PDA

View Full Version : Welsh and DF21



Reith
05-19-2015, 01:35 AM
So, according to a member here, whom seems much more knowledgeable about these things and I, my Y line matches closest to some Irish surnames such as Sullivan, Driscoll and McCarthy. I see some of these matches at 25 markers when I look on FTDNA, but at 67 markers I get matches with surnames of Baty, Griffith and Reece, semingly Welsh.

Now I know that there was some settling of the Irish into Wales, would that be the reason for these matches at 67 markers?

I was generously given matches of the aforementioned Irish names on an Exel sheet; with matches of low 20s for genetic distances and apparently the DF21 Scottish clusters into genetic distance of 30s, I believe this is for 111 markers.

How does this translate when it comes FTDNA matches of 6 and 7 at 67 markers? Am I closer to Welsh or Irish looking at these two pieces of information.

It has been very difficult for me to connect my dots for all of my ancestors came to the States from Northern Germany or Scandinavia.


As always, thank you for any help.

Christian Wright (Reith)

rms2
05-20-2015, 12:14 PM
I noticed your Reece and Griffith matches a long time ago, but did not talk about them on any public forum because they are your private information. Now that you have brought them up, though, we're free to discuss them.

Reece (Rhys is the Welsh original, probably from ap Rhys, "son of Rhys") is 6 away from you at 67 markers, Baty is also 6 away, and Griffith is 7 away. Those are pretty close.

Reece and Griffith are definitely Welsh surnames. Baty is supposed to be of Scottish and northern English derivation, as far as I can tell. One source says that surname comes from Yorkshire and from Carlisle in Cumbria. Of course, the latter is one of the places where the British held out the longest against the Anglo-Saxons.

You have a couple of more Reeces who appear at 37 markers and who have only tested to 37 markers; they would probably hold up at 67 markers, as well.

Your Irish neighbor (O'Sullivan) is two away at 25 markers. Since he has 111 markers tested but disappears from your radar at 37 markers, I think you can safely dismiss that one.

Your three closest matches, Baty, Griffith, and Reece, are Welsh, in the case of Griffith and Reece, and, in the case of Baty, possibly Cumbrian, which is really just the northern version of Welsh (Cumbria has the same root as Cymru, i.e., "Wales").

So, it looks to me like your y-dna ancestry is British, by which I mean Briton.

Griffith has 111 markers but does not show up as a 111-marker match for you. It would be interesting to see how Baty and the Reeces hold up at 111 markers if they would upgrade.

BTW, I don't think there is anything particularly Irish about DF21, although it is common there. DF21 was probably widespread throughout the Isles. Recall the Hinxton Celt from about AD 1 who was DF25+. He was recovered from Cambridgeshire in what is now SE England.

Reith
05-20-2015, 01:09 PM
Thank you my friend. I was just a little curious from what Oneillbabu said about the Irish matches, yet on FTDNA looked closer to Welsh/Briton.

oneillabu
05-20-2015, 08:15 PM
BTW, I don't think there is anything particularly Irish about DF21, although it is common there. DF21 was probably widespread throughout the Isles. Recall the Hinxton Celt from about AD 1 who was DF25+. He was recovered from Cambridgeshire in what is now SE England.

Not particularly Irish, here is a quick breakdown of the 155 S5488 people currently in the DF21 project

Irish 56%, Scottish 16%, Welsh 8%. English 4%, unknown and European 16%

Irish and Scottish Gaels combined represent 72% and the Welsh and English combined represent 12%

Were back to the tail wagging the dog I see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

oneillabu
05-20-2015, 11:29 PM
So, according to a member here, whom seems much more knowledgeable about these things and I, my Y line matches closest to some Irish surnames such as Sullivan, Driscoll and McCarthy. I see some of these matches at 25 markers when I look on FTDNA, but at 67 markers I get matches with surnames of Baty, Griffith and Reece, semingly Welsh.

Now I know that there was some settling of the Irish into Wales, would that be the reason for these matches at 67 markers?

