PDA

View Full Version : Niall of the Nine



wombatofthenorth
12-27-2016, 03:06 AM
So Y37 came in and a Nial of the Nine badge popped up.
However, we are R-L20 and AFAIK Niall is R-M222 so how can we get this badge?
I guess they just use STR 12 and 25 for the badge and don't check to see if the SNP results and your haplogroup actually make it impossible?
Or could we actually have the badge and it not be a mistake?

wombatofthenorth
01-02-2017, 03:49 AM
Nobody has a clue as to whether there is some way this could be a legit result?
Or to at least whether it might imply a very unusual pattern for STRs for our particular R-L20?

rms2
01-02-2017, 03:59 AM
If that is the case, it simply shows that 25 markers or 37 markers are not enough to make such a designation.

Jessie
01-02-2017, 08:09 AM
So Y37 came in and a Nial of the Nine badge popped up.
However, we are R-L20 and AFAIK Niall is R-M222 so how can we get this badge?
I guess they just use STR 12 and 25 for the badge and don't check to see if the SNP results and your haplogroup actually make it impossible?
Or could we actually have the badge and it not be a mistake?

My brother is M222 and has been tested further to S588 yet never got the Niall badge. I was always a bit annoyed about that. :)

MacUalraig
01-02-2017, 09:48 AM
So Y37 came in and a Nial of the Nine badge popped up.
However, we are R-L20 and AFAIK Niall is R-M222 so how can we get this badge?
I guess they just use STR 12 and 25 for the badge and don't check to see if the SNP results and your haplogroup actually make it impossible?
Or could we actually have the badge and it not be a mistake?

The Niall badge is so ridiculous its not worth wasting time on it tbh. What they are trying to do is match your STRs to a 17 marker profile from a paper which came out in 2005. That is almost prehistoric in terms of research. There is no 12 or 25 marker profile in the paper nor had the link with the M222 SNP been made at that stage. FTDNA aren't going to use the SNP as that would penalize their STR based sales, as they prefer to force people to start with testing STRs.

Don't forget the parting words of the TCD paper authors:

"Figures such as Niall of the Nine Hostages reside at the cusp of mythology and history".

Dubhthach
01-02-2017, 11:13 AM
"Figures such as Niall of the Nine Hostages reside at the cusp of mythology and history".

If anyone watches Vikings on History, well than following is apt. "Ragnar is the Niall of Norse saga" -- eg. pseudo-historical with perhaps glimpse of truth -- father of multiple sons. ;)

jdean
01-02-2017, 12:44 PM
So Y37 came in and a Nial of the Nine badge popped up.
However, we are R-L20 and AFAIK Niall is R-M222 so how can we get this badge?
I guess they just use STR 12 and 25 for the badge and don't check to see if the SNP results and your haplogroup actually make it impossible?
Or could we actually have the badge and it not be a mistake?

I know kits that are U106 and sport the badge too : )

wombatofthenorth
01-03-2017, 03:28 AM
My brother is M222 and has been tested further to S588 yet never got the Niall badge. I was always a bit annoyed about that. :)

Wow that is weird, so he is R-M222 and still didn't get it and we are R-L20 and did.
Not sure if it means their system for determination is just totally messed up or if our R-L20 line carries a few odd STR results that are actually closer to Niall than some R-M222 people are????

GogMagog
01-03-2017, 06:35 PM
Badge be damned! I am one mark off and didn't get it, he is still my ancestor. Oh and the Irish flag is green, white and gold.

wombatofthenorth
01-05-2017, 02:02 AM
Badge be damned! I am one mark off and didn't get it, he is still my ancestor. Oh and the Irish flag is green, white and gold.

I am one # off one entry off as well AND the wrong haplgroup for it to be possible.... and i got it. :)
I heard from someone that the tool simply looks at STR12 (maybe, maybe STR 25 a little) and that is that and so yeah it's gonna give a lot a lot of false positives and maybe a rare false negative too.

