm names. I note this because the Viking Slave trade idea just doesn't fit with what has been passed down through the years either.

Simply put, I am at a loss as to how my ancestors would have made the leap from Ireland or Scotland to the central areas of Norway. Scotland is slightly more believable than Ireland due to the strong historical ties between Norway and Northern Scotland (e.g. Orkney Islands).

To date I have participated in the FTDNA's Family Finder kit, Ancestry.com's DNA (the results of which were really useless), and I have ordered a 23andme test kit as well (just to cover all my bases). My FTDNA kit number is: N117590 and any insight this group may provide on my particular case would be greatly appreciated!

Josh, what is your YDNA haplogroup....L1066 has been found in two haplogroups. Geno 2.0 and our Celtic L1066 would be CTS1202. You may very well be of a L1066 Norwegian group, but that wouldn't be under the L1066 group we are referring to. Take another look at that and let us know.

AncientCelt
08-19-2014, 12:12 AM
Actually, it looks like you are CTS1202, so that part looks good. I can tell you this, an Irish gent was part of populating Iceland, I forget the connection now but I was looking at it last night. I think it would be interesting to think there might be a Viking subclade of L1066 but it doesn't look probable at this point, I know the Vikings took many Celtic prisoners back to Norway but I'm still open on who is what. I'm kind of intrigued about the possibility of some L1066 being R1B Vikings but I don't know if that's probable.

AncientCelt
08-19-2014, 12:23 AM
Actually, it looks like you are CTS1202, so that part looks good. I can tell you this, an Irish gent was part of populating Iceland, I forget the connection now but I was looking at it last night. I think it would be interesting to think there might be a Viking subclade of L1066 but it doesn't look probable at this point, I know the Vikings took many Celtic prisoners back to Norway but I'm still open on who is what. I'm kind of intrigued about the possibility of some L1066 being R1B Vikings but I don't know if that's probable.

Compadre', you are definitely in the very small minority in that project, meaning, there is nothing there to support any Viking origin relative to all the other Norwegians. I had to accept the fact a while ago I was not who I thought I was and my L1066 group/cluster is ancient Irish. There just isn't any L1066 present in Norway to remotely support it originated in that area. However, I'm starting to lean towards L1066 being Continental Celts, with my cluster being only very ancient Irish. Time will tell and I wish you much luck on your journey. Keep in mind, L1066 is now reputedly over 3900 years old.

Dubhthach
08-19-2014, 10:09 AM
Hi all, I am "newbie" here so I apologize in advance if this should be a new topic or should be posted elsewhere; I am somewhat unfamiliar with posting etiquette so please forgive any error I may have made in that regard. Here is my backstory...

I just recently discovered that I tested positive for L1066.1 via the GENO 2.0 test. At first glance of those results, the reference population data provided by GENO 2.0 somewhat matched up with my paternal and maternal family trees (First Reference Population: German, Second: Romanian).

However, I was somewhat disappointed to discover that this the general opinion has set the most likely origins for L1066.1 in either Ireland or Scotland. I say this because it conflicts with my Paternal family history, which is very distinctly Norwegian. That being said, I am reaching out through this thread for some insight that may shed light on where the shift occurred.

Indeed, both my Grandparents have (what could be considered as) strong Norwegian roots, with both their lines (and some distant relatives) establishing strong ties to the modern day Oppland and Telemark areas of Norway. Family lore actually places my paternal (my YDNA) ancestor there before the Viking period through a long stream of farm names. I note this because the Viking Slave trade idea just doesn't fit with what has been passed down through the years either.

Simply put, I am at a loss as to how my ancestors would have made the leap from Ireland or Scotland to the central areas of Norway. Scotland is slightly more believable than Ireland due to the strong historical ties between Norway and Northern Scotland (e.g. Orkney Islands).

To date I have participated in the FTDNA's Family Finder kit, Ancestry.com's DNA (the results of which were really useless), and I have ordered a 23andme test kit as well (just to cover all my bases). My FTDNA kit number is: N117590 and any insight this group may provide on my particular case would be greatly appreciated!