I was generously given matches of the aforementioned Irish names on an Exel sheet; with matches of low 20s for genetic distances and apparently the DF21 Scottish clusters into genetic distance of 30s, I believe this is for 111 markers.

How does this translate when it comes FTDNA matches of 6 and 7 at 67 markers? Am I closer to Welsh or Irish looking at these two pieces of information.

It has been very difficult for me to connect my dots for all of my ancestors came to the States from Northern Germany or Scandinavia.


As always, thank you for any help.

Christian Wright (Reith)

What you need to realise is that unless these people are confirmed DF21+ then these matches are probably just convergence. Here is my list of matches at 67 markers

Green, Griffith, Scott, another Griffith and finally Inches. So how many of these are related to me, well the answer is none because I have found them in various project groups and none of them match on key markers especially DYS462 in which L720 has a unique value of 12 and any of these who had tested to 111 markers had a value of 11. In the case of Inches I contacted this potential match with regard to testing for L21 and they came back negative so this just shows how deceptive these so called matches from FTDNA are, to be honest I do not think that anyone in my matches all the way down to 12 markers is actually related to me and there are quiet a few so unless some of the people you are talking about have tested DF21+ then simply ignore these is the best advice.

Regarding the spreadsheet I sent you, these are 2000 year old matches and they are all DF21+ and Irish in origin so this is an absolute indicator of where your ancestors were during this time period despite the wishful thinking agenda of others who want to assign a British origin to DF21, if the evidence points in this direction then sure we will look at it but it simply does not on present results and 314.2 is very Irish in origin.

Finally Hinxton man is dated from the first century AD during which Britain was occupied by the Romans so the location of his remains indicates that he was a Roman slave captured during the invasion of Britain possibly from Wales which may well have been occupied by Celts from Ireland at this period because we know they were there from the Ogham stones and these stones are absolutely associated with DF21 occupied areas of the West and South West of Ireland.

David Mc
05-20-2015, 11:49 PM
Finally Hinxton man is dated from the first century AD during which Britain was occupied by the Romans so the location of his remains indicates that he was a Roman slave captured during the invasion of Britain possibly from Wales which may well have been occupied by Celts from Ireland at this period because we know they were there from the Ogham stones and these stones are absolutely associated with DF21 occupied areas of the West and South West of Ireland.

Occam disagrees. Hinxton man was 1st century British. The Irish settlement of Wales is dated to the 4th century, (as are the earliest Ogham stones). What does that suggest?

rms2
05-21-2015, 11:00 AM
Not particularly Irish, here is a quick breakdown of the 155 S5488 people currently in the DF21 project

Irish 56%, Scottish 16%, Welsh 8%. English 4%, unknown and European 16%

Irish and Scottish Gaels combined represent 72% and the Welsh and English combined represent 12%

Were back to the tail wagging the dog I see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DF21 appears to be most common in Ireland now, but we were talking about Reith's ancestry and his matches, not where others in his haplogroup currently reside. I believe DF21 was once widespread throughout the Isles. The main reason I believe that is because one of the two Hinxton Celts from around AD 1 was DF25+, and Hinxton is in what is now SE England.

Unless and until convincing evidence to the contrary is presented, I do not believe DF21 spread east from Ireland.

IMHO, L21 in general has been pressed west since the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in the immediate post-Roman period. Thus its center of gravity, and that of its constituent subclades, like DF21, was altered by the advent of the English.

You seem to be making the all-too-common error that modern place of greatest frequency equals place of origin. Ancient y-dna seems to be the most effective remedy for that mistake.

rms2
05-21-2015, 11:08 AM
What you need to realise is that unless these people are confirmed DF21+ then these matches are probably just convergence. Here is my list of matches at 67 markers

Green, Griffith, Scott, another Griffith and finally Inches. So how many of these are related to me, well the answer is none because I have found them in various project groups and none of them match on key markers especially DYS462 in which L720 has a unique value of 12 and any of these who had tested to 111 markers had a value of 11. In the case of Inches I contacted this potential match with regard to testing for L21 and they came back negative so this just shows how deceptive these so called matches from FTDNA are, to be honest I do not think that anyone in my matches all the way down to 12 markers is actually related to me and there are quiet a few so unless some of the people you are talking about have tested DF21+ then simply ignore these is the best advice.

