You may enjoy this article that was posted in the U106 group, regarding ancient DNA and the change in the population of Britain. https://the-past.com/feature/transformations-in-early-medieval-england/ -Tom Little

FTDNA has added a "Time Tree" feature to it's Discover More tool. It reminds me of the Scientific View in YFull, You may enjoy checking it out. -Tom LIttle Little Project

I'll try to make this short(er). ;-) I don't seem to have the skills to address all the topics we've recently be conversing about, but I do appreciate everyone's input. I haven't thought much about these things for a while, maybe because I tend to get consumed by them. But I'm glad I have, despite putting off other things I should get done. One thing that others may have pointed out is the diversity -- genetics, and tribal -- in the Isles. I think perhaps historians may play a role in some of our misunderstandings of the past, including linguistic interpretations of names, places, etc.. Sure, the victors can attempt to mold history to their liking, but the academics also may purposely or accidentally slant history slightly, which the average person may often fully accept as truth. I'd like to spend some serious time with a room of linguistics and hash out some concerns. In the meantime I may come up with my own theories. Leake brought up Kenneth 'ugly head', if my memory serves me. I've read of a few different interpretations of 'Cinaed' and it's various spellings, but I continue to believe that some interpretations may just be incorrect, or simple guesses, or linguistic misunderstandings. I haven't come across theories/speculations similar to mine -- that I remember (lol) -- regarding the origins and true intended meaning of Cinaed(a) in Kenneth Alpin's name. I think it's true origins may reflect back to the Cunedda Clan -- which was apparently quite large and powerful -- especially when one considers the similarities of pronunciation with words like Cunedda, Cinaed(a), Kenned(a)y, Canada(y). Then there's labelling of people, but like Leake mentioned -- everything was all mixed together. So questions like "were they Picts, Scots, Irish, Dalriadans, Gaels, Britons, Saxons, Norse, etc.", naturally arise for those that demand clarity of distinctions. That's something we all want. I was never much of a reader, for various excuses I could list, but since I came across subjects like family genealogies and genetics 12 years ago I've read much more than years previous -- even if sometimes to my physical detriment. ;-) Ydna genetic testing forced me, and not reluctantly, to read more -- especially about Isles history. Along the way I've met some great people I'd like to one day meet in person. Recently I've been somewhat sellfishly consumed with my McLean heritage. But it too has forced me to try and look at the bigger historical and genetics pucture, and reminds me how little we know about our past. So, we're quite often left with speculation -- which can be enjoyable itself. We will likely never be satisfied about the past, but through genetic testing I'm cautiously optimistic that genealogy tree of mine, and others I've met, will be satifactorily filled in. On that note, as a 193 person with lots of L193 and L513 cousins, I consider myself lucky. Not all mysteries can be solved but it sure can be fun to try! While I'm at it, and I know Mike gave an answer, but how can I get my hands on some of Mike's great Excel productions? It still mystifies me how government legislators can stifle desired collaboration amongst the overwhelming majority who want to share their personal genetic information, especially when it's already knowingly on hundreds of thousands of people's personal computers and public websites. People who don't want to share can easily protect it if they want, so I don't believe governments or corporations, or anybody, should cater to the infinitesimally small percentage of people responsible for the birth of such shackling, fear-mongering, and stifling legislation. It's a big step backwards, and shamefully so in my opinion. Hmm, from calm and collected, to the opposite so quickly? I hope I didn't ruin anyone's calm. ;-) Best, Daryl

A look back in time, per Skip's email below, after some of us BY207 men pooled our money together to pick someone to take the Big Y test. In retrospect I'm glad it was Skip(Wade) McDonald who went on from below (and before) and helped us discover, and properly place on the Big Tree and FTDNA's Tree, equivalent SNPs; ancestor SNPs; descendant SNPs; and not just all in BY207. I haven't heard from Skip in a long time. He's one good example, along with our long-suffering leader Mike W, and many others, who all collaborated to build a Big Y SNP Tree, and I am grateful to all of them. Some, like Mike W, went way above and beyond what anyone thought possible -- including Alex Williamson and his public Big Tree, which I'm sure got too much to handle which resulted in him reducing his workload. Thanks Mike for your recent post about a FTDNA 'similar to Alex's Big Tree' model. I can understand the liabilities involved in protecting private information, like 'private SNPs', which is why I believe we must absolutely support public Trees like Alex has produced. How else could old groggy brains like mine hope to make sense of it all without accessing all of that detailed data? ;-) I know that L513 people hit the lottery when Mike W became our leader, and has hung in there for us all these years. It would take a book to list everything he's done for us. How he had time for all the work he's done is mind-boggling to me. Are you still employed Mike? How many clones of yourself did you have working with you? Lol I jest, but I thought it several times! ;-) I particularly miss Mike's Excel sheets. Wow! Now I'm wondering where to find equivalent SNPs from here on forward so that I can make 'very rough' low-math calculations about SNP ages. Private SNPs are also crucial -- especially to save money testing for them at places like yseq through Thomas Krahn, the former head of FTDNA's lab. I wonder if the $1 'Make a Wish' is still offered. That is what Duncan McLean -- current McLean Project administrator -- did for himself and others in BY207 years ago: I still see the benefits of it in A1067 men. Yseq used to offer single SNP tests for around $18 USD, but I'm sure it's still a much better buy than single, or specific group --as in private SNPs -- testing with FTDNA. I'll probably take the Big Y test to try and open things up -- hopefully, but slightly doubtful beyond Aussie Martin cousin and myself. Shared private SNPs with BigY testee #IN48416 does seem possible though. I'm surprised BIGY3 hasn't resulted in much more breakthroughs. Also, FTDNA's Big Y ads state that the STRs beyond 111 are not used for matching purposes. What! That's too bad, as there could be many 'family markers' there to help us -- like we did before BigY came along in the fall of 2013(?). Mike W's coloured/colored Excel charts made it so easy to see where certain SNPs like L193 began and ended, as well as many of it's SNP descendants. Best, Daryl Martin-McLean (My eyes and brain are revolting against all these recent demands on them! I need a 24 hr break!) ;-) ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Skip McDonald <skip@...> Date: Tue, Nov 11, 2014, 8:39 AM Subject: Re: Personal SNP's for McDonald f190210 and Knox f268319 are available on yseq.net To: DAVID MCLAIN <dntmclain@...> Cc: duncan@... <duncan@...>, crbeal@... <crbeal@...>, Douglas Knox <djknox66@...>, Class1 Driver <class1driver@...>, gkeithmcdonald@... <gkeithmcdonald@...> Terri, et. al; A1069 is probably phylogenetically equivalent to Z17813-816 and should be added to that block represented here: http://www.littlescottishcluster.com/RL21/NGS/R-L513.html But to answer the question it may or may not help us depending on where things branch. If Knox and I are together on a separate branch from McLain's like you then it is entirely possible that one of these will test negative even though Z17813 or Z17815 are positive, or (with additional big Y testing) we may uncover new SNPs you have that Knox and I do not have. For now A1069 is the only one identified in a quality testable region, we may uncover a few more

*Sample:* I2611 (Male) *Location:* England, Tyne and Wear, Blaydon, Summerhill <http://www.google.com/maps/place/54.97,-1.73> *Age:* 3092-2905 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-L21 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-L21> *mtDNA:* U5a2d1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/U;name=U5a2d1> I've never sent anybody a copy of Roberta's DNA newsletter emails before, but I'll make an exception now because of the content she reveals. The entire sample list of British Isles ancient burial sites was sent to me by Roberta but is not included here as Gmail automatically truncated it. I've enclosed the file with hundreds of mtdna and yDNA that Roberta mentioned plus many more from continental Europe. If you could get her original email you could click on the blue highlighted "location" and it would take you directly there via Maps. The file I've enclosed gives the coordinates for each location. It also gives the age as "3092-2905 calBCE" for sample I2611 man above but it is actually 4400 years BP in the file after the radiocarbon "calibrated" years are adjusted. The above L21 man is row #1785 in the file. It also mentions "questionable" which I think may be referring to the terminal SNP of R-A11001 which Alex W's Big Tree chart ages as about 2800 years old (click on the brown block -- on Alex's chart --above the block with A11001 to get it's age, shown at the bottom of the page that comes up. The TMRCA of any block is actually the exact age of the SNP, or block of equivalent SNPs, immediately below it). So, 2800 ybp for A11001 per Alex's chart is right, or the bones they tested actually are 4400 ybp but the A11001 SNP call is actually incorrect. If it is incorrect, the L21 call is probably correct. I also noticed a L513 man found: *Sample:* I13730 (Male) *Location:* England, Kent, East Kent Access Road <http://www.google.com/maps/place/51.3603,1.3405> *Age:* 390-202 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-S5668 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-S5668> *mtDNA:* H1bb <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H1bb> This S5668 man age is 2240 years BP in the file and is found on row 2066. Row 1797 lists a Canada Farm, UK, 3900 ybp L21 beaker EEF man Row 2051, a 2260 ybp DF1(L513) man from Orkney For those of you interested, have fun looking through the file. Best, Daryl ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: DNAeXplained - Genetic Genealogy <donotreply@...> Date: Tue, Feb 1, 2022, 1:11 PM Subject: [New post] DNA from 459 Ancient British Isles Burials Reveals Relationships – Does Yours Match? To: <class1driver@...> Roberta Estes posted: "In December 2021, two major papers were released that focused on the ancient DNA of burials from Great Britain. The paper, A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb by Fowler et al provided a genetic analysis of 35 individu" New post on *DNAeXplained - Genetic Genealogy* <https://dna-explained.com/?author=2> DNA from 459 Ancient British Isles Burials Reveals Relationships – Does Yours Match? <https://dna-explained.com/2022/02/01/dna-from-459-ancient-british-isles-burials-reveals-relationships-does-yours-match/> by Roberta Estes <https://dna-explained.com/?author=2> In December 2021, two major papers were released that focused on the ancient DNA of burials from Great Britain. The paper, A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04241-4> by Fowler et al provided a genetic analysis of 35 individuals from a Cotswold Neolithic burial who were found to be a multi-generational family unit. In Large-scale migration into Britain during the Middle to Late Bronze Age <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04287-4> by Patterson et, the authors generated genome-wide data for 793 ancient burials from the British Isles and continental Europe to determine who settled Great Britain, from where, and when. Of course, the very first thing genealogists want to know is, “Am I related?” If we are related, it’s far too distant for the reach of autosomal DNA, but Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> and mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> might just be very interesting. If you haven't yet tested your mother's line mitochondrial DNA for males and females both <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352>, and paternal line Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> for males only, you're in luck because you can purchase those tests here. These two papers combined provide a significant window into the past in Great Britain; England, Scotland, Wales, and nearby islands. First, let’s take a look at the Cotswold region. *The Cotswolds* Ancient DNA was retrieved from a cairn burial in the Cotswolds <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotswolds>, a hilly region of Southwest England. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Cotswolds-fields.jpg>By Saffron Blaze - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15675403 Even today, the paused-in-time stone houses, fences, and ancient gardens harken back to earlier times. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Cotswolds-buildings.jpg>By Peter K Burian - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=70384620 Stunningly beautiful and historically important, the Cotswolds is a protected landscape that includes Neolithic burial chambers (3950-2450 BCE), Bronze and Iron Age forts, Roman villas, and eventually, the Celtic pathway known as Fosse Way <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fosse_Way>. *The Hazelton North Long-Tomb Burial Site* The Fowler paper <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04241-4> explores the kinship practices and relationships between the Cotswolds burials. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Cotswold-Hazelton-North-Tomb.jpg>Click to enlarge images The North Hazelton site was endangered due to repeated plowing in a farmer’s field. Excavation of the tomb occurred in 1981. A book was published in 1990 <https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/eh_monographs_2014/contents.cfm?mono=1089037> with a pdf file available at that link. The photo from 1979 on page 3 shows that the burial cairn only looks to be a slight rise in the field. You can see on the map below from the UK Megalithic site map <https://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=5220> that there are many other locations in close proximity to the Hazelton North site, some with similarly arranged burials. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Cotswold-Megalithic-sites.jpg> The paper's authors state that there are 100 long cairns within 50 km of Hazelton North, and one only 80 meters away. Excavation in those tombs, along with archaeological evaluation would be needed to determine the ages of the cairns, if burial practices were the same or similar, and if any of the individuals were related to each other or the individuals in the North Hazelton cairn. In other words, were these separate cemeteries of an extended family, or disconnected burial grounds of different groups of people over time. While the North Hazelton site no longer exists, as it was entirely excavated, on the same page <https://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=5220>, you can see photos before excavation, along with the main chamber which now resides in the Corinium Museum <https://coriniummuseum.org/> in Cirencester, just a few kilometers away. The Fowler team analyzed 35 individuals who lived about 5,700 years ago, at least 100 years after cattle and cereal cultivation was introduced to Britain along with the construction of megalithic monuments. Stonehenge, the most well-known megalith, is located about 90 miles away and is estimated to be about 5,100 years old. The burials from Stonehenge <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6520225/> indicate that they were primarily Early European Farmers (EEF) from Anatolia who first moved to Iberia, then on to Britain. The remains analyzed in this paper were excavated from the Hazelton North Megalithic long-cairn type tomb <https://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=5220>. The tomb was built between 5,695 and 5,650 years ago, with the stonework of the north passage collapsing and sealing off the north chamber between 5,660 and 5,630 years ago. All burials stopped in this location about 5,620 years ago, so the site was only in use for about 80 years. The tomb seems to have been built with multiple passages in anticipation of planned burials by genealogical association. The arrangement of burials was determined by kinship, at least until the passage wall of the North chamber collapsed. The southern and northern chambers each housed two females' descendants, respectively. While the male progenitor was significant in that this entire tomb was clearly his family tomb, the arrangement of the burials within the chambers suggests that the women were socially significant in the community, and to their families as well. Osteological analysis reveals at least 41 individuals, 22 of whom were adults. Strontium isotope analysis indicates that most of the individuals had spent time in their childhood at least 40 km away. Authors of a 2015 paper interpret this to mean that the population as a whole was not sedentary, meaning that they may have moved with their livestock from place to place, perhaps based on seasons. Of course, this also calls into question what happened if an individual died while the group was not in the location of the burial cairn. Of those individuals, 27 people were part of a 5-generation family with many interrelationships. Of the 15 intergenerational genetic transmissions, all were through men, meaning every third, fourth or fifth generation individual was connected to the original patriarch through only males, suggesting that patrilineal descent determined who was buried in a Neolithic tomb. This also tells us that patrilineal social practices were persistent. 