The Big Tree () has the R-U106 branch that my Kincaid are part of (R-A321) as being separated from its parent snp R-FGC12993 by 18 mutations or 1494 years (18x83 years per snp) which takes us back 2000 years since Kincaids only emerge in records in Scotland in 1425 CE.? Ftdna has R-A321 breaking off from R-FGC12993 about 311 CE and R-FGC12993 in turn breaking off from R-S5245 about 86 CE.? R-FGC12993's brother clades R-S5627 (Sinclair, Cummings, Hepner, Ruff, Rechel, Foote, Sutherland), R-Y8604 (Pavlovich, Pearce, Locke, Bledsoe, Wildey, Lassiter, Wookey, Sprouse/Prowse, Winzenburg, Knight, Stewart, and Prince), R-A7946 (Ward, Becker, Derkman), and R-BY190868 (Rosen, Carpenter) ftdna has all breaking off from R-S5245 at the same time - about 86 CE.

?

Sub R-FGC12993 we have R-F22233 (Coles, Carlill, Smith, Johnson, Parsons) breaking off from R-FGC12993 around 311 CE and R-FGC12988 (Phelps, Foisset-a n.p.e., Wheadon, Dean, Skinner, Frenckinck, and Schw?n) at the same time.? Notice that all these parallel branches have more than one surname associated with it.? Kincaids have no other surname associated with it and seem to have a 1400 year gap in its history.? The reason for this post is to get other thoughts on this gap and a possible explanation - in particular Dr. Iain McDonald's.

?

First of all, I assume that the gap and lack of other associated surnames suggest isolation.? Is this a valid assumption?

?

If indeed isolation I should point out that old local histories have pointed out that the part of Campsie parish in Stirlingshire, Scotland that the Kincaid lands (which all of R-A321 Kincaids took their name from) was considered off the beaten track.? These lands were held by the Earl of Lennox and his Lennox predecessors for 200 years before the Earl of Lennox was executed and forfeit for treason in 1424 CE.? This is the year before Kincaids emerge.? So either the Kincaids either emerged because they, as former vassals to the Earl of Lennox, now became tenants to the king or because the king granted them to the Kincaids (who lived elsewhere) some of the forfeited lands.? However, wouldn't the fact that there is no trace of them elsewhere dna wise negate the latter case?? Wouldn't isolation suggest more a case of being elevated in status due to the 1424 forfeiture of the earl of Lennox?

?

If so, there is a possible explanation supported by local history and an ancient DNA; namely VK389 from Skein, Telemark, Norway.? VK389 was a 10th century Viking of the above noted haplogroup R-Y8604.? Skein, Norway was very much an isolated place with a small population.? VK389's branch would have broken off from R-S5245 around the same time as Kincaids (86 CE) and logically it would have been in Norway.? Viking expansion could account for all the sub R-S5245 families in Germany, Netherlands, Ukraine, England, Ireland and Scotland.

?

Now the Kincaid lands are at the junction of the Glazert river and the Kelvin river about 7 miles upriver from the Kelvin river's mouth on the Clyde River opposite Govan.? Govan was the administrative center after nearby Dumbarton castle was captured from the British Alt Clut kings in 870 CE by Amlaíb a king of the Lochlan (Norway) and his apparent brother ?mar.? The Govan church is famous for its Viking hogbacks.? The historian Alfred Smyth identifies Amlaíb as Olaf Geirstad-Alf of Vestfold.? Vestfold is adjacent to Skein, Telemark and the later was probably subject to the Vestfold kings.? It is interesting to note that just after the siege of Dumbarton, Amlaíb had to return to Norway to aid his father.? There was a dynastic struggle there and Harald Fairhair emerged as king of all Norway - with Amlaíb and his father being slain during the process.? ?mar and his followers, like many other Norweigan chieftans who opposed Harald Fairhair at the time, had to make their way now in Scotland and Dublin - eventually being assimilated with the local populations.? The Kincaid patriarch, perhaps a chieftan supporter of Amlaíb and ?mar and whose ancestors were isolated in the remote Skein area of Norway for 700 years, would now start a new line in an isolated area up the Kelvin river.? This scenarion would have them barely survive there over the next 550 years.? It seems to me that the isolated dna of the Kincaids could actually give support to theory of the historian Alfred Smyth about Amlaíb given VK389.? Thoughts please (especially from Dr. McDonald who hails from the same area)!

?

P.S. Although a long time Kincaid researcher, it doesn't matter to me whether Kincaids were Viking, Scots, Franks, English or whatever.? I just want to know what the dna points to.

?