PDA

View Full Version : Damnonii



George Chandler
08-13-2016, 07:32 PM
Maybe a question for Jean M but also for anyone who is interested. I know there is a similarity in the Damnonii in the Strathclyde area and the Damnonii/Dumnonii in the southwest of Britain. Is there any know evidence to suggest a tribal connection in terms of language, customs, discovered items etc for the two areas? Unless there is something new that has been discovered. The southern Dumnonii having accepted Roman occupation in the south and the Damnonii having been cut in two by the Antonine Wall in the north. Is there anything to suggest that when the Romans did enter that some in the south fled to the lands of their northern cousins only to be fighting the Romans down the road?

George

Jean M
08-13-2016, 08:18 PM
Maybe a question for Jean M but also for anyone who is interested. I know there is a similarity in the Damnonii in the Strathclyde area and the Damnonii/Dumnonii in the southwest of Britain. Is there any know evidence to suggest a tribal connection in terms of language, customs, discovered items etc for the two areas?

Just about all I know about the Damnonii/Dumnonii is online:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticswengland.shtml
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celtictribesireland.shtml (Domnann)

George Chandler
08-13-2016, 10:30 PM
Just about all I know about the Damnonii/Dumnonii is online:

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticswengland.shtml
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celtictribesireland.shtml (Domnann)

Thanks Jean! I'm some interesting results under R-S1051 which may link the two groups if Damnonii/Dumnonii and it's interesting you do see a possible connection between the two? I was writing it expecting you may have info that squashed my results.

Does that appear reasonable for this group (S1051) in terms of it's possible tribal origins?

George

George Chandler
08-13-2016, 10:39 PM
I never realized the Domnann were connected to the Dumnonii but given the the S1051 group and the history it now makes more sense as they were right in the Ulaid territory (or very close) which would also help establish the connection to the Dal Riata/Epidii movement as well? Do you think this may be mixing of the Epidii and Dumnonii or something different?

George

George Chandler
08-13-2016, 10:47 PM
Given what you wrote I think this is making more sense to me for S1051 as Domnann, Dumnonii or even Epidii etc than the more Pictish tribes to the north east of the Antonine Wall.



http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8260-R-S1051-Geographic-or-Tribal-Connections&p=179215#post179215

fridurich
08-14-2016, 05:13 AM
Thanks Jean! I'm some interesting results under R-S1051 which may link the two groups if Damnonii/Dumnonii and it's interesting you do see a possible connection between the two? I was writing it expecting you may have info that squashed my results.

Does that appear reasonable for this group (S1051) in terms of it's possible tribal origins?

George

George, at this web site, on page 21 http://www.academia.edu/8010655/Origins_of_the_Irish_Scottish_Welsh_and_English_R1 b-M222_population , the authors of the M222 study seem to link the Dumnonii in Devon, in southwest England, to the Fir Domnann (also know as the Laigin) who were in Leinster, in southeastern Ireland. They appear to attribute the spread of Y-DNA haplogroup M-222, from the Dumnonii in Devon as the source, moving to Leinster, and from there later to central Scotland, and later to southwest Scotland (where the Damnonii were). This study has Jean Manco as one of the people listed in their acknowledgements.

I think this is a very possible way that M222 became spread through Ireland and the British Isles, but I may be wrong. Or, perhaps there was more than one Y-DNA haplogroup present in the Dumnonii, M-222 and S1051? Kind of like among the Vikings there was both R1A, and a subclade of I (don't remember which subclade of I), totally different haplogroups, but still all Vikings.

David Mc
08-14-2016, 06:51 AM
George, at this web site, on page 21 http://www.academia.edu/8010655/Origins_of_the_Irish_Scottish_Welsh_and_English_R1 b-M222_population , the authors of the M222 study seem to link the Dumnonii in Devon, in southwest England, to the Fir Domnann (also know as the Laigin) who were in Leinster, in southeastern Ireland. They appear to attribute the spread of Y-DNA haplogroup M-222, from the Dumnonii in Devon as the source, moving to Leinster, and from there later to central Scotland, and later to southwest Scotland (where the Damnonii were). This study has Jean Manco as one of the people listed in their acknowledgements.

I think this is a very possible way that M222 became spread through Ireland and the British Isles, but I may be wrong. Or, perhaps there was more than one Y-DNA haplogroup present in the Dumnonii, M-222 and S1051? Kind of like among the Vikings there was both R1A, and a subclade of I (don't remember which subclade of I), totally different haplogroups, but still all Vikings.