26 of 35 people with genetic data were male. Male burials in other Cotswold tombs outnumber females 1.6 to 1. The remains of some women must have been treated differently. No adult lineage daughters were present in the tomb, although two infant daughters were, suggesting that adult daughters were out-married, outside of either the community or this specific family lineage. They would have been buried in their husband’s tomb, just as these women were buried here. The male progenitor reproduced with 4 females, producing 14 adult sons who were buried in the tomb. All four females were buried in the tomb, in two chambers, suggesting that women, at least high-status women were buried with their partners and not in their father’s tomb. The lineages of two of those women were buried in the same half of the tomb over all generations, suggesting maternal lineages were socially important. The burials included four men who did not descend from the male progenitors of the clan lineage but DID descend from women who also had children with the progenitors. The authors state that this suggests that the progenitor men adopted the four children of their mates into their lineage, but it also raises the possibility that the progenitor men were not aware that those four men were not their descendants. Multiple reproductive partners of men were not related to each other, but multiple reproductive partners of women were. Eight individuals found within the tomb were not closely related to the main lineages. This could mean that they were partners of men who did not reproduce, or who had only adult daughters. It could also mean they were socially important, but not biologically related to either each other nor the tomb’s family members whose DNA was sampled. Of those who are related, inbreeding had been avoided meaning the parents of individuals were not related to each other based on runs of homozygosity (ROH) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runs_of_homozygosity>. Some of the remains from the north chamber had been gnawed by scavengers, apparently before burial, and three cremations were buried at the entrance including an infant, a child, and an adult. This might answer the question of what happened if someone died while the group was away from the burial site. Individuals in the north tomb exhibited osteoarthritis typical of other burials in southern England, and signs of nutritional stress in childhood. The south chamber burials were more co-mingled and dispersed among neighboring compartments. In the Guardian article, World’s oldest family tree revealed in 5,700-year-old Cotswolds tomb <https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/dec/22/worlds-oldest-family-tree-costwolds-tomb-hazleton-north-long-cairn-dna?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other>, a genetic pedigree chart was drawn based on the burials, their relationship to each other, and burial locations. As discussed in this PNAS paper, Megalithic tombs in western and northern Neolithic Europe were linked to a kindred society <https://www.pnas.org/content/116/19/9469>, other Neolithic tomb burials in Europe were also reflective of a kinship system. The question remains, where did the Cotswold settlers come from? Who were they descended from and related to? The second paper provides insights to that question. *Who Migrated into Britain, and When?* Patterson et al tell us <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04287-4> that their DNA analysis of 793 individuals increased the data from the Middle (1550-1150 BCE) to Late Bronze (1150-750 BCE) and Iron Age (70-BCE-43CE) in Britain by 12-fold, and from Western and Central Europe by 3.5 times. They also reveal that present-day people from England and Wales carry more ancestry derived from Early European Farmers than people from the Early Bronze Age. The DNA contributed from Early European Farmers (EEF) increased over time in people in the southern portion of Britain and Wales, which includes the Cotswold region, but did not increase in northern Britain (Scotland,) nor in Kent. Specifically, from 31% in the Early Bronze Age to 34% in the Middle Bronze Age to 35% in the Late Bronze Age to 38% in the Iron Age. While the EEF DNA increased over time in the Southwest area of Britain, it decreased in other regions. This means that the increase could not be explained by migration from northern continental Europe in the medieval period because those early migrants carried even less Early European Farmer ancestry than the inhabitants of Southwest Britain. Therefore, if those two populations had admixed, the results would be progressively lower EEF in Southwest Britain, not higher. To fully evaluate this data, the team sequenced earlier samples from both Britain and mainland Europe in addition to the Cotswold burials, targeting 1.2 million SNP locations. In addition to DNA sequencing, they also utilized radiocarbon dating to confirm the age of the remains. Results for low-coverage individuals, meaning those with less than 30,000 SNPs scanned at least once, were removed from the data set. 123 individuals were identified as related to each other from 48 families within the third degree. Third-degree relatives share approximately 12.5% of their DNA and would include first cousins, great-grandparents/children, granduncles/aunts, half uncles/aunts/nieces/nephews. Lactase persistence <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase_persistence>, the ability to digest the lactose in milk was significantly higher in this population than in either the rest of Britain or Central and Western Europe by a factor of 5 or greater. The DNA of the Cotswold burial groups and others found from this early timeframe in Southwest Britain and Wales is most similar to ancient burials from France. A Eupedia megalithic culture page <https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/megalithic_culture.shtml>shows a map of various major megalithic sites in both Europe and the British Isles. Based on charts in Figure 4 of the paper, the location in Europe with the highest percentage of EEF about 4300 years ago (2300 BCE) was the Iberian Peninsula – Spain and Portugal, a location that neighbors France. Lactase persistence began increasing about that time and dramatically rose about 3500 years ago (1500 BCE.) Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> haplogroup R-L21/M529 went from 0% in the Neolithic era (3950-2450 BCE,) or about 5950-4450 years ago) in Britain to 90% in all of Britain in the Early Bronze Era (2450-1550 BCE or 4450-3550 years ago), then dropped slowly to about 70% in the Iron Age in Western England and Wales, then 50% in western Britain and Wales and 20% in Central and Eastern Britain in the Modern Era. You can read more about this research in this Phys.org article: Geneticists’ new research on ancient Britain contains insights on language, ancestry, kinship, milk <https://phys.org/news/2021-12-harvard-geneticists-ancient-britain-insights.html>, and more about Megalithic burials in France in this Smithsonian Magazine article: Europe’s Megalithic Monuments Originated in France and Spread by Sea Routes, new Study Suggests <https://www.smithsonianmag.com/articles/europe-megalithic-monuments-france-sea-routes-mediterranean-180971467/> . *Are You Connected?* The paper authors made the resequenced Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> and mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> information available for analysis. Of course, we all want to know if we are connected with these people, especially if our families have origins in the British Isles. The R&D team at FamilyTreeDNA downloaded the Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> and mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> sequences and linked them to mapped locations. They also correlated samples to Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> and mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> haplogroups and linked them to their respective public trees here <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/A> and here <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/L>. The Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> sometimes contained additional SNP information which allowed a more granular haplogroup to be assigned. I want to specifically thank Goran Runfeldt, head of R&D, for making this valuable information available and useful for genealogists by downloading, reformatting, and mapping the data, and Michael Sager, phylogeneticist in the FamilyTreeDNA lab, for reanalyzing the Y DNA results and refining them beyond the papers. Now, let’s get to the best part. *The Map* <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ancient-British-DNA-North-Hazelton-Cotswold.jpg> This map shows the locations of 459 ancient British Isles burials included in the papers, both in the Cotswolds and throughout the rest of Great Britain. There are significantly more mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> haplogroups represented than Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355>. Of course, everyone, males and females both have mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352>, so everyone can test <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352>, but only males carry Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355>. The next map shows the distribution of the base mitochondrial <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> haplogroups. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ancient-British-DNA-North-Hazelton-Cotswold-mtdna.jpg> - H=light green (181 samples) - U=rust (70 samples) - K=burgundy (68 samples) - J=yellow (46 samples) - T=dark green (43 samples) - V=grey (16 samples) - X=dark teal (9 samples) - I=orange (6 samples) - W=purple (6 samples) - N=brown (2 samples) The most common mitochondrial <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> haplogroup found is H which is unsurprising given that H is the most common haplogroup in Europe as well. It’s interesting to note that there is no clear haplogroup distribution pattern for either Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> or mitochondrial <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> DNA, with the exception of the North Hazelton burials themselves as outlined in the paper. There were only three ancient major Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> haplogroups discovered. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ancient-British-DNA-North-Hazelton-Cotswold-Y.jpg> - R=green (179 samples) - I=gold (50 samples) - G=blue (5 samples) 225 total samples were female and had no Y chromosome. A few male Y chromosomes were not recoverable. Of course, some samples on the maps fall directly beneath other samples, so it’s difficult to discern multiple samples from the same location. For that, and for more granular haplogroups, we need to refer to the data itself. *How to Use the Data* Each sample is identified by: - A sample ID from the papers - Sex - Location with a google map link. - Age calibrated to BCE, before current era, which means roughly how many years before about the year 1 that someone lived. To determine approximately how long ago one of these people lived, add 2000 to the BCE date. For example, 3500 BCE equates to 5500 years ago. - Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> haplogroup for male samples where recoverable, linked to FamilyTreeDNA’s public Y DNA haplotree <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/A>. - Mitochondrial <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352> DNA haplogroup for all but 2 samples where mitochondrial results were not recoverable, linked to FamilyTreeDNA’s public mitochondrial DNA haplotree <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/L>. If you have tested your full sequence mitochondrial DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710352>, you can use the browser search function (ctrl+F) on a PC to search for your haplogroup. For example. Searching for haplogroup H61 produces 5 results. Click on the sample locations to view where they were found. Are they in close proximity to each other? In the same burial? Four were found at the same location in the Channel Islands, and one in Kent. Where is your ancestor from? For Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355>, you