Josh,

L1066 (L21 -> DF13 -> Z253 -> Z2534 -> Z2185 -> Z2186 -> L1066) is probably quite old. I recall seeing a date of something like 2895.45±410.71 years calculated using 111 markers. If this is correct it would put it as having originated between 3300 and 2480 years ago (1300BC-480BC). In other words during the Bronze-Age to Early Iron-Age.

Databases such as FTDNA are slanted towards men with Isles origins, as a result majority of men who have tested L1066+ are gonna have that as a background. Given the age of the SNP though your L1066 lineage could have been in Scandinavia for a very long time. I see you've only tested 12 markers, it would probably be a good idea to upgrade the number of STR's you've tested to at least 37 markers if not 67. I'd also join the Z253 project if you aren't already a member

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-Z253

In time a test like BigY (Y-Chromsome sequencing) might be of some extra insight, it's expensive at the moment. There are several men who have already done BigY results. Some of them can be seen in the following tree maintained by Alex Williamson

http://www.littlescottishcluster.com/RL21/NGS/Tree.html

(ctrl-F to get search box, then search for L1066)

-Paul

Josh1377
08-26-2014, 07:07 PM
Thanks Paul (Et al.), I do appreciate the insight on my case and the latest updated info on the ever-evolving mystery of CTS1202. I agree that it is maybe time for me to upgrade my STR testing to 67 markers so I can take my personal part of this quest to the end of the road (heck, I may even shoot for the Big Y test if I can budget it). As far as Z253 group, I believe I have joined it already but I’ll double check (I recall doing so earlier this year).

Now, to go back to this Irish origin theory, I also tend to agree with your point that FTDNA is indeed "slanted" towards mainly Isles origin for many of the R1b-L21 results. This is the reason why I decided to test with some of their competitors recently. This is not to mention the fiasco where in which my GENO 2.0 results first labeled me under the J Haplogroup (I have blonde hair & light blue eyes so that was pretty funny), then under RL44 for a while before finally resting at CTS1202. In fact, CTS1202 was only confirmed recently, after three independent tests through the Geno 2.0 project were completed.

Moreover, I think it is important to note that we are not talking about how CTS1202 fits within the entire male population of the world. We are really just talking about how it fits within the data garnered from the men who have participated in the various projects thus far. Therefore, I personally believe that it may be too premature to attempt to link any ancient culture to any subclade (or even Haplogroup for that matter).That would be especially true when talking about a region as historically dynamic as Western and Northern Europe.

In addition, one could argue that each new participant that introduces conflicting results (especially people with a solid and long hereditary history) has the potential to further change what is known or accepted at this point. Indeed, all of us have to admit that it is not entirely improbable that the heritage of other men that share CTS1202 may eventually serve to tip the scales of origin back towards the main continent, Iceland or possibly even ancient Germania/ Scandinavia.

After all, the Alps/ Rhine region sounds like it was a proverbial hotbed of ancient tribal activity during the time when our common ancient progenitor was likely to be sowing his wild oats. If that is true, is it too farfetched to then theorize that L21-DF13-Z253-Z2534-Z2185-Z2186-L1066 may be from a root tribe that existed well before such distinctions between our earliest ancestors were made (e.g. before the ignorance of those pesky Romans)? Heck… perhaps the entire ancient world mingled much more (and much farther back time-wise) then our current understanding of history gives our ancestors credit for.

I know one thing for certain; it is going to drive all of us nuts until the database grows to the point where such alternate origins can truly be ruled out. Until then I am sticking to honoring my mixed Germanic and Celtic heritage by consuming large quantities of Lefse, Fine Scotch, strong Ale, Sausage, Mead and Smoked Salmon... :)

AncientCelt
08-26-2014, 08:01 PM
Thanks Paul (Et al.), I do appreciate the insight on my case and the latest updated info on the ever-evolving mystery of CTS1202. I agree that it is maybe time for me to upgrade my STR testing to 67 markers so I can take my personal part of this quest to the end of the road (heck, I may even shoot for the Big Y test if I can budget it). As far as Z253 group, I believe I have joined it already but I’ll double check (I recall doing so earlier this year).

