Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: S389+ Pictish?

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    369
    Sex
    Location
    England
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-FT79393
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3b

    England Scotland Northern Ireland United Kingdom

    S389+ Pictish?

    Prof Jim Wilson, who discovered S389, has kindly spent some valuable time trawling through a number of S389+ testees. He points out that about 0.5% of British men are in the R1b-S389 group, and that it should be included on ISOGG's tree. He has seen 33 surnames that have S389, so far.
    Jim states that it is Scottish, "In fact very Eastern Scottish, focused on Central Scotland & Aberdeenshire, with instances in Fife & East Lothian". It is much rarer elsewhere in the Isles. He states that "the frequency distribution is a classic signature of 'Pictish' type. R1b-S735, the 'Scots' or Pictish group of R1b, has the exact same frequency peak, but is 20x more common".
    Armstrong is the most numerous surname in the S389 group, but there is also another, typically NE Scottish surname which appears twice: this in a relatively small sample.
    Jim doesn't believe S389 is Flemish, and expects it to be absent from continental Europe.
    Jim suggests that FGC or whole Y chromosome sequencing would be extremely beneficial in pinpointing the actual age of S389. He finishes by saying that "If Y sequencing gives a young date, this looks to be another Pictish group! At the very least, it was carried by people who lived in what we now call Scotland, 2000 or however many years ago".
    I'd like to thank Jim profusely for taking the time & trouble to offer his guidance - especially with Xmas upon us.
    Cheers to all!
    Bob
    PS I obtained Jim's permission to post his views, which I've precised here. I hope I've got the gist exactly. Any errors will be mine.
    Last edited by castle3; 12-25-2014 at 05:44 PM.

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to castle3 For This Useful Post:

     GoldenHind (12-24-2014),  Gray Fox (12-25-2014),  palamede (12-25-2014),  rms2 (12-24-2014),  Salkin (12-24-2014)

  3. #2
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,334
    Sex
    Location
    California
    Ethnicity
    British-Scandinavian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF99
    mtDNA (M)
    J2a1a

    England Denmark Wales Scotland Sweden
    It should be pointed out that S389 is the same as L624, which has been found in two people who are otherwise classified as R1b-P312**. As they have a considerable GD, this appears to be an old subclade. Whether it falls directly below P312 or farther down the tree remains to be seen, but at the moment it is clearly a new subclade under P312.

    And yes, these two posts should probably be transferred to the R1b-P312** thread, where there has already been some mention of this.

  4. #3
    Administrator
    Posts
    2,316
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-Z12
    mtDNA (M)
    I3b (FMS)

    Thread moved to P312 by request.

  5. #4
    Hi All,
    Since the title of this thread is a question - S389+ Pictish? I wanted to answer the question. No, it isn't Pictish and it's great to see Wilson has a large number of followers posting this on several message boards over and over again. But anyway to answer the question again, No, it is not in any way associated with the Picts. Thank you and good day all.

  6. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    369
    Sex
    Location
    England
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-FT79393
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3b

    England Scotland Northern Ireland United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by SearchSeeker View Post
    Hi All,
    Since the title of this thread is a question - S389+ Pictish? I wanted to answer the question. No, it isn't Pictish and it's great to see Wilson has a large number of followers posting this on several message boards over and over again. But anyway to answer the question again, No, it is not in any way associated with the Picts. Thank you and good day all.
    I'm pleased to receive any help from people who have studied genetics, plus have access to data which I don't. I'm quite content to keep my own counsel, but feel it important to share leads with any interested parties. You don't offer any explanation as to why you consider S389+ to be non-Pictish. I'd appreciate seeing any evidence you have to that effect. I can say that my Big Y results show some interesting links to north-east Scottish surnames, so I believe it's an avenue of research worth pursuing.

  7. #6
    Conversely, I'd like to see any evidence other than Wilson's wild speculation, but unfortunately there is none. In fact, it is his speculation that solely forms the basis for these unsubstantiated claims. There is no connection, and no one should have to disprove a "theory" that is solely based in speculation. It is not our job to disprove and untruth/falsehood, let's see some actual evidence that supports this. If they want to keep playing with their jars of wode, like dressing up for a fake holiday of halloween, that's fine, it's nice to have fantasies I guess to help with reality.