can search for your haplogroup, but if you’ve taken the Big Y test <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> and don’t find your specific haplogroup, you might want to use the Y DNA tree <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/A> to search for successive upstream haplogroups to see where your closest ancient match might be found. Of course, if you’re haplogroup G, it’s pretty easy to just take a look without searching for each individual haplogroup. Just search for “G-“. For each sample, be sure to click on the haplogroup name itself to view its location on the tree and where else in the world this haplogroup is found. Let’s look at a couple of examples. *Sample:* I26628 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Alderney, Longis Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.72173,-2.17747> *Age:* 756-416 calBCE *mtDNA:* H61 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H61> Mitochondrial haplogroup H61, above, is fairly rare and currently found sparsely in several countries including England, Germany, Hungary, Belarus, Ireland, Netherlands, the UK, and France. The flags indicate the location of FamilyTreeDNA <http://www.kqzyfj.com/click-6754800-13710356> testers' earliest known ancestor of their mitochondrial, meaning direct matrilineal, line. <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ancient-British-DNA-mtdna-map.jpg> Click on the haplogroup link to view the results in the Y or mtDNA trees. Next, let’s look at a Y DNA <http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-6754800-13710355> sample. *Sample:* I16427 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 4234-3979 calBCE *Y-DNA:* I-M423 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/I;name=I-M423> *mtDNA:* X2b-T226C <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/X;name=X2b-T226C> <https://dna-explained.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ancient-British-DNA-Y-dna-tree.jpg> Haplogroup I-M423 itself is found most frequently in Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Scotland and Ireland, but note that it also has 648 downstream branches defined. You may match I-M423 by virtue of belonging to a downstream branch. Do you match any of these ancient samples, and where were your ancestors from? *Sample:* I26630 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Alderney, Longis Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.72173,-2.17747> *Age:* 749-403 calBCE *mtDNA:* H61 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H61> *Sample:* I16430 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Alderney, Longis Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.72173,-2.17747> *Age:* 337-52 calBCE *mtDNA:* H61 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H61> *Sample:* I16505 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Alderney, Longis Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.72173,-2.17747> *Age:* 174-45 calBCE *mtDNA:* H61 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H61> *Sample:* I26629 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Alderney, Longis Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.721729,-2.177469> *Age:* 170 calBCE - 90 calCE *mtDNA:* U5a1b1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/U;name=U5a1b1> *Sample:* I16437 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 4241-4050 calBCE *mtDNA:* K1b1a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/K;name=K1b1a1> *Sample:* I16444 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 4228-3968 calBCE *Y-DNA:* I-FT376000 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/I;name=I-FT376000> *mtDNA:* J1c1b1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/J;name=J1c1b1> *Sample:* I16429 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 3088-2914 calBCE *mtDNA:* K1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/K;name=K1> *Sample:* I16425 (Female) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 3083-2912 calBCE *mtDNA:* K1a4a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/K;name=K1a4a1> *Sample:* I16438 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Guernsey, Vale, Le Déhus <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.49715,-2.50646> *Age:* 2567-2301 calBCE *Y-DNA:* I-L623 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/I;name=I-L623> *mtDNA:* J1c8 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/J;name=J1c8> *Sample:* I16436 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Herm, The Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.4794,-2.4521> *Age:* 3954-3773 calBCE *Y-DNA:* I-CTS7213 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/I;name=I-CTS7213> *mtDNA:* HV <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/R;name=HV> *Sample:* I16435 (Male) *Location:* Channel Islands, Herm, The Common <http://www.google.com/maps/place/49.4794,-2.4521> *Age:* 3646-3527 calBCE *mtDNA:* H <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H> *Sample:* I16597 (Male) *Location:* England, Bedfordshire, Broom Quarry <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.07912,-0.28097> *Age:* 404-209 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-DF49 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-DF49> *mtDNA:* H1-C16355T <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H1-C16355T> *Sample:* I21293 (Female) *Location:* England, Bedfordshire, Broom Quarry <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.07912,-0.28097> *Age:* 425-200 BCE *mtDNA:* J1c1b <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/J;name=J1c1b> *Sample:* I11151 (Male) *Location:* England, Bedfordshire, Broom Quarry <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.07912,-0.28097> *Age:* 379-197 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-FT44983 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-FT44983> *mtDNA:* K1a-T195C! <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/K;name=K1a-T195C!> *Sample:* I11150 (Male) *Location:* England, Bedfordshire, Broom Quarry <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.07912,-0.28097> *Age:* 381-197 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-FT335377 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-FT335377> *mtDNA:* H15a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H15a1> *Sample:* I19047 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Babraham Research Campus (ARC05), ARES site <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.13489,0.204105> *Age:* 1-50 CE *Y-DNA:* R-M269 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-M269> *mtDNA:* H2a <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H2a> *Sample:* I19045 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Marshall's Jaguar Land Rover New Showroom (JLU15) <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.21091,0.177859> *Age:* 388-206 calBCE *Y-DNA:* G-S23438 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/G;name=G-S23438> *mtDNA:* U4a2 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/U;name=U4a2> *Sample:* I19046 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Marshall's Jaguar Land Rover New Showroom (JLU15) <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.21091,0.177859> *Age:* 383-197 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-P312 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-P312> *mtDNA:* H1t <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H1t> *Sample:* I19044 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Marshall's Jaguar Land Rover New Showroom (JLU15) <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.21091,0.177859> *Age:* 381-199 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-FT50512 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-FT50512> *mtDNA:* K1a-T195C! <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/K;name=K1a-T195C!> *Sample:* I11152 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Over <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.34659,0.031828> *Age:* 355-59 calBCE *Y-DNA:* G-Z16775 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/G;name=G-Z16775> *mtDNA:* U3a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/U;name=U3a1> *Sample:* I11149 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Teversham (Marshall's) Evaluation <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.19892,0.180799> *Age:* 733-397 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-Z156 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-Z156> *mtDNA:* V <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/V;name=V> *Sample:* I11154 (Female) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 743-404 calBCE *mtDNA:* H5a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H5a1> *Sample:* I13729 (Female) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 512-236 calBCE *mtDNA:* H1ag1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H1ag1> *Sample:* I11153 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 405-209 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-FGC33066 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-FGC33066> *mtDNA:* H3b <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H3b> *Sample:* I13727 (Female) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 389-208 calBCE *mtDNA:* T1a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/T;name=T1a1> *Sample:* I13728 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 381-179 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-P312 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-P312> *mtDNA:* T2a1a <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/T;name=T2a1a> *Sample:* I13687 (Female) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Trumpington Meadows <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.17028,0.105604> *Age:* 368-173 calBCE *mtDNA:* W1c <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/W;name=W1c> *Sample:* I11156 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Whittlesey, Bradley Fen <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.56402,-0.17945> *Age:* 382-200 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-CTS8704 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-CTS8704> *mtDNA:* J1c3 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/J;name=J1c3> *Sample:* I11997 (Male) *Location:* England, Cambridgeshire, Whittlesey, Bradley Fen <http://www.google.com/maps/place/52.56402,-0.17945> *Age:* 377-197 calBCE *Y-DNA:* R-FGC36434 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/R;name=R-FGC36434> *mtDNA:* X2b-T226C <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/X;name=X2b-T226C> *Sample:* I16620 (Female) *Location:* England, Co. Durham, Hartlepool, Catcote <http://www.google.com/maps/place/54.676567,-1.236391> *Age:* 340 BCE - 6 CE *mtDNA:* H1bs <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H1bs> *Sample:* I12790 (Female) *Location:* England, Cornwall, Newquay, Tregunnel <http://www.google.com/maps/place/50.409374,-5.088903> *Age:* 400-100 BCE *mtDNA:* H2a1 <https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mt-dna-haplotree/H;name=H2a1> *Sample:* I12793 (Male) *Location:* <http://www.google.com/maps/place/50.409374,-5.088903>

I try to keep the Project About/Results web page as a place to reference data. I've recently updated the overview descendants charts. https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-l513/about/results

-- For general R1b Y DNA questions please post on one of the two forums: R1b Y DNA Project Facebook Group - http://www.facebook.com/groups/R1b.YDNA/ R1b All Subclades Project Activity Feed - http://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b/activity-feed

I will close this group down since the Facebook L513 group is now going. https://www.facebook.com/groups/R1b.L513/ Hopefully, this takes care of the lag factors people in Australia see on Yahoo groups.

Please do not go near F***book with any of my information. Joe

Here is the link to the new FB forum. https://www.facebook.com/groups/162623697829957/ Some people don't like FB. I don't either but a lot of people use it and it has some nice functions. I just don't think highly of "Zuck"(erberg) and the way they use data. The R1b-L513-project yahoo group will NOT be closed down, though.