David Mc
01-05-2017, 08:24 AM
Oh and the Irish flag is green, white and gold.

It's actually green, white, and orange (unless you're writing a poem or singing a song).

castle3
01-05-2017, 08:40 AM
The Niall badge is so ridiculous its not worth wasting time on it tbh. What they are trying to do is match your STRs to a 17 marker profile from a paper which came out in 2005. That is almost prehistoric in terms of research. There is no 12 or 25 marker profile in the paper nor had the link with the M222 SNP been made at that stage. FTDNA aren't going to use the SNP as that would penalize their STR based sales, as they prefer to force people to start with testing STRs.

Don't forget the parting words of the TCD paper authors:

"Figures such as Niall of the Nine Hostages reside at the cusp of mythology and history".

Thanks for the TCD quote. Very sensible.

GogMagog
01-05-2017, 03:30 PM
If Niall is not the ancestor who is? Some peasant who got lucky? No other candidate plausibly fits.

TigerMW
01-05-2017, 04:53 PM
However, we are R-L20 and AFAIK Niall is R-M222 so how can we get this badge?


I know kits that are U106 and sport the badge too : )

This discussion is the other side of the coin of those who want FTDNA to present SNP Pack testing options based on STR predictions. Things can go wrong! The more STRs the better usually if one want to risk decisions based on STRs.

jdean
01-05-2017, 05:12 PM
This discussion is the other side of the coin of those who want FTDNA to present SNP Pack testing options based on STR predictions. Things can go wrong! The more STRs the better usually if one want to risk decisions based on STRs.

Probably best to leave that to the admins : )

miiser
01-05-2017, 06:41 PM
If Niall is not the ancestor who is? Some peasant who got lucky?

Yes, exactly - some lucky peasant with extraordinarily healthy genes in his Y-chromosome. See this thread: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9271-Updated-Marciano-paper-Y-chromosome-Haplogroups-and-Gene-Mutations&p=201872#post201872

A powerful ruler might produce maybe a hundred or so offspring, not tens of millions. Only good genes can do that.

GogMagog
01-06-2017, 09:22 AM
Niall had wives, mistresses, concubines, slave girls (cumals) and anything else in a skirt passing by. His sons the same, so in a few generations, thousands of descenents, given that in 500 AD they had money, property etc and were seen as attractive, socially desirable.

miiser
01-06-2017, 09:39 AM
Niall had wives, mistresses, concubines, slave girls (cumals) and anything else in a skirt passing by. His sons the same, so in a few generations, thousands of descenents, given that in 500 AD they had money, property etc and were seen as attractive, socially desirable.

Suppose a ruler really were this productive (which is doubtful to begin with, because no matter how great a sex machine he and his sons are, there are still a limited number of fertile women available in his neighborhood who can each only produce about one son per two years, a good fraction of whom won't survive into adulthood.) That would take M222 from comprising ~0% of the Irish population to maybe a few percent. A good start, but then it stops there and proceeds to grow at the same rate as the general population without increasing its share further. What this model can't possibly achieve is to get M222 up to its present day share of around 20% of the L21 haplogroup.

Romilius
01-06-2017, 10:24 AM
Suppose a ruler really were this productive (which is doubtful to begin with, because no matter how great a sex machine he and his sons are, there are still a limited number of fertile women available in his neighborhood who can each only produce about one son per two years, a good fraction of whom won't survive into adulthood.) That would take M222 from comprising ~0% of the Irish population to maybe a few percent. A good start, but then it stops there and proceeds to grow at the same rate as the general population without increasing its share further. What this model can't possibly achieve is to get M222 up to its present day share of around 20% of the L21 haplogroup.