  8. #7
    On second thought, I just had a change of heart and thinking, if that groups wants to be "picts", that's fine, free speech and all, have at. I dub these picts. It could because easter is right around the corner, the whole eater bunny thing so please, no one throw out those jars of wode. Take care.

  9. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    369
    Sex
    Location
    England
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-FT79393
    mtDNA (M)
    U5b2b3b

    England Scotland Northern Ireland United Kingdom
    Recent Big Y results are showing interesting links for a number of families to north-east Scotland. That alone makes it worth closely researching Pictish & pre-Pictish history in that region. I have no preference regarding a 'tribal' origin for my ancestors, merely seeking the truth. Over 40 years of research has led me to look at a variety of options, including: Anglo-Danish, Breton, Flemish, Brythonic Celt & others. I don't indulge in fantasy & 'wishful thinking', but endeavour to fully reference any finds. I consider it unwise not to seriously consider the views of someone, like Dr Wilson, who has studied genetics at a high level.
    One of my reasons for posting was to enable anyone who has tested positive for S389/L624 to contact me & share results. I have taken the time & trouble to read the works of Cassius Dio, Gildas, Skene and more recent authors in order to gain an understanding of Pictish & pre-Pictish history. Anyone who has studied the above will know that the Picts' heartland was north of the Antonine Wall and east of the Mounth. Therefore, finding links to that region makes researching the Picts & their ancestors extremely worthwhile.
    I'd continue, but I'm off to cover myself in blue paint & get some tattoos. If time permits, I'll venture out to my local Italian restaurant to complain about the Roman Legionnaires' devastation of Pictavia!
    Last edited by castle3; 02-25-2015 at 11:14 AM.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to castle3 For This Useful Post:

     Eldar (02-28-2021),  SearchSeeker (02-25-2015)

  11. #9
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,334
    Sex
    Location
    California
    Ethnicity
    British-Scandinavian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF99
    mtDNA (M)
    J2a1a

    England Denmark Wales Scotland Sweden
    It seems to me that the debate about whether L624/S389 is Pictish or not only distracts from the important fact that it appears to constitute a new subclade under P312. L624 has been found in three people at FTDNA who have otherwise tested P312**, and under the name S389 in apparently over 30 samples at BritainsDNA. All three at FTDNA have at least Scottish surnames, and I gather the those at BritainsDNA are primarily of eastern Scottish origin. Personally I am not a fan of assigning ethnic classifications to ancient subclades, so I largely ignore the Pictish question.

    The possibility that L624 may be downstream from another SNP which takes in an even larger group currently classified as P312** is now under investigation.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to GoldenHind For This Useful Post:

     SearchSeeker (02-25-2015)

  13. #10
    Regarding what was posted, let's use me as an example, I may be good at engine work, but I'm not good with body work, but both are related to the automobile. Just because someone is good at discovering say snps, that does not mean they are good with assigning an origin to an snp, follow? The theory has no basis other than thus far it's mainly a group of guys with mostly (and not all by any stretch) Scottish names "somewhat" localized. That's it, that's the only evidence, it's pretty weak. Until an actual pict body is found with DNA that can be tested, it's not right for someone to be claiming they've discovered something but really have no proof at all. Just my opinion and every time I see this stuff re-posted from the same source, over and over again, it's actually a little sad. Anyway, take care all.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rosemarkie Pictish Man
    By castle3 in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-23-2020, 09:03 PM
  2. Ghostly Outline of a Pictish Woman
    By JMcB in forum History (Medieval)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-24-2019, 09:09 PM
  3. Pictish man's face reconstructed.
    By JohnHowellsTyrfro in forum Archaeology (Prehistory)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-16-2017, 05:43 AM
  4. Painted Pictish Stones
    By castle3 in forum General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-03-2017, 09:18 AM
  5. S389+ Pictish?
    By castle3 in forum R
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-24-2014, 10:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •