Military, for very respectfully. ? On the go, sent from my iPhone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Aug 12, 2021, at 21:27, Rusty Sullivan <gunshipfco@...> wrote:
? Roy,
Just curious (and way off topic), where did you pick up using ¡°v/r¡± in your emails? On Aug 12, 2021, at 20:51, Roy Walker via groups.io <walkerjeep@...> wrote:
?
My email is walkerjeep@...? ? I'm not sure which results you are asking for specifically for the the Big y test?
v/r Roy
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 08:16:12 PM EDT, O'Brien, Neil <neil.obrien@...> wrote:
Hi Pat and Roy,
?
Can you send me screenshots of your FTDNA view of FT38151.
?
The direction of your ancestral line follows the following path CTS4466/S1136 > S1115 > FGC84010 >
A541 > S1121 > Z16251 > Z18170 > FGC29280 > S1126 > S1129¡./ FT38151
?
Given that FT38151 is a child block of CTS4466/R-A541/R-S1121, your deep ancestry is in Southwest Ireland. That¡¯s definite ¨C R-A541 formed in Munster ¨C end of story.
?
You are also positive for Z16251, which snip is indicative for many of the modern surnames of southwest Ireland, which are understood to be major branches of the eponymous E¨®ganacht dynasty of Munster.
In the next snip down, Z18170 ¨C many major Munster surnames are still found.
FGC29291 seems to be the snip location where migration out of the core homeland begins to happen on your branch tree, if one is to follow the track of modern
surnames.
At block S1126 the Howies and Coldwells are still grouped with typical South Western
regional surnames like O¡¯Leary and of course McCarthy. Alex Williamson dates the MRCA of this snip block to a median of 878 years before present, so to around the 12th Century or so. However I seem to recall that YBP (years before present) is generally
rounded off to 1950, so this could perhaps be pushed back another 70 years.
I¡¯m not sure what basis Alex uses for estimating snip formation, and the MRCA, but to me the snip aging sounds a bit short of the mark for
block S1126. The child block FT38151 (your block), and it¡¯s sibling A726, have 10 and 9 downstream snips respectively, so arguably block S1126 could have
had a common ancestor be at least 200++ years older than estimated. However who am I to argue with Alex Williamson!
Which or whether block S1126 is just at the dawn of genealogical time, and perhaps just before, surname adoption in Ireland which began in earnest in the 11th
Century by order (I believe) of the Irish High King Brian Boru.
?
<image001.png>
?
FT38151 is the ancestral snip common to both the Coldwells and Howies (just to round off the spellings) (your branch). It¡¯s sibling block A726 appears to remain
at home in the Munster homeland. O¡¯Leary is an obvious Cork surname, and Cotter is a likely Anglicisation of MacCoitir, an minor Irish Sept also found in Cork.
Now to your unique branch. At first glance there is clearly a duel parallel surname type in
FT38151, split between Howies and Coldwells.
Surname Howie is clearly Ulster in origin ¨C at first glance an obvious Anglicised corruption of O h-Eochaidh, and indeed one kit is named Haughey ¨C the direct etymological translation
of O h-Eochaidh.
The block circled in red below are Howies (FGC36625). The block circled in green below are Caldwells (FT41075 - with an obvious quite recent NPE in 875867 Walker).
The third block of
FT38151 is a combination of Howies and Coldwells (still standardising the spelling for convience). There are 5 kits in all here, 3 Coldwells and two Howies.
None of these 5 kits have matched downstream, so the branching of these surname types await suitable future matches to create new downstream snip blocks. For now they branch straight off the parent block FT38151, and their respective downstream snips are private
snips until a matcher comes along individually for each of the 5.
<image002.png>
McLysaght, Ireland¡¯s Chief Herald, notes that the name Caldwell is common in Ulster, and is often seen as an Anglicisation not of O h-Eochaidh, but of ? h-Uarghuis (roughly pronounced
phonetically as Ohargush), ? h-Uairisce (Tyrone) (again roughly Ohurshka) and Mac Conluain (Cavan (pronounced macconloon). It¡¯s therefore difficult to state clearly whether the Coldwell branch, in origin, is of recent Gaelic Irish descent, or brewed in the
long boiling pot of Ulster and Scottish migrations back and forth.
The Griffith¡¯s Valuations taken in the Mid 19th Century map the number of Coldwell households in Ireland, and the majority are centred on Ulster.
Some of these are of undoubted Scottish or English surname origin, but many are also Irish Gaelic surnames garbled into English during Anglicisation. Given the CTS4466 origin of your surname, if I was a betting man your branch is an Anglicised surname type
for both surnames:-
<image003.png>
Finally I¡¯m going to look at all of the kit numbers of FT38151, and see if I can build a template ySTR pattern. Taking this template I¡¯ll look at the Coldwell,
Haughey and Hoey FTDNA projects (if they exist) to see if we can map out other likely matches to FT38151 extrapolating from these modern surnames.
It has been remarked that ySTRs are not of significance, but in my experience they are vitally invaluable for building a haplogroup model for kits with basic
snip testing, once the initial upstream parent snip has been discovered. There is often a clear correlation between snip formation and STR mutations. How else, for example, would haplotype CTS4466 have been discovered 20 years ago, before next generation sequencing
came on board in the last 10 years.
Therefore it is absolutely possible to build a profile once you know the modern surname and have some indication of the immediate upstream snips. Once you
build the template you can begin to build up a clear picture of a haplogroup without any risk of convergence or divergence, and it is possible to map this information to other surname types as well, but not necessarily as efficiently. I¡¯m afraid, if I can
be rather critical, many project Administrators have underestimated this ¡®back to basics¡¯ approach. It¡¯s time consuming, but it does bear results.