I think we must go deeper in subclade in order to define better the offsprings of Niall of the Nine hostages. I wouldn't refuse the possibility of millions of descendants. Only with three wives, a man can have at least 6 children per generation. There was a paper about the offsprings of prominents before the industrial revolution: they made more children than peasant. The proletariate was born after the industrial development.

miiser
01-06-2017, 11:24 AM
I think we must go deeper in subclade in order to define better the offsprings of Niall of the Nine hostages. I wouldn't refuse the possibility of millions of descendants. Only with three wives, a man can have at least 6 children per generation. There was a paper about the offsprings of prominents before the industrial revolution: they made more children than peasant. The proletariate was born after the industrial development.

But this Niall model doesn't just require that prominents have more offspring, which I readily believe. In order for M222 to continuously gain share until reaching its modern dominance, it requires that Niall's haplogroup ALONE enjoyed the benefits of this increased reproductive rate among prominents, and none of the competing haplogroups in Ireland enjoyed a similar reproductive advantage among their social elites. Modern haplogroup dominance doesn't simply require that haplogroups grow. It requires that they grow significantly faster than competing haplogroups over an extended duration. And there's no reason that non M222 haplogroups should be excluded from an increased reproductive rate among their own elites. After all, no matter how much of a man Niall was, he can't have prevented women from having sex with other men throughout ALL of Ireland. There were just too many women, and too much distance, to do the rounds each day.

Jessie
01-06-2017, 01:40 PM
Wow that is weird, so he is R-M222 and still didn't get it and we are R-L20 and did.
Not sure if it means their system for determination is just totally messed up or if our R-L20 line carries a few odd STR results that are actually closer to Niall than some R-M222 people are????

Well he is definitely M222 but never got the badge. Not sure how someone who is not M222 would be closer. He is tested to 111 STRS and SNP tested but still no badge. Very odd really.

Dubhthach
01-07-2017, 02:05 AM
I think we must go deeper in subclade in order to define better the offsprings of Niall of the Nine hostages. I wouldn't refuse the possibility of millions of descendants. Only with three wives, a man can have at least 6 children per generation. There was a paper about the offsprings of prominents before the industrial revolution: they made more children than peasant. The proletariate was born after the industrial development.

With regard to upper classes I'm always reminded of this quote from Dubhaltach Mac Fhirbhisigh writing in mid 17th century Ireland


'as the sons and families of the rulers multiplied, so their subjects and followers were squeezed out and withered away (translation taken from "Gaelic and Gaelicized Ireland in the Middle Ages" by K.W. Nicholls)

https://www.mayobooks.ie/image/cache/data/gbig-500x500.jpg
13507


The majority of M222 in the Ireland project is dominated by DF105+ and it's subclades. Looking at the M222 SNP bundle results in the Ireland yDNA Project we see following:

n=204
DF105+ = 171 -- 83.82%

Three specific subclades dominate these results. These been:
A259: 40 -- 23.29% of total DF105+
S588: 36 -- 21.05% of total DF105+
DF85: 44 -- 25.73% of total DF105+

So that's 70.18% of sample set made up of three subclades.

Via current BigY testing we know of at least 11 subclades based on sample set of 238 BigY results on Alex Williamson site:
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=564&star=false


YFULL gives following estimate for DF105 based on 91 BigY samples -- formed 1850 ybp, TMRCA 1850 ybp

YFULL dates for the three major subclades above are:
S588: formed 1850 ybp, TMRCA 1700 ybp
DF85: formed 1850 ybp, TMRCA 1850 ybp
A259: formed 1850 ybp, TMRCA 1550 ybp

Why was DF105 so successfull? The next major clade is FGC4077 which in bundle test only makes up 11.27% of results which yfull gives: formed 1900 ybp, TMRCA 1600 ybp, followed by S568 which has 2.94% (yfull: formed 1900 ybp, TMRCA 1700 ybp)

In turn even though we know of at least 11 major subclades of DF105 (so far, more been found all time), it is turn dominated by three SNP's namely DF85, S588 and A259. As a comparison BY198 makes up 3.51% of total DF105 sample set above.

From looking at the ScotlandDNA data which unfortunately didn't test for A259 (or A260) there does seem to be some geographic bias

S588 and DF85 combined make up 75.88% of the DF105 results from Ulster, in comparison in neighbouring province of Connacht they make up 21.47% of total. Almost a 3x difference in distrubution, given surnames that show up in DF85 and S588 this isn't really that surprising.

Leaving that aside there's the fact that there is distinct geographic bias towards where M222 appears in Ireland, this can be seen in following map that ScotlandDNA published

13504

Why is there such a distinct difference between Connacht and Ulster and Munster. Of course Leinster is intermediate but there are two issues there, namely they didn't spilt out Dublin (which makes up 20% of islands population) into it's own group, or fact that historic Leinster was a considerably smaller province -- it would be good to see difference between North and South Leinster in this chart.

What is obvious is there appears to be a North/South cline in place. If this is case it's rather interesting as it follows a trend that we see both in archaelogical record and linguistically. For example here is a map showing the major modern isoglosses in the Irish language

http://nos.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/learscail-canuinti-724x1024.jpg

The main division in Irish really between the dialect of Munster and Connacht/Ulster. Where Connacht and Ulster share major features denoted by a general line running from Galway in the West to Dublin in the east. Interesting we see a similar pattern when it comes to finds of La Tene influence material in Ireland, with them been found north of line by and large. A good example of this is with Beehive Querns which seem to be a tradition that comes in from Northern Britain in period after 300BC

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/images/Beehivequernstones.jpg
13505

Of course in the pseudo-historic narrative Ireland was divided into two half's these been Leath Cuinn (the half of Conn of Hundred battles -- titular ancestor of both Uí Néill and Connachta) and Leath Mogha (the half of Mug Nuadhat eg. Eogann Mór the namesake of Eoghanachta of Munster -- names linked to which seem to be dominated by R1b-CTS4466).

This mythical division ran basically from Galway Bay to Dublin, now the two lads mention above probably didn't exist (let alone in 2nd century when story is set) but the concept basically seems to be backporting of the poltical situation of the 6th/7th century into deep antiquity. eg. The northern half of Ireland was dominated by the Uí Néill and their Connachta co-relatives (having expanded out of obscurity during the 5th century), while Munster was dominated by the Eoghanachta who likewise came to power during the 5th/6th century by overthrowing the previous ruling dynastic groupings in the province.

TM Charles-Edwards for example writing in "Early Christian Ireland" (Cambridge Univeristy Press) proposes that the Uí Néill and Eoghanachta were actually working as allies during course of the 6th century as the two of them carved out new Kingdoms, in case of the Uí Néill via creation of "sword-land" -- there's some basis for this also in differeing legal traditions between Leath Cuinn and Leath Mogha (see Patterson -- Cattle Lords & Clansmen -- University of Notre Dame Press)

The upcoming Irish DNA atlas also seems to show up a North/South division within Ireland, again basically following Leath Cuinn/Leath Mogha division. It's going to be interesting to see results of that when it's published.

GogMagog
01-07-2017, 09:00 AM
Irish DNA atlas need to get their finger out. Last saw a map of British Isles with a few circles, Orkney DNA in the Orkneys, etc. Well, whoda thunk it?

Romilius
01-08-2017, 10:08 AM
But this Niall model doesn't just require that prominents have more offspring, which I readily believe. In order for M222 to continuously gain share until reaching its modern dominance, it requires that Niall's haplogroup ALONE enjoyed the benefits of this increased reproductive rate among prominents, and none of the competing haplogroups in Ireland enjoyed a similar reproductive advantage among their social elites. Modern haplogroup dominance doesn't simply require that haplogroups grow. It requires that they grow significantly faster than competing haplogroups over an extended duration. And there's no reason that non M222 haplogroups should be excluded from an increased reproductive rate among their own elites. After all, no matter how much of a man Niall was, he can't have prevented women from having sex with other men throughout ALL of Ireland. There were just too many women, and too much distance, to do the rounds each day.

Good, but you are thinking through contemporary ideas: probably, Niall signature began with an élite web of related clansmen who excluded other lines from reproduction. Obviously, there were also NPEs, but we must think about a different society, where life was lead in a different way.

