Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The "First" Irish people

1457910

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    Here is something from the DNA Forums website. The author no longer posts there but it seems he was well respected for his archaeological knowledge.



    It’s not surprising that you are having trouble with the Iberian idea. Its nonsense. It’s been rejected by archaeologists, historians, classicists, Celtic studies experts, linguists etc for several decades. It is essentially based on nothing but the Irish invasion legends. The latter were written by monks writing in a classical tradition whereby a history or ethnology is put together by trying to connect tribes and places with similar names and linking them. Often when modern linguists look at them the etymology is completely nonsensical. In the case of the Milesian myth the word linking was Hibernia=Iberia, Scoti=Scythia etc etc. The legend is full of people given names to represent ancient names for the Irish - Goidel Glass (Goidel-Gael), an Egyptian princess 'Scota' or similar.

    For example Hibernia is from the Ierne or Iverna or similar which comes from an Indo-European/proto-Celtic root for 'lush/fertile/fat/bursting land’ while Iberia is from the non-Celtic river name Ebro in eastern Spain. Gael is from a Welsh word Gwiddel (sorry spelling), a pejorative term meaning something like 'wild men of the woods'. Most of the waves and names in the book of invasions are fabricated. The idea was to create a unified history for all the Irish when in fact there never was one. There was never a wave of Gaels under a leader who arrived in Ireland and was the ancestor of all the Irish. Each tribe in reality had a different history.

    There are grains of real ethnic/tribal names in the mythology but their origins are confused and not agreed - Cruithin, Erainn, Fir Domnainn, Fir Galieon, Fir Bolg for example. Linguists think they probably represent respectively early Iron Age tribes via Britain, the indigenous Bronze Age peoples of the island, the Domnoni/Damnoni trines of the Irish Sea area, NW Gaulish tribes and Belgae respectively. Other traditional, 19th century and even modern, interpretations are pretty well nonsense. Ideas like the Cruithin being Picts and therefore pre-Celtic etc is clearly nonsense. Even the name is Celtic for heaven’s sake! There has been an awful lot of nonsense written about the stuff over the last 1600 years. It’s too confused to tell us much beyond what I have quoted above as the modern linguist’s best guess. The legends themselves seem to have been written when these tribes and peoples had faded away somewhat and the real origins had already been forgotten or confused, which is not surprising seeing as they were written down at least 600 years after the events. The inaccuracy of the tales as regards the periods they claim to describe has been analysed by linguists and archaeologists and they are essentially too confused to be of much value at all.

    What archaeology tells us about Irelands peopling is this:

    1. Mesolithic-Ireland was likely settled from north Britain c. 8000BC by peoples who probably were located in the southern/mid North Sea area prior to arriving in the isles.

    2. Early Neolithic-Ireland and Britain seem to have been mainly settled very quickly and homogeneously by a single group who likely arrived from NE France to SE England and spread through the isles from there across a 400 year period. There was probably another more minor input into western Britain and Ireland from NW France.

    3. Mid- Later Neolithic-Ireland had strong contacts with all of western Britain from Cornwall to the Orkneys indicated by exchange items. There was possibly some much lighter contact with NW France shown by similar ideas in monuments, art etc although this was shadowy, did not extend to mundane artefacts and was clearly mainly contact rather than settlement.

    4. Beaker period-Ireland suddenly became part of a really major network that extended beyond the isles for the first time. The beakers that have an agreed origin point to the Middle and Lower Rhine and south, eastern and northern Britain while the burial traditions and deposition habits of beaker are more like western Britain and NW France. It is suspected that Ireland's paramount position in NW European metallurgy came from Atlantic contacts via NW France. It seems likely that NW France is the common denominator or link between the NW European beaker types and the Atlantic burial and metallurgical traditions and it was likely crucial in terms of the beaker influence in Ireland.

    5. Bronze Age-A lot of the mundane culture and burial traditions are purely insular with no continental parallels. There is a lot of similarity of mundane culture and ritual monuments/burial traditions within and between the isles but not much with the continent. The exception is metalwork where ideas seem to have flowed in a confusing network whose directions seem to have varied greatly over time although Central European influence seemed to steadily grow as the period went on. Ideas like 'Atlantic Bronze Age' have no real basis. On the basis of settlement, burial, ritual etc traditions it is very hard to see continental settlement on any sort of scale into the isles in this period although trade contact shown in metalwork, ore and influences must have been frequent.

    6. Iron Age-influences came from west-Central and Europe via Britain in the Hallstatt C and La Tene periods. The influences are relatively weak and like the Bronze Age largely confined to metalwork. Ireland is especially insular in terms of the monuments, burial traditions and mundane material culture and seems different from both the continent and Britain (which itself has a lot of insularity-house shapes etc). This has lead many to feel that no large scale invasions took place in the Iron Age in Ireland although I think there is enough to suggest some small scale. I would say the same is also true for Scotland and much of the rest of Britain.