Regarding the spreadsheet I sent you, these are 2000 year old matches and they are all DF21+ and Irish in origin so this is an absolute indicator of where your ancestors were during this time period despite the wishful thinking agenda of others who want to assign a British origin to DF21, if the evidence points in this direction then sure we will look at it but it simply does not on present results and 314.2 is very Irish in origin.

What do you mean by "matches"?

I took a look at Reith's matches as listed by FTDNA, and he has no close Irish matches beyond the 25-marker level. That one (O'Sullivan 23/25) has tested to 111 markers and drops off Reith's list of matches at 37 markers.



Finally Hinxton man is dated from the first century AD during which Britain was occupied by the Romans so the location of his remains indicates that he was a Roman slave captured during the invasion of Britain possibly from Wales which may well have been occupied by Celts from Ireland at this period because we know they were there from the Ogham stones and these stones are absolutely associated with DF21 occupied areas of the West and South West of Ireland.

Wow! You do know a lot about that DF25+ Hinxton Celt that no one else does! He was a Roman slave from Wales and probably of Irish origin, even though his body was recovered in what is now SE England?

There is no evidence for any of these assertions. You're just making stuff up. Incredible.

rms2
05-21-2015, 11:47 AM
One more comment (sorry for three posts in a row).

I have no "wishful thinking agenda" (quoting oneillabu) where DF21 is concerned. It makes me no never mind where DF21 originated. I don't care. I really don't. I'm not DF21+, and none of my relatives that I know about is DF21+.

I find ancient y-dna most impressive and convincing and arguments from modern distribution, especially when they are derived from FTDNA project stats, far far less compelling.

oneillabu
05-22-2015, 09:14 PM
What do you mean by "matches"?





Wow! You do know a lot about that DF25+ Hinxton Celt that no one else does! He was a Roman slave from Wales and probably of Irish origin, even though his body was recovered in what is now SE England?

There is no evidence for any of these assertions. You're just making stuff up. Incredible.

Well first of all here is the definition of possibly, "Capable of happening but of uncertain likelihood" so it is simply one of a number of different possibilities however you seem to have completely ruled out any possibility he originally came across from Ireland so you are the one with blinkers not me.

Now I am sure that Hinxton man did not have a headstone with a date on it so we must assume that the 1st Century AD dating comes with a least a plus or minus of 100 years so 200 BC is not an unreasonable assumption so the question is were there Irish on the Island of Britain during this period. Well there is a large school of thought that believes that Fergus Mor Mac Erc was simply following other Irish who had crossed to Alba centuries before so this is definitely one possibility however how he could have ended up down South given the hostile picts.

Well the possible reason for this is the early Welsh Britons of Strathclyde who definitely were well disposed to the new Irish and the are no instances of aggression between them and indeed they eventually married into the Dalriada line which is the source I believe of M222 in Ireland. So we have contact between the Britons and Irish in both Wales and Scotland from a very early time.

I made the point about the Ogham stones of Wales being physical evidence of the Irish presence in Wales however it was pointed out that these stones date from the fourth century AD which again must come with a plus or minus period. It is my own belief that this Ogham is much older and because it is the Celtic Tree alphabet it must have been initially used with timber none of which obviously would have survived, I am not the only one with this belief by the way check out this passage regarding Professor James Carney and his Ogham research. These Welsh Ogham stones by the way have both Irish Gaelic and Welsh Brythonic on them giving testament to the close connection between both sets of Celts

The earliest inscriptions in ogham date to about the 4th century AD, but James Carney believes its invention is rather within the 1st century BC. Although the use of "classical" ogham in stone inscriptions seems to have flowered in the 5thÐ6th centuries around the Irish Sea, from the phonological evidence it is clear that the alphabet predates the 5th century. A period of writing on wood or other perishable material prior to the preserved monumental inscriptions needs to be assumed, sufficient for the loss of the phonemes represented by uath ("H") and straif ("Z"), as well as the velar nasal, getal, all of which are clearly part of the system, but unattested in inscriptions.