JohnLightbridge
01-08-2017, 11:03 AM
I think we must go deeper in subclade in order to define better the offsprings of Niall of the Nine hostages. I wouldn't refuse the possibility of millions of descendants. Only with three wives, a man can have at least 6 children per generation.

Want to bet?

One of my ancestors [1600s] had 12 offspring with three wives, who in turn had 139 adult grandchildren [roughly 11 children per each child]. If you multiple those 139 grandchildren even on the low number of 3 children per child that's still over 400 great-grandchildren, over 1,200 great-great-grandchildren and over 3,600 great-great-great-grandchildren. If we kept it with the higher reproductive rate [which was reality] there were nearly 700 great-grandchildren, over 2,400 great-great grandchildren, and over 9,000 great-great-great grandchildren.

Many people like to believe our ancestors should count themselves lucky if they made 30. The unfortunate truth, which researchers have been finding, is mortality wasn't so high. It was high but even if you had 12 children and only 3 survived, if each of those children had 3 surviving offspring themselves multiple it by the generations. That'd be 50 generations give or take a few if we use the basic 30 years per generations and yeah you'd likely get millions of descendants.

I mean 3 multipled 13 times already puts you into millions.

miiser
01-08-2017, 12:46 PM
Good, but you are thinking through contemporary ideas: probably, Niall signature began with an élite web of related clansmen who excluded other lines from reproduction. Obviously, there were also NPEs, but we must think about a different society, where life was lead in a different way.

Yes, I recognize that in a strongly patriarchal society such as this, it is especially true that the powerful thrive at the expense of the weak, who are prone to be extinguished. And I acknowledge that this hierarchy is a minor contributing factor to haplogroup dominance.

But in his recent publication, Maciamo Hay even identified a mutation specific to M222 on a gene associated with male fertility:

http://www.academia.edu/30336043/Major_Y-chromosomal_haplogroups_are_defined_by_gene-altering_polymorphisms_affecting_fertility_and_rep roductory_success

Have you read the paper, and do you agree that gene mutations are a strong contributing factor to haplogroup dominance? It is difficult to deny the relevance of this information to M222's modern dominance.

Dubhthach
01-08-2017, 07:47 PM
Good, but you are thinking through contemporary ideas: probably, Niall signature began with an élite web of related clansmen who excluded other lines from reproduction. Obviously, there were also NPEs, but we must think about a different society, where life was lead in a different way.



One of the most important phenomena in a clan-based society is that of expansion from the top downwards. The seventeenth-century Irish scholar and genealogist Dualthach mac Fhirbsigh remarked that 'as the sons and families of the rulers multiplied, so their subjects and followers were squeezed out and withered away; and this phenomenon, the expansion of the ruling or dominant stocks at the expense of the remainder, is a normal feature in societies of this type. It has been observed of the modern Basotho of South Africa that 'there is a constant displacement of commoners by royals [i.e. members of the royal clan] and of collateral royals by the direct descendants of the ruling prince;, and this could have been said without adaptation , of any important Gaelic or Gaelicized lordship of late medieval Ireland.

In Fermanagh, for example the kingship of the Maguires began only with the accession of Donn Mór in 1282 and the ramification of the family - with the exception of one or two small and territoriality unimportant septs - began with the sons of the same man. the spread of his descendants can be seen by the genealogical tract called Geinelaighe Fhearmanach; by 1607 they must have been in the possession of at least three-quarters of the total soil of Fermanagh, having displaced or reduced the clans which had previously held it. The rate which an Irish clan could itself must not be underestimated. Turlough an fhíona O'Donnell, lord of Tirconnell (d. 1423) had eighteen sons (by ten different women) and fifty-nine grandsons in the male line. Mulmora O'Reilly, the lord of East Brefny, who died in 1566, had at least fifty-eight O'Reilly grandsons.
Philip Maguire, lord of Fermanagh (d. 1395) had twenty sons by eight mothers, and we know of at least fifty grandsons. Oliver Burke of Tirawley (two of whose became Lower Mac William although he himself had never held that position) left at least thirty-eight grandsons in the male line.

Irish law drew no distinction in matters of inheritance between the legitimate and the illegitimate and permitted the affiliation of children by their mother's declaration (see Chapter 4), and the general sexual permissiveness of medieval Irish society must have allowed a rate of multiplication approaching that which is permitted by the polygyny practised in, for instance, the clan societies of southern Africa already cited.


That's my transcription (no doubt with Typos!) of section of text from "Gaelic and Gaelicized Ireland in the Middle Ages" by Kenneth W. Nicholls (University College Cork -- retired), which was originally published in 1972 and republished/updated in a second edition in 2003:

https://www.lilliputpress.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/9781843510031.jpg

https://www.lilliputpress.ie/product/gaelic-and-gaelicized-ireland-in-the-middle-ages
https://www.amazon.com/Gaelic-Gaelicized-Ireland-Middle-Ages/dp/1843510030/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1483902210&sr=8-1&keywords=gaelic+and+gaelicized+ireland
(Amazon price is crazy compared to what ye pay here in Ireland!)

When Nicholl talks about known sons/grandsons he means of course those who survived to Adulthood and were thus either recorded in the genealogies or in relevant Annals/manuscript tradition.

In the case above of the Maguires we possibly see expansion of Airgialla II STR cluster under L513. Obviously this appears to be restricted geographically within one county (Fermanagh) with overspill into surrounding, which makes sense given the Maguires retained the Lordship of Fermanagh for over 300 years loosing it with Flight of Earls in 1607 when Cúchonnacht Mag Uidhre led the Ulster Earls into exile in Europe, as a comparison one of junior branches of family (they descend from different sons of Tómas Mór who died in 1430) had fought on English side and been promised the Lordship. During the plantation from 1609 they were only given one Barony totaling 12,000 acres (Fermanagh has 8 baronies).

Likewise with the O'Reilly's we see a concentration under A260 where they fall into subclade A883 which according to YFULL has as formed 1300 ybp, TMRCA 750 ybp

This make sense given that Bréifne (Eg. modern Leitrim and Cavan) was probably conquered by expansion of the Uí Briúin during the 7th century. We know of course that the O'Reilly's seperate from their close relatives the O'Rourkes during the 9th century.

13516


The O'Rourkes dominated the Kingship during the 11th and 12th century, both challenging for overkingship of Connacht (11th century) and expanding by carving sword-land out of modern North Meath. Which would eventually result in murder of Tigernán Ua Ruairc King of Bréifne after failed negotiations with Hugh de Lacy (Norman) in 1172, de Lacy was subsequently granted title "Lord of Meath" basically taking over bulk of the Southern Uí Néill kingdom of Meath. During the 13th century Bréifne was dividied into West (O'Rourke) and East (O'Reilly) due to Civil war, this corresponds to modern counties of Leitrim and Cavan.

In the account mentioned above going on current evidence it's probable that both O'Donnell and O'Reilly mentioned were M222+, these are just two examples and from High Middle ages, what we have to remember is the Dál Cuinn basically come out of no-where in the 5th century and in process of 200 years basically carve out "sword-land" equivalent to about 12-13 modern counties in Ireland. (eg. they from a standing stop took over a third of country via direct rule, and overlordship over about 50-60%)

As historian John V. Kelleher famously wrote about the Uí Néill segment of Dál Cuinn (though equivalent relevant to their Uí Briúin and Uí Fiachrach relatives in Connacht)
"The Uí Néill emerge into history like a school of cuttlefish from a large ink-cloud of their own manufacture; and clouds of ink continued to be manufactured by them or for them throughout their long career"

https://books.google.ie/books?id=1g57cMJMXtwC&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=kelleher+ui+neill+cuttlefish&source=bl&ots=zycM17-r-_&sig=m5ohp8u9h9To-Me_nbYxjRtW4Q4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjy_eeHp7PRAhXBhJAKHcRYCfsQ6AEIGTAA#v=on epage&q=kelleher%20ui%20neill%20cuttlefish&f=false

The case of Burke is interesting, given that he was actually of Norman origins (De Burgo), who became "more Irish than the Irish themselves". What needs to be remember about the Mayo Burke family is they had 4 major lineages, who rotated the title between each lineage in turn. So you would have seem similiar fecundity in the other three branches.