I'm still not sure about all of this. From what I've read the Dumnonii were fairly decentralized and not particularly warlike; the Romans mostly ignored them. Also, if they did (against all expectations) go all expansionist and wage successful campaigns to take land in Ireland and southern Scotland, wouldn't we expect to see some cultural ties between these three areas. It's possible there are connections, but I haven't seen them. Very open to more information, though.

George Chandler
08-14-2016, 04:38 PM
Good point by both of you. I don't believe that the different Dumnonii were a single genetic group so being mixed with M222 people does seem reasonable given that the Irish tribe would have been in the very southern Ulaid. What fits is that the geographic profile for S1051 but what doesn't seem to fit is the massive genetic bottle necking for the group. The only thing I can think of would be that "if" S1051 was a part of this tribal group spanning the Strathclyde, Eastern Ireland and Southwest England that the S1051's were the northern Damnonii/Dumnonii and were on the receiving end of the Roman campaigns near the Antonine Wall where the M222 people for the most part weren't?? If there were part of the same or similar tribal custom's, language etc would displace people have traveled to those other two Damnonii tribal areas or would they have been absorbed by the local tribes like Epidii or other Caledonian tribes? We have a few from the Pictish area that seems to have been predominantly L1335 (Aberdeen etc) but not a lot.

The S1051 group does have a lot in common with the M222's in terms of geography and location. The big difference is the genetic tree where you can see some pruning in M222 but it's pretty big and healthy where ours was cut to pieces.

George

George Chandler
08-14-2016, 06:34 PM
So not to spam out the results again but if you look at the S1051 data in the links below the ancient S1051 SNP cluster (the cluster of five ancient SNP's) is close to the age of DF49 and both groups do share the InDel Z39589. Both share the purported (myth or not) of being Goidel Glas descendants (FGC17906 subgroup). Both seem to have similar geographic areas being Northwest Ireland, Strathclyde area and Southwest Britain - the big difference being the tree. There are almost 1,600 members in the M222 project alone..and how old is the M222 founder age right now (I'm not sure) 2,000-2,700 years ago? You find them and other DF49 people throughout the L21 project and it's obvious the tree is pretty substantial. You are hard pressed to find S1051 people though the same L21 project. Most of the surname projects containing S1051 people have very few S1051+ members (more often than not there are less than 10 members of the same surname) with most having maybe 1 or 2 members being or suspected positive for S1051.

So not getting into the who are Gaels and who aren't Gaels who was or wasn't Dal Riata the two groups do seem to have a similar history. The only thing (I see) that would have caused this group being torn apart would be the Roman invasion of the north and the best candidates would be the Damnonii or the Epidii but again maybe someone sees the results differently??

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-S1051?iframe=yresults

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E1iiiFeUgXGA-Trg_whSqbK_sTZI5csja4dRFWZ5-bE/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ds8zx4F3y8vb2YxS1Zt6mPjoqzE6427r7XramYsN9zY/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VaNKMFUePcVc17HR0vycf8k0M-GXMI5h2G_EjOgBIcA/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YsOmg_EaoSh3QVKn9u_216ZtN3nI8LO5-NRA5Oscg4s/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OqY8pFyQqKORigWMMVFIFC954u02J5mmIHe6ygWEtdg/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qDjjxQYqNS8Jb_2s53TZZwRypUx-nwGj_lOq-z3QeSA/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

It doesn't really show what should be a healthy Southern Dumnonii tribal population unless maybe the Irish and Southern England Dumnonii were predominantly populated with M222 people and the northern Dumnonii had a higher percentage of S1051?? That is if the S1051's were in fact from that tribe at all and not Caledonian Picts or Epidii?? Maybe a more distant split between the DF49's and the S1051's.

David Mc
08-16-2016, 02:50 AM
I could imagine a link between the Fir Domnann and the Damnonii of SW Scotland. Certainly the material cultures of Ireland and that part of Scotland share many similarities. Again, I can't see the connection between these two and the Dumnonii, apart from a similarity in names.

David Mc
08-16-2016, 07:55 AM
I've looked at FTDNA's S1051 page (thanks for the link). I looked at the map, as well. You are pretty much as widely dispersed as DF49xM222, which doesn't make it easy to narrow the group down to a particular region or tribal group-- a frustration I know well.

Some observations. The S1051 people in Ireland mostly have non-Irish surnames. I see some English surnames and some Scottish. The latter look like they could originate in either the Western Isles or the Galloway area (or anywhere in between, along the western seaboard. I notice your Scottish members are biased mostly towards the west as well (although, interestingly, you have a McGuire in Scotland which is a very Irish name).

So back to the Damnonii. It's worth remembering that the Damnonii were a Brythonic people, not a Gaelic people. They seem to have been clients of Rome. At the very least they seem to have had god relations with the Romans and serves as a buffer kingdom between the walls. Later on they would be called the Strathclyde Britons. It's certainly possible that S1051 was found among the Damnonii. Looking at present day distribution I would be more inclined to think that it was borne by men throughout northern Britain rather than isolated to one tribal group. But that is very much my own speculation...

George Chandler
08-16-2016, 02:33 PM
I could imagine a link between the Fir Domnann and the Damnonii of SW Scotland. Certainly the material cultures of Ireland and that part of Scotland share many similarities. Again, I can't see the connection between these two and the Dumnonii, apart from a similarity in names.

Thanks for your input David. The more opinions I get on this the better as it's still a bit of a mystery in terms of tribal origins. The only thing that is pretty clear is what has happened to them genetically.

George

cairn
08-18-2016, 08:18 PM
Over in Z251, some of us are also looking at the Z16943 subclade as possibly being associated with the Dumnonii. Many of the families in this branch trace their origins to southwest Scotland and northwest England, but there's also a couple families in Z16943 from Cornwall. Then again, there's some Irish and Portuguese in this branch :confused:. Here's the branch on Ytree: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=166&star=false

Z251 as a whole seems to match up well with Brythonic peoples, and the FGC13899 branch is mostly Welsh, but making associations with specific tribes is much more challenging and there are some who argue that Z251 is more likely Norse/Norman than Celtic.

rms2
08-19-2016, 12:12 AM
The problem with the idea of Z251 being Brythonic is that it includes the Baltic Cluster, which, as far as I know, is 100% Ashkenazi Jewish, and none of them appear to have ever set foot in Britain. I am one of the cluster's discoverers, along with Elise Friedman. We noticed it at about the same time but independently of one another. Its characteristic marker values are 388=11, 392=14, 459b=9, and 464c=15.

Yfull estimates a tmrca for Z251 of about 2300 BC, which would make it arise among the Bell Beaker people, if those of us are right who see a close connection between Bell Beaker and L21.

Maybe British Z251 could be characterized as Brythonic.

George Chandler
08-20-2016, 06:07 PM
To muddy the waters a bit more..the Durotriges tribe that was next to the Damnonii (Jean correct me if I'm wrong) may have been a confederation of tribes more than a tribe Cunliffe wrote in the "Iron Age Communities in Britain..." So is it possible some of the genetic Southern Damnonii were also part of the Durotriges who also controlled the shipping port to Brittany? Not sure what to think of them as they were at war with the Romans early on then appear to have become another Roman vassal tribe.

George Chandler
08-20-2016, 06:58 PM
I've looked at FTDNA's S1051 page (thanks for the link). I looked at the map, as well. You are pretty much as widely dispersed as DF49xM222, which doesn't make it easy to narrow the group down to a particular region or tribal group-- a frustration I know well.

Some observations. The S1051 people in Ireland mostly have non-Irish surnames. I see some English surnames and some Scottish. The latter look like they could originate in either the Western Isles or the Galloway area (or anywhere in between, along the western seaboard. I notice your Scottish members are biased mostly towards the west as well (although, interestingly, you have a McGuire in Scotland which is a very Irish name).


So back to the Damnonii. It's worth remembering that the Damnonii were a Brythonic people, not a Gaelic people. They seem to have been clients of Rome. At the very least they seem to have had god relations with the Romans and serves as a buffer kingdom between the walls. Later on they would be called the Strathclyde Britons. It's certainly possible that S1051 was found among the Damnonii. Looking at present day distribution I would be more inclined to think that it was borne by men throughout northern Britain rather than isolated to one tribal group. But that is very much my own speculation...

What's interesting is that most of the S1051 Irish/Welsh seem to be the ancient subgroup of FGC17938 where as the the FGC17906 ancient subgroup seem to located in the Ulaid/Epidii tribal locations. Both of these ancient haplogroups share a common ancestor going back to about 3,700 years ago. What sets the S1051's apart are the lack of numbers (even though FGC17938 & FGC17906) are two of the largest ancient subgroups (of the 15) below S1051. Whatever they experienced in terms of getting torn up genetically they likely experienced it together with the rest of S1051.

There are a few Irish names like the Byrnes group from the Louth area..the McCain's..McCormick's..McKinnon's etc but we lack population numbers right across the board. There is that Scottish/Irish connection..there is the large suspected group connected to the Vikings (Norse origin surnames like Wray, Fell etc). I'm still calling the FGC17906 subgroup "Iberian Gaels" from the genetic evidence, names history etc. What were the Gaels but a loose genetic confederation like Damnonii, Picts etc sharing language, religion and cultural traditions? The only real evidence (my opinion) of where the S1051's were located geographically which would caused them to have been this torn up genetically like this would be along the Antonine wall area during the Roman invasion. If we were all located in Northern Ireland at the time of the Roman invasion my bet would be that our tree (or subgroups of it) would be healthy like most of DF49. Even though there is no evidence...and I may be going out on a limb here..maybe there was some sort of genetic Epidii connection to some genetic Gaels in Northern Ireland pre Roman and pre Dal Riata that we don't understand?

Once more skeletal remains are found and tested we'll get a better picture. This is why the SNP databases we are all building for our haplogroups is so important right now. Looking at the genetic results S1051 it's becoming more and more clear that this group wasn't at peace with the Romans. Given the Viking connection for some the best fit would be that Epidii/Damnonii area of the north. We definitely don't fit the southern Damnonii at peace with the Romans or another of the Roman vassal tribes looking at the genetics.

George

dkm1987
08-21-2016, 04:32 PM
First off let me preface, I am not ancient history scholar, but I do know how to read and since I have a vested interest in that I am one of the FGC17938+, let me ask.

Could we not be seeing the remnants of Caratacus? Who although defeated and flees later leads Silures (Wales) against the Romans in AD 47. Who also both second century rulers of Damnonii as well the fifth century kings of the Guotodin/Gododdin (later to remove to Gwynedd), attribute their ancestry?

George Chandler
08-21-2016, 05:03 PM
For S1051 I would be surprised if it was. If we assume that all the tribes were a genetic mix of peoples with some having higher percentages than others contained within then it wasn't only S1051's that would have died at each battle. Being that the southern Damnonii weren't aggressive to the Romans I'm doubtful S1051 was part of it unless they were some sort of refugees fleeing and sneaking to a safer area. I'll post more that is specific to this on the R-S1051 thread in a bit so it doesn't override the Damnonii thread.

Good suggestion though and who knows..maybe time will prove you correct?

George

dkm1987
08-21-2016, 05:35 PM
George, when I say Damnonii I am referring to the Damnonii of the southern Scotland, whereas Dumnonii were the tribe of the south neighboring the Durotriges.

Since both the Damnonii and the Guotodin/Gododdin attribute their descendancy from Caratacus and since both the Gododdin and Stratclyde flee to Gwynedd I don't see how we can dismiss the relationship, or at the least not consider it.

But again, not truly my realm so I'll leave it up to those far more interested in Ancient Britain than myself.

George Chandler
08-21-2016, 07:07 PM
Could be? Being right on the wall in the area of the Damnonii could account for it but like I said in my email I'm not so sure of even that given the amount of genetic loss to this group. I can't believe that we were the only ones on the receiving end of this. If you look at the Roman accounts and the death toll of indigenous tribes during the different campaigns there should be a substantial loss within L1335, DF21, L513 etc?? Let's suppose that S1051 wasn't at the battle of Mons Graupius and it was predominantly L1335 should there not be a huge genetic loss and a torn up tree?

I like the idea of there being Damnonii from that area where some went to Gwynedd and some melted into the Epidii post Roman invasion. Here is the question concerning S1051 though "if" the viking connection is correct for some of us who would have been the most likely vikings to have adopted some of us into the fold beyond slavery? The Norse that invaded Cumbria don't appear to have married local girls where as the Norse "Gall-Ghàidheil" in the Dal Riata area did taking on the language etc. This isn't an absolute fact but only a possible clue that has to be considered.

The Damnonii and Dumnonii by the sounds of it are more a name issue with tribes being connected culturally (and possibly genetically). I thought you were making a Silures to the Damnonii from southern Britain (my mistake).

George