Now, to go back to this Irish origin theory, I also tend to agree with your point that FTDNA is indeed "slanted" towards mainly Isles origin for many of the R1b-L21 results. This is the reason why I decided to test with some of their competitors recently. This is not to mention the fiasco where in which my GENO 2.0 results first labeled me under the J Haplogroup (I have blonde hair & light blue eyes so that was pretty funny), then under RL44 for a while before finally resting at CTS1202. In fact, CTS1202 was only confirmed recently, after three independent tests through the Geno 2.0 project were completed.

Moreover, I think it is important to note that we are not talking about how CTS1202 fits within the entire male population of the world. We are really just talking about how it fits within the data garnered from the men who have participated in the various projects thus far. Therefore, I personally believe that it may be too premature to attempt to link any ancient culture to any subclade (or even Haplogroup for that matter).That would be especially true when talking about a region as historically dynamic as Western and Northern Europe.

In addition, one could argue that each new participant that introduces conflicting results (especially people with a solid and long hereditary history) has the potential to further change what is known or accepted at this point. Indeed, all of us have to admit that it is not entirely improbable that the heritage of other men that share CTS1202 may eventually serve to tip the scales of origin back towards the main continent, Iceland or possibly even ancient Germania/ Scandinavia.

After all, the Alps/ Rhine region sounds like it was a proverbial hotbed of ancient tribal activity during the time when our common ancient progenitor was likely to be sowing his wild oats. If that is true, is it too farfetched to then theorize that L21-DF13-Z253-Z2534-Z2185-Z2186-L1066 may be from a root tribe that existed well before such distinctions between our earliest ancestors were made (e.g. before the ignorance of those pesky Romans)? Heck… perhaps the entire ancient world mingled much more (and much farther back time-wise) then our current understanding of history gives our ancestors credit for.

I know one thing for certain; it is going to drive all of us nuts until the database grows to the point where such alternate origins can truly be ruled out. Until then I am sticking to honoring my mixed Germanic and Celtic heritage by consuming large quantities of Lefse, Fine Scotch, strong Ale, Sausage, Mead and Smoked Salmon... :)

That's quite a diet, you might want to add some Guinness, boiled tatties and corned beef and cabbage into the mix. I am Big Y tested and if my novel variants, not shared by any other L1066 Big Y testers yet are all below L1066 (28 novel variants not shared yet by anyone), I've got enough potential snps to go back perhaps to 500 BC, which will ultimately turn out to be ancient Irish or pre-"Irish" in Ireland for lack of a better word. L1066 might well still be of the Continent which wouldn't be at all surprising but I seriously see any major shift back that way when you look at the coverage Z253 and Z2534 have in the Isles and the age estimates there show upwards of 3,000 years in the Isles, older than any found on the Continent. True though, you don't need to be a scientist to realize the Continent is severely under tested so yes, we're going to have to wait. Since I started this thread, I lost interest, L1066 is just far too old to care enough about for me personally. Cheers or Slainte

Josh1377
08-27-2014, 12:51 AM
Slainte, Cheers, Skal, Prost... it doesn't matter as long as it meant in good health, eh? I do hear you loud and clear and since L1066 is too old to continue to discuss, let me drive the discussion on to a far more important topic, your culinary suggestions.

Corned Beef, cabbage and carrots are never wasted on my plate. However, 1) Guinness, in my humble opinion, is far too mass produced these days. I tend to aim for local craft brews that do those age-old brews better and in smaller batches. 2) I've lost my taste for tatties as I've began to grew older. Not to mention, they are not even really native to the Isles anyway; they are native to South American and were brought over by the Spanish circa the 16th century.

Now serve me my Granny's homemade breakfast (sausage, pudding, fried eggs, some nice beans and proper bread) and I'm there for sure!

Health and Happiness to all...

AncientCelt
08-27-2014, 01:46 AM
Slainte, Cheers, Skal, Prost... it doesn't matter as long as it meant in good health, eh? I do hear you loud and clear and since L1066 is too old to continue to discuss, let me drive the discussion on to a far more important topic, your culinary suggestions.