    In general I would think that most archaeologists feel that the main populating events were the Mesolithic and/or the Early Neolithic with a much lesser (but ultimately significant??) input in the beaker period, very little movement in the Bronze Age other than flotsam brought by elite contact (marriages, craftsmen etc??) and perhaps some small groups of war bands etc in the Iron Age. I doubt many archaeologists would disagree hugely with that summary.

    You will note that Iberia is conspicuously absent from this summary which I would say few archaeologists would find much to disagree with. Convincing evidence for Iberian contact is extremely rare. This is in line with the genetic evidence of R1b clades. Not only do they suggest that the populations are different in immediate origin with Ireland a lot more like Britain, NW France and the Rhineland etc, the low quantity of S116* or its Iberian subclades or indeed other Iberian Haplogroups like E etc also suggests that contact and gene flow afterwards was also very rare. This is fully in keeping with the archaeological evidence.

    In light of that it is amazing the fact that Iberia keeps springing up in relation to Ireland and it essentially shows the power of myths. It is clear from archaeology and the breaking down of R1b into clades (especially after the discovery of L21) that Ireland should look to Britain, northern France and the Rhine area for its roots and stop being in denial that the Iberian myth is a myth. This myth appears to be fact-proof!!

    Unfortunately the recent 'blood of the Irish' TV series (made before L21, MRCA re-dating which showed western R1b is much younger and our recent better understanding of the SE-NW spread from ancestral to derived R1b forms) has misinformed a new generation and perpetuated the Iberian myth in a slightly altered form. The only very indirect link with Iberia and a major populating event of the isles was the old Palaeolithic refugia idea and the outpouring north and east from that refuge in the Magdallenian phase and its possible (although this is not clear) contribution to NW European terminal Palaeolithic and Mesolithic groups including those that went to the isles. This is what ‘blood of the Irish’ clung to. However, when progress in the last year made clear that Iberian and indeed all western European forms of R1b are much younger than those in SE Europe and indeed probably not older than 5000 years old (the refugia people spread out about 14000 years ago and the hunter gathers reached even Ireland and Scotland 10000 years ago) then the last saloon for the theory locked it doors.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    Tbh because theres so many ethanices on this island you have to do your tree youself people are always saying everyone on the island are from france and all that but i bet yeh 9 times outta ten most people will do a tree and find they are english, its all false i have yet to do a tree which is not scottish. Everyone sittin there sayin that irish people as a whole are french i think thats a pile of rubbish because i have done a family tree and have gotten back to spain!! Most were scottish which proves my theory that most won't be from mainland europe it makes sense why would your ancestors come from somewhere further away than closer..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    owenc wrote: »
    Tbh because theres so many ethanices on this island you have to do your tree youself people are always saying everyone on the island are from france and all that but i bet yeh 9 times outta ten most people will do a tree and find they are english, its all false i have yet to do a tree which is not scottish. Everyone sittin there sayin that irish people as a whole are french i think thats a pile of rubbish because i have done a family tree and have gotten back to spain!! Most were scottish which proves my theory that most won't be from mainland europe it makes sense why would your ancestors come from somewhere further away than closer..

    You are misleading things by applying modern labels such as national boundaries to a time when those labels didn't exist.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    This story comes from the gigantic collection of Old Irish Legal texts. These collections of texts are gigantic. In modern times they have been collected into a six volume (2371 page) work by Professor Binchy called Corpus Iuris Hibernici. A brief guide to the contents is here on Wikipedia:
    Legal Texts

    There is some extremely interesting stuff in these texts, especially how complex Irish society was at the time (the time is the 7th and 8th centuries). It also contains some of the finest writing of Medieval Europe.

    Anyway, one such story is Ninne who laid claim to a piece of land unintentionally.

    Ninne Mac Magach had went with three companions to (an area which roughly corresponds to what we would call) Ulster to see some friends of theirs. They unharnessed their horses on a piece of land that used to belong to their family several years ago, but they don't know it is ancestral land.

    The guy who owns the land is aware that the land used to belong to Ninne's family. He comes up to Ninne and demands he take his horses of the land. The two companions try to explain they are not claiming the land, however the current owner lets slip that the land is their ancestors and they are in fact claiming the land by letting their horses be unharnessed there, a procedure known at the time as "tellach" or "legal entry" and that is why he wants the horses gone.

    They don't take their horses off, so he drives them off with force. They then appeal to the King of Ulster Conchobar Mac Nessa. He decides that "tellach" was performed even if none of the claiments knew about it, so the poor owner has to compensate them to the value of the price of the land.

    Here is the ending in the original Old Irish:
    Fo.gellsat íarum imbi Conchobor mac Nessa 7 bert-side fíach n-ecair étechtai forsin n-í cartas a n-echu asin tír 7 chomlóg ind í cartas as, 7 do.combaig selba doib a chummai-sin di thelluch.

    I'm too much of a lazy arse to do it now, but in later posts I might put lines I've quoted in Old and Modern Irish, just to give an example of how different the language has become.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    fontanalis wrote: »
    Here is something from the DNA Forums website. The author no longer posts there but it seems he was well respected for his archaeological knowledge.
    Great find fontanalis!
    In relation to the early points in his chronology, there is some interesting archeological and linguistic information. It would appear that most historians believe that the people who built he Dolmens and those who built passage tombs like Newgrange were two seperate cultures. The Dolmens are usually associated with Indo-Europeans culture (their spread throughout Europe matches the most likely spread of the Indo-Europeans in a similar time order).

    So, one proposed timeline for Ireland is:
    1. Original Mesolithic settlement.
    2. Arrival of Indo-Europeans.
    3. (Much Later) Arrival of Celtic culture.

    From a linguistic point of view this leaves an interesting scenario. Originally we have "Old Europeans" living in Ireland. Indo-Europeans arrive with their Dolmen building culture. This means the island could have been divided into Indo-European culture and non-Indo-European culture with a similar division of language. It wasn't until the arrival of Celtic culture that the island was totally Indo-Europeanised.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭Johnmb


    Enkidu wrote: »
    Great find fontanalis!
    In relation to the early points in his chronology, there is some interesting archeological and linguistic information. It would appear that most historians believe that the people who built he Dolmens and those who built passage tombs like Newgrange were two seperate cultures. The Dolmens are usually associated with Indo-Europeans culture (their spread throughout Europe matches the most likely spread of the Indo-Europeans in a similar time order).

    So, one proposed timeline for Ireland is:
    1. Original Mesolithic settlement.
    2. Arrival of Indo-Europeans.
    3. (Much Later) Arrival of Celts.

    From a linguistic point of view this leaves an interesting scenario. Originally we have "Old Europeans" living in Ireland. Indo-Europeans arrive with their Dolmen building culture. This means the island could have been divided into Indo-European culture and non-Indo-European culture with a similar division of language. It wasn't until the arrival of the Celts that the island was totally Indo-Europeanised.
    Big problem here is that there was no arrival of the Celts, just a branch of their language.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    Enkidu wrote: »
    Great find fontanalis!
    In relation to the early points in his chronology, there is some interesting archeological and linguistic information. It would appear that most historians believe that the people who built he Dolmens and those who built passage tombs like Newgrange were two seperate cultures. The Dolmens are usually associated with Indo-Europeans culture (their spread throughout Europe matches the most likely spread of the Indo-Europeans in a similar time order).

    So, one proposed timeline for Ireland is:
    1. Original Mesolithic settlement.
    2. Arrival of Indo-Europeans.
    3. (Much Later) Arrival of Celts.

    From a linguistic point of view this leaves an interesting scenario. Originally we have "Old Europeans" living in Ireland. Indo-Europeans arrive with their Dolmen building culture. This means the island could have been divided into Indo-European culture and non-Indo-European culture with a similar division of language. It wasn't until the arrival of the Celts that the island was totally Indo-Europeanised.

    Would the wide spread nature of R1b (along with findings of it's more recent age) suggest that the original Mesolithic population was quite low in number?
    One DNA haplogroup that pops up at a low level and which likely isn't attributable to the Normans (some of whom may have carried it) is one falling under I which is common around Scandanavia and ties in with the comment made regarding a North Sea origin for the orignal settlers made by the author of the post I pasted. Apparently a lot of people with the family name McCartan and McGuiness fall under this haplogroup. Some Irish researchers try to tie this to the cruithne, who apparently were supposed to be based around the Roscommon area, and isn't there some passage tombs in this region which may be quite old and then there's the ceide fields not too far away (probably too much speculation there).
    What is known about the cruithne (from what I read the term has been romaticised much like Pict and Celt)?
    Regarding Newgrange and passage tombs, there's a historian/archaeologist at Oxford called Barry Cunliffe who is big into the idea of the Atlantic seaboard playing a big part for trade and travelling etc; I think he claims that passage tombs along the Atlantic fringe of Europe (and even a bit inland on mainland Europe) can be traced to basic middens burials on the Northern Coast of Portugal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    Johnmb wrote: »
    Big problem here is that there was no arrival of the Celts, just a branch of their language.
    :eek:Sorry, yes of course you are right. Previous post edited. Only Celtic language and culture arrived. That's what you get for typing a post out too fast.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 nPlusOne


    fontanalis wrote: »
    I think he claims that passage tombs along the Atlantic fringe of Europe (and even a bit inland on mainland Europe) can be traced to basic middens burials on the Northern Coast of Portugal.

    The culture comes from North Africa, before the northern sahara dried up and became a desert, it was the garden of Eden. After the change in climate the survivors migrated east and created the tomb culture of Egypt.

    Separate migrations north in to Iberia spread the culture through Europe. The settlement of Stonehenge was created by colonials who entered through the Severn estuary.

    The tomb cultures of Egypt and Europe have a dead common ancestor in North Africa (Eden). Another migration from Eden went south and the remnants of it can be found in northern Cameroon(R1B).

    http://www.jihsin.com/manufacturers/information-technology/the-sahara-wasn%E2%80%99t-always-a-desert.html

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/ba9VK4iRQUybd1KMGnRimQ


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    nPlusOne wrote: »
    The culture comes from North Africa, before the northern sahara dried up and became a desert, it was the garden of Eden. After the change in climate the survivors migrated east and created the tomb culture of Egypt.

    Separate migrations north in to Iberia spread the culture through Europe. The settlement of Stonehenge was created by colonials who entered through the Severn estuary.

    The tomb cultures of Egypt and Europe have a dead common ancestor in North Africa (Eden). Another migration from Eden went south and the remnants of it can be found in northern Cameroon(R1B).

    http://www.jihsin.com/manufacturers/information-technology/the-sahara-wasn%E2%80%99t-always-a-desert.html

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/ba9VK4iRQUybd1KMGnRimQ

    Aside from the fact that the passage tombs predate the pyramids by at least 1000 years, egypt was already populated by people by the time you say the sahara began, and I dont see how you managed to link the sahara to the eden. The last link shows some cows.. um?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭Johnmb


    nPlusOne wrote: »
    The culture comes from North Africa, before the northern sahara dried up and became a desert, it was the garden of Eden. After the change in climate the survivors migrated east and created the tomb culture of Egypt.

    Separate migrations north in to Iberia spread the culture through Europe. The settlement of Stonehenge was created by colonials who entered through the Severn estuary.

    The tomb cultures of Egypt and Europe have a dead common ancestor in North Africa (Eden). Another migration from Eden went south and the remnants of it can be found in northern Cameroon(R1B).

    http://www.jihsin.com/manufacturers/information-technology/the-sahara-wasn%E2%80%99t-always-a-desert.html

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/ba9VK4iRQUybd1KMGnRimQ
    There may be a fiction forum on Boards, I'm not sure. But this is a History forum, so either back up your claims (neither link provided does that), or post the fiction elsewhere.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    nPlusOne wrote: »
    The culture comes from North Africa, before the northern sahara dried up and became a desert, it was the garden of Eden. After the change in climate the survivors migrated east and created the tomb culture of Egypt.

    Separate migrations north in to Iberia spread the culture through Europe. The settlement of Stonehenge was created by colonials who entered through the Severn estuary.

    The tomb cultures of Egypt and Europe have a dead common ancestor in North Africa (Eden). Another migration from Eden went south and the remnants of it can be found in northern Cameroon(R1B).

    http://www.jihsin.com/manufacturers/information-technology/the-sahara-wasn%E2%80%99t-always-a-desert.html

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/ba9VK4iRQUybd1KMGnRimQ

    I thought the garden of eden was in Iraq or Iran.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 nPlusOne


    It is accepted by contemporary archaeologists that the people of the sahara, in question, migrated east and formed the first tomb building civilization in Egypt. The cows reference says that cows where first domesticated in North Africa.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 nPlusOne


    Did you post that response to every poster in this thread that mentions history by referencing fairy tales?
    1. Bizarre R1B populations live in North Cameroon FACT
    2. Stonehenge created by people using boats, transporting stone from Welsh Coast FACT
    3. DNA of some Ancient Europeans comes from North Africa, Haplogroup E's migration into Europe through the levant corridor. FACT
    4. Eden, the landscape of the lush north African plains was like a garden of eden.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 nPlusOne


    The Bible is not always literal translation of history, the bible openly uses parables and metaphors to explain concepts, have you not read the book of revelations where the prophet does not understand the signs and symbols, an angel has to decrypt the metaphors. Genesis is allegorical.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 nPlusOne


    The DNA Project use Adam & Eve as references to the first people, I use Eden as a reference to the diaspora from the sahara.


  • Registered Users Posts: 132 ✭✭Mervyn Crawford


    Fontanalis

    Would you have time to give the link to the piece you qouted on page 13?

    "Here is something from the DNA Forums website. The author no longer posts there but it seems he was well respected for his archaeological knowledge.



    It’s not surprising that you are having trouble with the Iberian idea. Its nonsense. It’s been rejected by archaeologists, historians, classicists, Celtic studies experts, linguists etc for several decades. It is essentially based on nothing but the Irish invasion legends. The latter were written by monks writing in a classical tradition whereby a history or ethnology is put together by trying to connect tribes and places with similar names and linking them. Often when modern linguists look at them the etymology is completely nonsensical. In the case of the Milesian myth the word linking was Hibernia=Iberia, Scoti=Scythia etc etc. The legend is full of people given names to represent ancient names for the Irish - Goidel Glass (Goidel-Gael), an Egyptian princess 'Scota' or similar.

    ............"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭Johnmb


    nPlusOne wrote: »
    It is accepted by contemporary archaeologists that the people of the sahara, in question, migrated east and formed the first tomb building civilization in Egypt. The cows reference says that cows where first domesticated in North Africa.
    And where is your reference for this? Who are these "contemporary archaeologists"?
    Bizarre R1B populations live in North Cameroon FACT
    Reference?
    Stonehenge created by people using boats, transporting stone from Welsh Coast FACT
    Reference?
    DNA of some Ancient Europeans comes from North Africa, Haplogroup E's migration into Europe through the levant corridor. FACT
    Reference?
    The DNA Project use Adam & Eve as references to the first people, I use Eden as a reference to the diaspora from the sahara.
    No actually, Adam and Eve are not used as reference to the first people. Mitochondrial Eve is used to reference the most recent female from who all modern people share her Mt DNA, and Y-Chrosome Adam is the most recent male from where all modern men share their Y-Chromosomes. Nowhere near being the first people, and they were not contemporary with each other.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    Fontanalis

    Would you have time to give the link to the piece you qouted on page 13?

    "Here is something from the DNA Forums website. The author no longer posts there but it seems he was well respected for his archaeological knowledge.



    It’s not surprising that you are having trouble with the Iberian idea. Its nonsense. It’s been rejected by archaeologists, historians, classicists, Celtic studies experts, linguists etc for several decades. It is essentially based on nothing but the Irish invasion legends. The latter were written by monks writing in a classical tradition whereby a history or ethnology is put together by trying to connect tribes and places with similar names and linking them. Often when modern linguists look at them the etymology is completely nonsensical. In the case of the Milesian myth the word linking was Hibernia=Iberia, Scoti=Scythia etc etc. The legend is full of people given names to represent ancient names for the Irish - Goidel Glass (Goidel-Gael), an Egyptian princess 'Scota' or similar.

    ............"

    Below is the link, you will have to sign up to the forum to view it though. It's about half way down. You can see it was quoted by someone else as the author removed his own posts.

    http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/6561-gaels-and-l21/page__hl__goidel__st__40


  • Registered Users Posts: 132 ✭✭Mervyn Crawford


    fontanalis

    thanks very much for that.

    I've only been able to give this thread a skim; but I think it's very interesting to analyse this issue (prehistorically and historically.)

    Maybe another title for this thread could be 'The first "Irish" people'?.

    Zoologists warn against anthropomorphising non-human animal life.

    Just as historians warn against 'Nationalising' the history of our our little geographical territory?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    The R1b found in Cameroon is a different branch of R1b, there are multiple sub-branches as can be seen on the Haplogroup Tree for R.
    http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

    The Western European R1b is mostly made up of the P312 clade (R1b1b2a1a2). African R1b is marked by the V88 clade (R1b1a)

    This points that both shared a comman male ancestor at a very early stage. V88 isn't found in Europe apart from in recent immigrants and is tied with the expansion of the Chadic languages in Africa.

    Within P312 there are several distinct subclades. The most common in Ireland is L21 (R1b1b2a1a2f) which is found from Ireland in the west to Austria in the east (very common in France). It's been postulated that the expansion of L21 is tied with that of Celtic languages. In Ireland there are a number of sub-clades of L21 that are tied to specific Irish septs/tribes.

    For example M222 (R1b1b2a1a2f2) is tied to the Uí Neill and the Uí Briúin and the Uí Fiachra which are both branches of the ancient Connachta (supposedly descended from the half brothers Niall,Brion and Fiachra).

    L226 (R1b1b2a1a2f4) appears to be the signature of the Dál gCais, it's reported in men who bear Dál gCais surnames including "The O'Brien" (Baron Inchiquin)

    I myself am just plain old L21* I haven't tested positive for any of the let discovered sub-clades under L21.

    Germanic R1b is mostly in another P312 clade. This is S28/U152 (R1b1b2a1a2d) which has a very high incidence in the Netherlands. The other major haplogroup among the Germanics is I2b which is interesting as linguists often consider that Germanic languages has been heavily influenced by a non Indo-European language.

    In Ireland 90% of men are R1b most of remaining 10% belong to haplogroup I specificially I1 which appears to be that of the pre-celtic speaking male population. Irish men who are I2b are showing potential Germanic ancestory (be that viking/Norman/English/Palatine German)

    Some have postulated that the Centum/Satem spilt in Indo-European languages are connected with difference between R1a and R1b. For example most Satem language populations are high in R1a (slavic/baltic/Indic/Iranic) whereas R1b is high in Centum languages (Celtic/Germanic/Italic)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    dubhthach wrote: »
    The R1b found in Cameroon is a different branch of R1b, there are multiple sub-branches as can be seen on the Haplogroup Tree for R.
    http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

    The Western European R1b is mostly made up of the P312 clade (R1b1b2a1a2). African R1b is marked by the V88 clade (R1b1a)

    This points that both shared a comman male ancestor at a very early stage. V88 isn't found in Europe apart from in recent immigrants and is tied with the expansion of the Chadic languages in Africa.

    Within P312 there are several distinct subclades. The most common in Ireland is L21 (R1b1b2a1a2f) which is found from Ireland in the west to Austria in the east (very common in France). It's been postulated that the expansion of L21 is tied with that of Celtic languages. In Ireland there are a number of sub-clades of L21 that are tied to specific Irish septs/tribes.

    For example M222 (R1b1b2a1a2f2) is tied to the Uí Neill and the Uí Briúin and the Uí Fiachra which are both branches of the ancient Connachta (supposedly descended from the half brothers Niall,Brion and Fiachra).

    L226 (R1b1b2a1a2f4) appears to be the signature of the Dál gCais, it's reported in men who bear Dál gCais surnames including "The O'Brien" (Baron Inchiquin)

    I myself am just plain old L21* I haven't tested positive for any of the let discovered sub-clades under L21.

    Germanic R1b is mostly in another P312 clade. This is S28/U152 (R1b1b2a1a2d) which has a very high incidence in the Netherlands. The other major haplogroup among the Germanics is I2b which is interesting as linguists often consider that Germanic languages has been heavily influenced by a non Indo-European language.

    In Ireland 90% of men are R1b most of remaining 10% belong to haplogroup I specificially I1 which appears to be that of the pre-celtic speaking male population. Irish men who are I2b are showing potential Germanic ancestory (be that viking/Norman/English/Palatine German)

    Some have postulated that the Centum/Satem spilt in Indo-European languages are connected with difference between R1a and R1b. For example most Satem language populations are high in R1a (slavic/baltic/Indic/Iranic) whereas R1b is high in Centum languages (Celtic/Germanic/Italic)

    Isn't there also a grouping which appears mainly on the East Coast? I sent my sample to 23 and me a few weeks ago, hopefully on a few weeks I'll get it back.
    R1b is oh my god like so 2005; E or J would be good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    fontanalis wrote: »
    Isn't there also a grouping which appears mainly on the East Coast? I sent my sample to 23 and me a few weeks ago, hopefully on a few weeks I'll get it back.
    R1b is oh my god like so 2005; E or J would be good.

    Well when it comes to Y-Chromosome STR (short tandem repeats) there are a number of Irish clusters. So far at least two of these clusters have been tied to SNP (Single-nucleotide polymorphism) such as M222 or L226.

    All of these clusters as far as I know are L21 here's a list that I know of:
    • Uí Neill cluster (M222) -- Irish Northwestern Modal
    • Dal gCais cluster (L226) -- Irish Type III cluster
    • Laigin Cluster (no distinct SNP let)
    • South Irish cluster (no distinct SNP let)
    • Airghialla cluster (no distinct SNP let)

    Someone who is in say the Uí Neill cluster will have STR markings close to this: M5UKQ

    If they then did SNP testing would probably show them as M222+, 23andme doesn't test for STR's but for SNP's so depending on list of SNP's on their chip you might be able to get quite exact data on your y-chromosome.

    I've tested with Familytreedna, have results of over 95 STR's but I don't have any matches in their database with anyone within the last 6 generations, I also don't belong to any clusters. As part of my testing I've done deep clade SNP testing. Which has shown I'm just L21+
    P312+ L21+ M222- M37- P66- L96- L130- L144- L159.2- L192- L193- L195- L226- P314.2- L9- L10-, L69-

    I've also did a test with 23andme in early december and should hopefully get the result by the end of the week. Good thing about 23andme is they do testing on your autosomal DNA (all 23 pairs not just the X/Y) as well as Mitochondrial (female line).

    There's a very interesting project been run called "The Dodecad project" where they take your 23andme raw data and tell you the exact break down of your autosomal DNA (population admixture). For example the Irish members (8) of project break down on average as:
    Northern European: 64.9%
    Southern European: 26.7%
    West Asian: 7.8%
    South Asian: 0.6%

    Image (click for bigger)
    Irish_D_10.png

    Regarding haplogroup E and J those would be quite exotic in an Irish context, E is generally linked with Africans and Southern Europeans whereas J is extremely comon among Semetic population (Jews/arabs). As an Irish person if you don't test R1b highest probability would be haplogroup I. It does look that some names associated with the ruling families of the Ulad/Dál nAraide/Cruithne are haplogroup I.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Well when it comes to Y-Chromosome STR (short tandem repeats) there are a number of Irish clusters. So far at least two of these clusters have been tied to SNP (Single-nucleotide polymorphism) such as M222 or L226.


    All of these clusters as far as I know are L21 here's a list that I know of:
    • Uí Neill cluster (M222) -- Irish Northwestern Modal
    • Dal gCais cluster (L226) -- Irish Type III cluster
    • Laigin Cluster (no distinct SNP let)
    • South Irish cluster (no distinct SNP let)
    • Airghialla cluster (no distinct SNP let)
    Someone who is in say the Uí Neill cluster will have STR markings close to this: M5UKQ

    If they then did SNP testing would probably show them as M222+, 23andme doesn't test for STR's but for SNP's so depending on list of SNP's on their chip you might be able to get quite exact data on your y-chromosome.

    I've tested with Familytreedna, have results of over 95 STR's but I don't have any matches in their database with anyone within the last 6 generations, I also don't belong to any clusters. As part of my testing I've done deep clade SNP testing. Which has shown I'm just L21+



    I've also did a test with 23andme in early december and should hopefully get the result by the end of the week. Good thing about 23andme is they do testing on your autosomal DNA (all 23 pairs not just the X/Y) as well as Mitochondrial (female line).

    There's a very interesting project been run called "The Dodecad project" where they take your 23andme raw data and tell you the exact break down of your autosomal DNA (population admixture). For example the Irish members (8) of project break down on average as:
    Northern European: 64.9%
    Southern European: 26.7%
    West Asian: 7.8%
    South Asian: 0.6%

    Image (click for bigger)
    Irish_D_10.png

    Regarding haplogroup E and J those would be quite exotic in an Irish context, E is generally linked with Africans and Southern Europeans whereas J is extremely comon among Semetic population (Jews/arabs). As an Irish person if you don't test R1b highest probability would be haplogroup I. It does look that some names associated with the ruling families of the Ulad/Dál nAraide/Cruithne are haplogroup I.

    That Dodecast is by that Greek blogger Dienekes isn't it?
    I'd expect my results to be M222; as my surname originated in Galway (like you said earlier the range of M222 goes beyond the UiNiall).
    Is there a point where the irish clusters intersect? A common ancestor outside of Ireland, if you will.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    fontanalis wrote: »
    That Dodecast is by that Greek blogger Dienekes isn't it?
    I'd expect my results to be M222; as my surname originated in Galway (like you said earlier the range of M222 goes beyond the UiNiall).
    Is there a point where the irish clusters intersect? A common ancestor outside of Ireland, if you will.

    Well if all of the clusters are L21+ (if you are M222+ you are automatically L21+) then they would have shared a common ancestor who was first to carry the L21 snp. L21 has been reported in France and over as far as Austria. However problem with alot of amateur genetic testing that most people getting test are Americans. The three biggest ancestral groups for white americans are the: Germans, Irish, British.

    Until testing becomes more common in Europe (including Ireland) it's going to be hard to get a broader view. Currently the picture is alot more detailed then it was 5 years ago. Back then the major SNP groups in R1b hadn't been discovered. I can imagine that in 5 more years that our imagine of the Haplogroup tree will be even more different.

    M222 is a good example of "dominant male replacement". In that you could get a small population of warrior invaders who due to higher social standing (been conquerors) end up swamping the local male population over multiple generations. What happens is they have more male children who survive to adulthood. A good example given on M222 is that one of the Kings of Tír Chonnail in the 15th century (Ó Domhnaill) had 15 surviving male children from 3-4wives.

    As a result 1 in 6 Irish men carry M222 even though it's only believed to have arisen about 1700-2000 years ago.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Well if all of the clusters are L21+ (if you are M222+ you are automatically L21+) then they would have shared a common ancestor who was first to carry the L21 snp. L21 has been reported in France and over as far as Austria. However problem with alot of amateur genetic testing that most people getting test are Americans. The three biggest ancestral groups for white americans are the: Germans, Irish, British.

    Until testing becomes more common in Europe (including Ireland) it's going to be hard to get a broader view. Currently the picture is alot more detailed then it was 5 years ago. Back then the major SNP groups in R1b hadn't been discovered. I can imagine that in 5 more years that our imagine of the Haplogroup tree will be even more different.

    M222 is a good example of "dominant male replacement". In that you could get a small population of warrior invaders who due to higher social standing (been conquerors) end up swamping the local male population over multiple generations. What happens is they have more male children who survive to adulthood. A good example given on M222 is that one of the Kings of Tír Chonnail in the 15th century (Ó Domhnaill) had 15 surviving male children from 3-4wives.

    As a result 1 in 6 Irish men carry M222 even though it's only believed to have arisen about 1700-2000 years ago.