So now we need to look at Britain in the Second century AD and we find it was very much under the Roman yoke so these Ogham stones must have been erected with the Roman's permission giving rise to another possibility and that is that Hinxton man was in the service of the Romans in some capacity, like I said the possibilities are many and varied. We must look at the rest of DF25 especially the Seven Septs of Laois to give and indication of the possible origin of Hinxton man and my money is definitely on the West of Ireland because this is where the nucleus of the earliest DF21 occurs.

Finally if you think that I am alone in thinking that Hinxton man originated in Ireland take a look at the following post

Eurogenes K15 shows up something interesting. His Baltic is really low compared to eastern Euro - a pattern which you see in many other British people. Although overall it looks just like a more unusual result for a modern day British person. He looks more extremely northwestern Euro, which is interesting. Apparently closest to West Scottish and Irish using Euclidean distance.

David Mc
05-22-2015, 09:28 PM
There is a great sea that lies between the realms of the "possible" and the "likely." Is it possible that Hinxton man was Irish? Of course it is. Is it likely? Not in the remotest.

David Mc
05-22-2015, 09:35 PM
... So we have contact between the Britons and Irish in both Wales and Scotland from a very early time...

How does anything you wrote before this statement establish that there was contact between the Britons in Wales at that time-- and by contact I assume you mean Welsh settlement rather than the odd tradesman crossing the Irish Sea.

As to Ogham, is it possible that it existed before the 4th century? Yes, it's possible, but again unlikely. You're building castles out of air. The most likely origin of Hinxton man is southeast Britain where he was found or, if you want to go back further, the Belgic territory on the other side of the English Channel. Surely you can admit that this is where the evidence points, even if you want to leave room for the distant possibility of an (unlikely) Irish origin?

oneillabu
05-22-2015, 09:53 PM
How does anything you wrote before this statement establish that there was contact between the Britons in Wales at that time-- and by contact I assume you mean Welsh settlement rather than the odd tradesman crossing the Irish Sea.

The most likely origin of Hinxton man is southeast Britain where he was found or, if you want to go back further, the Belgic territory on the other side of the English Channel.
Ahhhh the endless quest for a continental origin for DF21 continues I see (from non DF21 people mostly), I presume you mean Latta who incidentally stems from a Scottish and Ulster cluster, even the surname is Scottish in origin, when you can find quotes from Professors supporting your position please feel free to post them but meantime feel free to continue to ridicule my posts and just like my theory on the Egyptian Irish connection which was treated with equal disdain until this connection was confirmed by acedemics when all became strangely silent on the subject. If people were not able to proliferate various theories then there simply would not be any meaningful research carried out, please feel free to put forward your own theory on DF21 and I will give it full consideration.

David Mc
05-22-2015, 11:50 PM
My response had nothing to do with Latta-- I barely follow the DF21 discussions. I'm simply interested in point A to B, and I don't care one whit as to whether DF21 is continental or Insular in origin-- I have nothing invested in internal DF21 debates. The basis for my response is we have DF21 in 1st century Belgic territory. The simplest and most likely explanation is DF21 either came from continental Belgic territory to Britain or arose in Belgic Britain itself. The only thing I object to is people using mental gymnastics to arrive at a very unlikely explanation in order to back up pet theories. It's the only reason I got involved in this particular thread.