Corned Beef, cabbage and carrots are never wasted on my plate. However, 1) Guinness, in my humble opinion, is far too mass produced these days. I tend to aim for local craft brews that do those age-old brews better and in smaller batches. 2) I've lost my taste for tatties as I've began to grew older. Not to mention, they are not even really native to the Isles anyway; they are native to South American and were brought over by the Spanish circa the 16th century.

Now serve me my Granny's homemade breakfast (sausage, pudding, fried eggs, some nice beans and proper bread) and I'm there for sure!

Health and Happiness to all...

You tak' the high road and I'll tak' the low road, and I'll get to Ireland before ye'. Once you get tested out on the additional markers, you've hopefully find out what cluster you fall under as there are many under L1066. I wish you well in your discoveries, I'm quite satisfied with mine knowing all my snps (novel variants) are right there now, just awaiting matches..Eventually we'll identify the Irish/Celtic tribe right before surnames were mandated on the native Irish population.

AncientCelt
01-16-2015, 07:01 PM
Well, hard to keep up with all the updates on here but I will try to squeeze one in. I'm trying very hard to get past preconceived speculation and wishful thinking...heck I saw some recent theory about one name's origins that had more holes in it than a huge wheel of Swiss cheese. I've finally stopped laughing long enough to manage a post. Anyway, have to really lean more towards a Breton origin for at least some of the L1066 varieties, Breton's that came back to the Isles with the Norman Invasion. Too many surnames have L1066 clusters that appear to be "Norman" however, they are only Norman in the sense they came over in the invasion, I think there is a possibility these families are actually of Breton origin, in fact, some do have roots in Brittany whereas others are in Normandy proper. The last analysis I saw from MJOST back in late 2013 put Z253 in Scotland, as the likely origin and also several snps under it, including L1066. Perhaps L1066 was part of the Britain group that fled to Amorica/Brittany during the Saxon invasion, only to later return to the Isles as part of the Norman Conquest. This still leaves the door open that possibly Z253 is linked to the Belgae or Fir Bolg since we've found since the discovery of ZZ10 that Z253 and Z255 share a common ancestor of ZZ10. This could possibly link the Laigin (Z255) with the Fir Bog or some other connected group (Z253). So far we haven't really been able to pin any L1066 Irish group to a more ancient Irish family/tribal group. Perhaps some of the L1066 Irish made their way back during the Strongbow invasion. Something I wouldn't even attempt to speculate is where did the L1066 mutation occur but I think it might be a stronger case to propose that at least some of them may have returned to the Isles during the Invasion of 1066. Anyway, just wanted to put this out there as food for thought and it's a lot less ridiculous than some other surname theory I came across yesterday, almost started to laugh again, whew. Take care.

SearchSeeker
01-18-2015, 04:12 AM
I wanted to add, there is a bit of discussion about the novel variants found from NGS testing, for me it's Big Y and the the age calculations for novel variants. Well, I have 28 novel variants not shared by anyone that has tested thus far. I do not in any way shape or form think an age of 135 years per novel variant is even remotely realistic. I actually like an average of 35 years, so 28 times 35 equals (my novel variants times the 35 years) equals 980 years. Now, take 2015 and subtract 980 and we get about 1035 AD...what do you know, just prior to the Norman invasion. It's really getting hard to ignore these bits of information.This makes a bit of sense that I'd not have any other matches, if my own lineage arrived with the invasion, and no other persons from this lineage have tested, I'd be out on my own, and that's how I currently am. That's where we currently stand, we do have a few one offs from other surnames that match our L1066 cluster but I'll lean at this point our surname being the root of the cluster. I could be wrong and if additional evidence arises that supports a change, I'll be first on the list to review the new information. For now, this is the leading hypothesis.