    It's basically an Irish Genghis Khan effect isn't it?
    Doesn't this also pose problems for future testing within Ireland? You gave an example of one king with 15 sons; if there isn't a "filter" inplace to take account of these instances won't the results be skewed in favour of these male lines?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    fontanalis wrote: »
    It's basically an Irish Genghis Khan effect isn't it?
    Doesn't this also pose problems for future testing within Ireland? You gave an example of one king with 15 sons; if there isn't a "filter" inplace to take account of these instances won't the results be skewed in favour of these male lines?

    The Genghis Khan effect indeed. Niall is generally ranked up there with him in this regard. However more then likely he isn't the originater given that families with other Connachta "dynasties" carry M222 as well (Uí Briúin, Uí Fiachra). One funny thing about M222 that most people don't know is that a very high proportion of O'Neill's (surname not dynastic group) aren't M222. It would seem there was a NPE (non-paternal event) occured sometime between the 12th and 14th century.

    TBH the ruling dynasties of "Gaelic Ireland" are always going to be well represented. What potentially might happen in the future is that a new SNP is found that divides M222. For example there might be one that is only found in M222 men who have names connected with the Uí Briúin (O'Connor, O'Rourke, O'Malley, O'Flaherty etc.) so it's still worthwhile to test men who are M222. I think one thing that would be good is if we have more testing from people bearing "minor" names. What I mean is names that are not connected to kings etc. (my name would be an example: Duffy).

    Here's an image from 2006 regarding Niall's purported STR signature. As you can see it reaches a peak in around Inishowen and in Connacht (Uí Briúin)
    ireland470.645.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    I think I read somewhere that there are two O'Neill lineages; the "main" one and a Southern one. This ties in with your non parental event; probably down to someone adopting it due to allegiances etc
    You mentioned the cruithne earlier; I read somewhere that they had links around Roscommon. Isn't this also the rough region where the Connachta hailed from?
    What is known about the cruithne; anything I've read always seems to tie them to the Picts and also to p-celtic speaking groups. Also who were the Connachta and what kind of background did they claim?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    I think people get abit too hung up on the P/Q celtic divide. Looking at Welsh now obviously it seems quite alien compared to Irish but when you understand the orthographical differences you can see words that have common meanings. They reckon that the spilt between Irish and Welsh could be about 2,500 years, given that neither was written for a further 1,000 years it's not surprising that they look different, but in sense the basic P/Q divide is like the "High German" shift. For example Dutch only shifted th ->d but it didn't do for example d -> t (English: day, Dutch: Dag, German: Tag) or t -> ss (english that, German dass

    As for Cruithne I can't really comment as I don't know enough though the medieval Dal nAirde are purported to be their successors. If they had originally been p-celtic then they had undergone language shift. Given the closeness of the two languages at the time this wouldn't have been too hard (lot easier then shifting Irish to English for example).

    The Connachta if you believe the ancient Genealogists are descended from Conn Cétchathach (Conn of the 100 battles). Who supposedly lived in the 2nd century around the time of Marcus Aurelis and who ruled the northern half of Ireland (line from Galway to Dublin) as Leath Cuinn (Conn's half). The southern half (leath Mugh) been ruled by the ancestor of the Éoganacht: Mug Nuadat

    However alot of Irish history at this stage is purely conjucture if not outright mythology in it's own way. It would seem that the history books were rewritten by the Uí Neill for dynastic propaganda.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    dubhthach wrote: »
    I think people get abit too hung up on the P/Q celtic divide. Looking at Welsh now obviously it seems quite alien compared to Irish but when you understand the orthographical differences you can see words that have common meanings. They reckon that the spilt between Irish and Welsh could be about 2,500 years, given that neither was written for a further 1,000 years it's not surprising that they look different, but in sense the basic P/Q divide is like the "High German" shift. For example Dutch only shifted th ->d but it didn't do for example d -> t (English: day, Dutch: Dag, German: Tag) or t -> ss (english that, German dass

    As for Cruithne I can't really comment as I don't know enough though the medieval Dal nAirde are purported to be their successors. If they had originally been p-celtic then they had undergone language shift. Given the closeness of the two languages at the time this wouldn't have been too hard (lot easier then shifting Irish to English for example).

    The Connachta if you believe the ancient Genealogists are descended from Conn Cétchathach (Conn of the 100 battles). Who supposedly lived in the 2nd century around the time of Marcus Aurelis and who ruled the northern half of Ireland (line from Galway to Dublin) as Leath Cuinn (Conn's half). The southern half (leath Mugh) been ruled by the ancestor of the Éoganacht: Mug Nuadat

    However alot of Irish history at this stage is purely conjucture if not outright mythology in it's own way. It would seem that the history books were rewritten by the Uí Neill for dynastic propaganda.

    Is there any truth to the charge that they moved the seat of the high king to Tara from a more western location?


Advertisement