Gray Fox
05-23-2015, 01:31 AM
Gentlemen, we're getting way off topic here. If you wish to continue this discussion you will need to create another thread. I can merge the off-topic post's to it if you'd like. Also, let's get this out of the way before it gets any worse.. KEEP IT CIVIL.

oneillabu
05-23-2015, 07:57 PM
The basis for my response is we have DF21 in 1st century Belgic territory. The simplest and most likely explanation is DF21 either came from continental Belgic territory to Britain or arose in Belgic Britain itself. The only thing I object to is people using mental gymnastics to arrive at a very unlikely explanation in order to back up pet theories. It's the only reason I got involved in this particular thread.

When you talk about DF21 you are talking about mulitple offshoots from a very old clade, you simply cannot generalise for all DF21. My own clade S5488 is at least 3000 years old and shows no sign of any continental or British origin, here is a breakdown again of the current S5488 members in the DF21 project

Irish and Scottish Gaels combined represent 72% and the Welsh and English combined represent 12%

I believe that the 12% have Irish origins as well, indeed I just got back a result from a Quinn from Ireland who I persuaded to test for DF21 and he came back positive, he matches very strongly to a small Welsh S5488+ cluster and is allmost certainly also S5488+ which bears out my initial thoughts. The name Quinn and Loughlin also have other S5488 matches with differant STR patterns showing the antiquity of this Irish cluster.

Now if the majority of DF21 offshoots have a very strong Irish presence then the obvious conclusion is DF21 is of ancient Irish origin, I personally have Genetic distances of over 50 at 111 markers with other Irish S5488 people so this is more than twice the GD's of Reith to his fellow FGC3213 people so to suggest that Reith is Belgic in origin makes no sense whatsoever.

05-23-2015, 09:45 PM
Not too sure of any conclusions drawn based on surnames which originated much later the SNP age predictions. My Harris surname supposed Welsh with Norman origins.

David Mc
05-23-2015, 11:40 PM
Now if the majority of DF21 offshoots have a very strong Irish presence then the obvious conclusion is DF21 is of ancient Irish origin, I personally have Genetic distances of over 50 at 111 markers with other Irish S5488 people so this is more than twice the GD's of Reith to his fellow FGC3213 people so to suggest that Reith is Belgic in origin makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless Belgic tribes did in fact settle in Ireland, introducing DF21 along the way. Hinxton may help establish the route to Ireland, which would make you one of the luckiest genetic groups out there (having the ancient DNA to validate the migration). That's not a bad thing.

And to keep on topic, that means Reith could be Irish, British, or continental in origin. I leave that to those of you who are handy in comparing STR links, though.

Gray Fox
05-24-2015, 04:11 AM
When you talk about DF21 you are talking about mulitple offshoots from a very old clade, you simply cannot generalise for all DF21. My own clade S5488 is at least 3000 years old and shows no sign of any continental or British origin, here is a breakdown again of the current S5488 members in the DF21 project

Irish and Scottish Gaels combined represent 72% and the Welsh and English combined represent 12%

I believe that the 12% have Irish origins as well, indeed I just got back a result from a Quinn from Ireland who I persuaded to test for DF21 and he came back positive, he matches very strongly to a small Welsh S5488+ cluster and is allmost certainly also S5488+ which bears out my initial thoughts. The name Quinn and Loughlin also have other S5488 matches with differant STR patterns showing the antiquity of this Irish cluster.

Now if the majority of DF21 offshoots have a very strong Irish presence then the obvious conclusion is DF21 is of ancient Irish origin, I personally have Genetic distances of over 50 at 111 markers with other Irish S5488 people so this is more than twice the GD's of Reith to his fellow FGC3213 people so to suggest that Reith is Belgic in origin makes no sense whatsoever.

If you wish to discuss this matter further, create your own thread.. I'm not going to say it again. Stop piggy backing and using this thread as a platform for your own personal pet theories.

rms2
05-24-2015, 11:04 AM
Unless Belgic tribes did in fact settle in Ireland, introducing DF21 along the way. Hinxton may help establish the route to Ireland, which would make you one of the luckiest genetic groups out there (having the ancient DNA to validate the migration). That's not a bad thing.

And to keep on topic, that means Reith could be Irish, British, or continental in origin. I leave that to those of you who are handy in comparing STR links, though.

Well, his only close matches have Welsh surnames (Reece, Griffith) or have a surname supposedly of Cumbrian origin (Baty). Cumbria and Cymru (i.e., "Wales") come from the same Brythonic root, so we are probably talking about not two close Welsh haplotype neighbors, but three.

I don't see any reason for Reith to think his ancestry might be Irish just because he is DF21+.

David Mc
05-24-2015, 07:38 PM
Well, his only close matches have Welsh surnames (Reece, Griffith) or have a surname supposedly of Cumbrian origin (Baty). Cumbria and Cymru (i.e., "Wales") come from the same Brythonic root, so we are probably talking about not two close Welsh haplotype neighbors, but three.

I don't see any reason for Reith to think his ancestry might be Irish just because he is DF21+.

I am very happy to bow to your wisdom on this, rms. You're better equipped to make these connections than I.

rms2
05-24-2015, 10:20 PM
I am very happy to bow to your wisdom on this, rms. You're better equipped to make these connections than I.

I don't know what wisdom I have, but thanks.

Reith
05-27-2015, 06:58 PM
Eurogenes K15 shows up something interesting. His Baltic is really low compared to eastern Euro - a pattern which you see in many other British people. Although overall it looks just like a more unusual result for a modern day British person. He looks more extremely northwestern Euro, which is interesting. Apparently closest to West Scottish and Irish using Euclidean distance.

Well, all four of my grandparent's parents or grandparents came from Northern Germany with possibly one being from somewhere in Scandinavia, specifically the Northwest. Hannover, Hamburg, Oldenburgh, etc. Do British people get Sweden, Norway and Denmark as their matches too? I am no means an expert at this, but my Swedish is really not much further than my North German. It is not until you go down furthern until you see Southeast England, which was at a time Belgic and then very Germanic after the migration period.

Using 1 population approximation:

1 North_German @ 6.339834
2 Swedish @ 6.564004
3 North_Swedish @ 7.275739
4 Norwegian @ 7.391794
5 Danish @ 7.613762
6 North_Dutch @ 7.653378
7 East_German @ 8.543875
8 West_German @ 9.367972
9 South_Dutch @ 9.843406
10 Southeast_English @ 10.257219
11 West_Norwegian @ 10.276397
12 Irish @ 10.364018
13 Southwest_English @ 10.550762
14 Southwest_Finnish @ 10.685708
15 West_Scottish @ 10.736671
16 Orcadian @ 12.302310
17 Hungarian @ 13.303087
18 Finnish @ 13.989597
19 Austrian @ 14.567246
20 French @ 15.126334

JRW
05-28-2015, 03:06 AM
Christian, I recommend that you look at all of the evidence to “connect the dots”: 1) your paper trail ancestry; 2) your surname’s geographical affiliation; and 3) the genetic evidence. All contribute to forming a picture that although incomplete, is a better picture than achieved by looking at only one set of information.

First, given your patrilineal paper trail ancestry is German (and presuming you’re confident in its accuracy), I suggest a German (geographic) ancestral origin remain as a working assumption until other evidence suggests otherwise.

Second, your surname’s geographical affiliation is German. Surname profilers indicate that the relative distribution/concentration of your surname is highest in Landkreiss Fulda, Hesse, although it also has concentrations in Lower Saxony and Baden-Württemburg. This information is consistent with your paper trail ancestral record.

Third, the genetic evidence is consistent in its pattern with many other L21>DF13 men of German ancestry: no close STR matches either on the Continent or in the Isles. NGS SNP testing has allowed us to sort through the noise of STR matches arising from STR convergence. Your SNP tests indicate that you are DF21>FGC3213. The FGC3213 subclade can be further divided into P314.2, S3058, Z30228 and S7150 (per Alex Williamson's The Big Tree). Since you have tested negative for P314.2, you do not share a close relationship with any of the tested or “presumed” P314.2 men given you have an average GD of 16 @ 67 STR markers and 27 @ 111 STR markers with that subclade (i.e., you are equally related to all of them regardless of the closeness/distance of a particular match within the subclade). And, even though you have not tested for S3058, your average GD is 23 @ 67 STR markers (closest match is a GD of 17), suggesting a distant relationship to the S3058 subclade. You have average GDs greater than 24 @ 67 markers for all the other downstream FGC3213 subclades. (These distances calculated from Mike Walsh's L21 spreadsheet.) Lastly, you are even more distantly related to the descendants of the brother subclades to FGC3213, such as S5201. These genetic distances suggest that your closest common patrilineal ancestor with your Isle’s cousins lived about 1600 years ago (rough estimate) and other Isles relationships are substantially older, dating to the Iron Age or potentially earlier.

An interesting observation about your surname's highest relative density is that similar to most of the men of German ancestry in DF21’s brother clade FGC5494, it peaks in a Landkreiss within a relatively short distance (30 miles) of major Celtic oppida dating from the Halstatt and La Tène periods: the Glauberg in your instance and the Donnersburg in the case of the FGC5494 men. This may indicate that the well-attested Celtic activity in these areas during the Iron Age is the probable source of your common ancestry with men in the Isles. Additionally, having distant cousins whose surnames hotspot to north-eastern France in common with your Isles’ cousins suggests that the Belgae may have been the conduit (many of the Belgae tribes asserted a German/right-bank-of-the-Rhine origin).

Layer onto the above points the ancient DNA grave finding of DF21 in Hinxton, an area in the Isles known to have Belgae settlement, the building evidence that R1b appears to have spread from the Pontic Steppe westward about 4500 years ago, and that a haplogroup ancestor of DF21, P312, has been found in 3000 year-old burials in what is now central/eastern Germany, the more likely scenario is that your ancestry is a continental legacy of FGC3213’s and DF21’s continental origins and not the other way around.

Reith
05-28-2015, 12:05 PM
Thank you for the insight JRW!

Gray Fox
08-16-2015, 10:41 PM
Discussion of Hinxton Celt/DF21 merged to http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3312-Ancient-Celt-from-Hinxton-DF21-Z246/page16

Reith
08-18-2015, 04:09 PM
Just received a new match of GD 6 on 67 markers. Surname is German with a concentration in Bavaria.

Hmmmmm.... Maybe a Celtic holdover like presumably my ancestor...

Rory Cain
01-25-2016, 04:45 AM
The topic does read "Welsh and DF21" but perhaps the lack of such discussion has deterred some would-be contributors for participating. While they appear to have been left out of the discussion, there are actaually some Welsh DF21. Make of them what you will, but they include at least the following:
FGC3903 >> L1446 principally north Wales surnames, Griffith, Hughes, Jones, etc. and some surnames that match villages on the English side of the border, Davenport and Hodnett.
FGC3903 >> Z29528 Humphreys from the Llyn Peninsula, north Wales although his matches are principally the Nisbet clan of Scotland.
FGC3903 >> DF25 Rydderch
S5488 >> Z16294 Evans, Harris, Jones, Morgan & Wilson
S5488 >> possibly BY518 Jones
S971 > Z16267 Harbour
DF21 miscellaneous Jones

The above discussion appears to focus so heavily on FGC3213, of whom there may or may not be any Welsh, that it overlooked the Welsh contingent in the other three sub-clades of DF21. They could just prove to be significant.

Rory Cain
05-03-2016, 12:23 AM
An interesting DF25+ Welsh cluster bearing the surname Griffith(s) claim descent from Rhys ap Rhydderch of Wales bc 1275/ 1280. One of them expands his ancestral further, as Rhys ap Rhydderch ap Cydifor ap Dinawal of Gwynned. I cannot vouch for the pedigree. It represents an ambitious claim, the rulers of Gwynned being the major Welsh dynasty. A matter worthy of further investigation.