Muircheartaigh
01-18-2015, 09:53 AM
I wanted to add, there is a bit of discussion about the novel variants found from NGS testing, for me it's Big Y and the the age calculations for novel variants. Well, I have 28 novel variants not shared by anyone that has tested thus far. I do not in any way shape or form think an age of 135 years per novel variant is even remotely realistic. I actually like an average of 35 years, so 28 times 35 equals (my novel variants times the 35 years) equals 980 years. Now, take 2015 and subtract 980 and we get about 1035 AD...what do you know, just prior to the Norman invasion. It's really getting hard to ignore these bits of information.This makes a bit of sense that I'd not have any other matches, if my own lineage arrived with the invasion, and no other persons from this lineage have tested, I'd be out on my own, and that's how I currently am. That's where we currently stand, we do have a few one offs from other surnames that match our L1066 cluster but I'll lean at this point our surname being the root of the cluster. I could be wrong and if additional evidence arises that supports a change, I'll be first on the list to review the new information. For now, this is the leading hypothesis.

Unless you have had your 28 Unshared variants validated, I very much doubt if they are all safe, even though FTDNA may have rated them High. Having checked the BAM files of 14 members of the Z253 group more than one third of the so called private variants turn out to be dodgy and others are actually shared by donors outside of Z253. Has Dennis Wright validated your Variants by reference to your BAM file?

Ray Murta

SearchSeeker
01-19-2015, 02:03 AM
Hello Ray, no, I'm keeping the bam file in-house but yes, I understand perhaps some of them might no pan out and that could of course change the big picture somewhat.

AncientCelt
01-29-2015, 02:28 PM
I may have found the Celtic tribe for one branch of L1066, the Curiosolitae. They were centered around Corseul in the Cotes d'Armor region of Brittany and very close to the commune of Corlay. I'll keep digging into this as best I can but feel like I may be on to something with this one, more so that my dozen or so past hypothesis. This one is actually making some sense..

SearchSeeker
02-25-2015, 05:30 PM
While the Curiosolitate tribe mentioned in the last post is interesting, there really isn't any connection from a DNA standpoint, just that they were in the area of Corlay and that Corlay and Curley are "similar", that's about it. As hard as it may be to swallow, I am still interested in a possible Viking connection, an R1B L1066 Viking connection. If this L1066 cluster is over 3000 years old, it is not really beyond the realm of possibility this group was back on the Continent, possibly in Denmark. Variance data from back late 2013 did show the combination of Scotland/Sweden/Denmark had the larges variance (for Z253), this from Mr. Jost's analysis back then. Maybe it's possible. This L1066 cluster is right around the area the Vikings were in Ireland and it is currently represented by a handful of one off surnames, with a MRCA possibly going back to the time the Vikings arrived. Maybe it's not that silly/crazy a proposition?? I'm reaching for sure but there is a 12 marker match to a Thurston, there is the Toirdhealbach name that some would like to completely remove from the mix but possibly shouldn't, there is the geographic area and there is the time period that could fit.

Variance analysis (thank you MJOST) for Z253 from 9/2013
Scotland, Sweden and Denmark n=29 9.60 / 3,041.99 = Var/Coal.

I don't know if MJOST would consider running some new data for L1066 to see how it looks now but maybe things have changed. I think we may have more Scandinavian representation now in Z253 and L1066 and my prior Scotland entry should be changed to Ireland. Anyone open to the possibility that some of the L1066 might actually be from Viking incursions? As everyone knows, this is a really old snp, and some of the branches are quite isolated and not remotely closely related.

Rory Cain
12-03-2015, 11:19 PM
Bill,

As every English schoolboy (and schoolgirl) knows, 1066 definitely is associated with the Normans. It's the year that William of Normandy crossed the channel and defeated King Harold at the Battle of Hastings.

Muircheartaigh, I note that Bill has a history of throwing up such red herrings. That would be why he was removed from Antrogenica as AncientCelt and SearchSeeker and returned as AtWhatCost, now also removed. Bill's connecting the year 1066 with the SNP L1066 was never a serious attempt at history and worthy of no further attention, except to ponder why a project admin (so I'm told) would mislead his project members with such nonsense. I though oneillabu was exaggerating in the past with his criticisms of project admins. We should remember that there are also very good project admins.