Romilius
01-09-2017, 09:43 AM
Yes, I recognize that in a strongly patriarchal society such as this, it is especially true that the powerful thrive at the expense of the weak, who are prone to be extinguished. And I acknowledge that this hierarchy is a minor contributing factor to haplogroup dominance.

But in his recent publication, Maciamo Hay even identified a mutation specific to M222 on a gene associated with male fertility:

http://www.academia.edu/30336043/Major_Y-chromosomal_haplogroups_are_defined_by_gene-altering_polymorphisms_affecting_fertility_and_rep roductory_success

Have you read the paper, and do you agree that gene mutations are a strong contributing factor to haplogroup dominance? It is difficult to deny the relevance of this information to M222's modern dominance.

I'm not sure if I can answer to a banned member, but that is my answer: obviously, you even didn't think about the possibility that <<M222 fertility ratio + leader or king with that genetic signature>> could be a possible and very simple operation? Or are we all someway R1b haters?

Romilius
01-09-2017, 09:48 AM
Want to bet?

One of my ancestors [1600s] had 12 offspring with three wives, who in turn had 139 adult grandchildren [roughly 11 children per each child]. If you multiple those 139 grandchildren even on the low number of 3 children per child that's still over 400 great-grandchildren, over 1,200 great-great-grandchildren and over 3,600 great-great-great-grandchildren. If we kept it with the higher reproductive rate [which was reality] there were nearly 700 great-grandchildren, over 2,400 great-great grandchildren, and over 9,000 great-great-great grandchildren.

Many people like to believe our ancestors should count themselves lucky if they made 30. The unfortunate truth, which researchers have been finding, is mortality wasn't so high. It was high but even if you had 12 children and only 3 survived, if each of those children had 3 surviving offspring themselves multiple it by the generations. That'd be 50 generations give or take a few if we use the basic 30 years per generations and yeah you'd likely get millions of descendants.

I mean 3 multipled 13 times already puts you into millions.

Obviously, I wanted to state the things you are stating... even if I would be less optimistic about mortality. However, I agree that in few generations we can have millions of descendants from a chieftain. I remember a study about the Al-Saud family, still now kings of Saudi Arabia. The first was an emir, a prince, of a powerful tribe that, with the crown over other tribes in a time English rulers modified the balance between tribes' political relationships, from 1750 cca to 2000 multiplied (well... "millionied") his offsprings.

JohnLightbridge
01-09-2017, 11:28 AM
Obviously, I wanted to state the things you are stating... even if I would be less optimistic about mortality.

Even if one or two children survived per generation in a rough 50 generations you'd still have millions of descendants. Even if you wanted to use the 1 to 20% potential of non-paternal events the descendants would still be rather numerous. I just calculated the non-paternal at the highest percentage [20%] for 3 x 13 generations. You'd still likely have over a million descendants of the desired heritage.

Besides mortality varies. Like I said people assume our ancestors were hopeless & helpless who died at the drop of a hat. History, on the other hand, shows that that assumption isn't quite reality. Actuality the here & now shows that assumption doesn't quite work. There are remote "backward" civilizations, who widely don't employ convential healthcare/medicine, where the people can live to quite an old age with a half dozen adult offspring.

But people who were of better social standing typically survived better than someone who was working the fields from dawn to dusk. Someone whose career was farming likely had a better chance of surviving longer than a coal miner. And not every soldier stood on the battlefield with his mouth hanging open like a turkey as the arrows rained down.