That¡¯s all for now. Do send me your direct email addresses and also screenshots of your BigY results. Alex Williamson¡¯s tree does not always have the same
amount of data posted as found on FTDNA, which is to be regretted ¨C we really need testers to openly publish their results for all to see, not just FTDNA kit owners.
Best,
Neil
?
?
?
Thanks much, this has been enlightening for me.??
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 01:12:33 PM EDT, O'Brien, Neil <neil.obrien@...> wrote:
In that case your closest relative on the phylogenetic tree is kit no.
875867 Caldwell, which is an NPE is the last 200-400+ years, based on the number of snips and depending on the speed of snip mutation in your line (and I obviously can¡¯t see the number of private snips).
?
FT38151 is 10 snips back in time, but the line splits into 3 branches only about 3 or 4 snips back in time, which is well within the
modern genealogical period. I¡¯d suggest that you contact your FT38151 cousins and see if a couple of you can purchase a BAM file and get the snips properly aged on yFull. Then you¡¯ll be able to get a resolution on the splitting of the line in a more accurate
timeframe.
Given that you¡¯re CTS4466/..A541..
S1121+ positive, this would suggest a probable deep ancestry in the Munster region.
Best,
Neil
?
?
?
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 12:52:59 PM EDT, O'Brien, Neil <neil.obrien@...>
wrote:
I¡¯ve actually just realised, besides misspelling ¡®series¡¯, that I have managed to contradict myself below. Looking
at Alex¡¯s tree for your snip line, it is clear that the Cauldwell/Hoey split is a relatively recent one in genealogical time, if you count the snips. I¡¯m presuming your kit no. 906045 below? Your surname mismatch to Caldwell/Hoey etc is probably a fairly recent
NPE.
?
<image004.png>
Best,
?
Neil
?
?
From:
O'Brien, Neil
Sent: Thursday 12 August 2021 17:37
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] FGC84010>A663 from Wales to Meath / Westmeath
?
Hi Roy,
?
Goodness, 117 y111 matches ¨C that¡¯s seriously impressive, but doesn¡¯t sound right. I only have one. Normally a y111
sorts out the mismatches due to convergence and divergence, on particular markers, that give false matches.
?
It is possible to spot haplotypes on ySTRs and predict what snips they might be positive for by doing detailed analysis
on a serious of ySTR matchers, but it¡¯s pretty labour intensive work to be honest.
?
A 10 step mismatch to John is really at the absolute outer scale of having a recent MRCA, even at y111 a 101/111
is seriously out, unless you can spot a definite pattern on the markers.
?
The snips are king, however. You¡¯ve reported your haplotype as FT41075, which is CTS4466/S1136 > S1115 > FGC84010
> A541 > S1121 > Z16251 > Z18170 > FGC29280 > S1126 > S1129.
?
A541, Irish type 2, has 3 parallel upstream blocks, which are all around 1500+ years old (it possibly has more
now, I haven¡¯t been keeping up to date of late):-
?
S1121+
1135+
A151+
?
?
John is A151+ positive, and you are S1121+ positive. ?This split happened long before the Ui Liathain and outward
CTS4466 colonisation in South Wales.
?
Modern surnames are of absolutely no significance in terms of discussing ancient DNA and establishing NPEs, as surnames
didn¡¯t exist until genealogical time. However surnames found in modern men can be indicative of ancient origin, but I think to be honest this is really stretching generalities. The only evidence is data.
?
The data from your line is interesting, because 3 branches of FT38151 have two of the same surname types, Caldwell/Coldwell/Colwell
and Hoey. Howay, Hughey etc. This can¡¯t be an NPE in genealogical time, and it seems clear to me, at any rate, that there is a philological common origin for the modern surnames Hoey and Caldwell. ?Mr Walker is the exception.
?
Based on Alex Williamson¡¯s tree below, it looks to me that your common snip block, FT38151, formed just inside genealogical
time, after 1200 or so. It also looks like the branching in FGC36625 and FT41075 are relatively recent, possible in the last few hundred years. It looks to be that there was either an odd Anglicisation of O h-Eochaidh surname, or else one branch of the same
family took the name Coldwell, or else there is an NPE split.
?
<image004.png>
?
?
Best,
?
Neil
?
?
I'm just going to jump in because I get lost quickly following some of this conversation.?
What is the average amount of 111 matches?? I have 117 with the closet being at 4 steps, but one at 5 steps with
the same Haplogroup of FT41075.? I also just realized that Mr. Brazil is a match at 10.
The majority of "close" matches are of the Caldwell surname.? Is there a likelihood of an NPE somewhere or is this
still far enough back before surnames became a thing?
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 11:41:57 AM EDT, john brazil <johnkbrazil@...>
wrote:
And I am sure you are aware Ed that Teague as a surname comes ultimately from the Irish given name Tadgh but also
came to be used as a slang term for an Irish person. It is still used, derogatively, as Taig, to describe Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland and Scotland by a section of their populations.?
?
I like Elizabeth using ¡°cluster¡± in her recent reply. ? ?Also John provides great insight on surname history. ?
?
The time and # of generation horizons makes logical analyses dynamic and uncertain. ? ?My true surname was Sullivan,
in part because my grandpa was orphaned and Irish immigrant men wouldn¡¯t get hired.
At 111 markers I have 30 matches, including many in avSouth Irish Sullivan cluster, and several Keith¡¯s. ? ?The
L21 match reflects Cornwall/Devon origins. ? ?One CTS4466 has Jewish links to the Azores and Portugal.
Also, across all panels Teague is a surname among several panels.
<image001.png> <image004.png> <image003.png> <image002.png>
|