Question to anybody: Hood, B144260, and Wood, 421024, both took Big Y. Hood just got onto Alex's Tree, but preliminary, so in red. I can't find the BY34846 SNP in either of their private SNPs on Alex's Tree, so it's a bit of a mystery why FTDNA has them both as BY34846 according to our Project page under L193>>>BY2634. Neither testee knows how they are related, so they're excited to find out. Perhaps somebody will need to look at their VCF files to see if BY34846 is there. Any volunteers willing to receive their VCFs and analyze them? I've just got my phone. BY34846: Hg19, 7815367; Hg38, 7947326 Ybrowse uses 7947326 and recognizes it as BY34846. Nobody else in their block has BY34846 per Alex's Tree and Project Results page. I don't doubt FTDNA, but curious how they matched these two with same SNP. Best, Daryl

Check this out. N195016CampbellFinlay Campbell abt 1764 CAMPBELTOWN,ARGYLL,SCOTLAat https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-L513?iframe=ysnp I couldn't find any STRs for him. He is BY13857 like Pelkey (290867, SNP Pack) and McClain ( 82167, Big Y) Can he be added to the L513 Tree with Pelkey and McClain under BY13857? I'd also like to contact him, since he shares the same MDA town of Campbelltown with me, but I don't have an email address for him. Do you? Maybe you could have him contact me. Best, Daryl

Mike: Your Descendant Tree chart has Galbraith and McIntyre descending from Z17816, but they should descend from Z17813. Do you know how these two men came to share/test the same SNP in BY34838? Very interesting. Is this an example of where Alex's chart has fallen behind? I suspected this McIntyre was different from the other L193 McIntyres, especially since he (347690) and another McIntyre (57594) share the 640=13 STR and the latter does not share the very slow moving 434=10 which the other group of McIntyres (BY2634 suspected) share. The 434=10 STR has been seen in L193-only men who have tested positive for BY2634, including Wood, Mcintyre, Ferguson, and Wilson. It seems apparent that 434=10 is a predictor marker for BY2634 amongst L193 men. Recommendation for McIntyres: Those with 434=10 should test for BY2634, and possibly for some of the 7 private SNPs held by #676804 McIntyre. Click on the surname on Alex's chart to access private SNPs http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=10 #57594 Mcintyre should test for the BY34838 SNP held by #347690 Mcintyre. For the 7 McIntyres I've bcc'd with this email, please feel free to contact me for any clarifications. I match you all at 67 STR markers, and you are all at least L193/S5982, as I am: Darrel, George, William, Fred, Scot, Albert, Ted. See our public L513 Haplogroup Project pages here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-l513/about/background There are two types of Y-DNA mutations: STRs, and SNPs. STRs are what are used on our personal Matches pages. SNPs, often referred to as Haplogroups, are the only mutations we can use to build our paternal trees. See the left side blue background of the Descendant Tree Chart on the above link to our Background page for men descending from L193 man. L193 man was likely born around 2900 years ago, but all L193 men share a common paternal ancestor born approximately around 200 AD (my personal calculation). Best, Daryl

Joel: You've got your work cut out for you. Take a look at this link from Alex W's Big Tree http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=200&star=false Flucker is your closest relative there and per both your unique SNPs, which average to 4.5 (3 for Flucker, 6 for you) your common ancestor may be around 350-550 yrs ago (depending on SNP mutation rate used). Your next closest relatives are Dixon and the two Musgraves. Combining all 5 men's unique SNP, plus shared SNPs works out to roughly 5.3 SNPs -- so you all share the same common ancestor, under the BY14605 Block of SNPs, roughly 400-600 yrs ago. Your next closest relative, per Alex's Tree, is Howie who doesn't share the BY14605 SNP Block with you and the other above men. But he does share the BY411 Block with all of you, and this makes you 6 men closer to each other than all the other men under L1066. You 6 men now share a common ancestor back to about 9.8 SNPs, which could be about 800-1100 years ago -- roughly. I see that L1066 is one of the larger subclades under Z253 (Son SNP of ZZ10, which is a Son SNP of DF13). There doesn't seem to be any dominant surname there. In fact, you are the only Campbell I could see under ZZ10 which is L513's brother SNP under DF13. It was common for tenants to assume their landlords name, so this may be how you got your Campbell surname, as they were a prolific dominant group. My recent paternal Martin ancestors came from Campbelltown, Kintyre, Argyll, and one still lives there. You need many more L1066>BY411 men to Y-DNA test, if they're out there. Perhaps researching your closest paternal relatives will reveal a particular geographical pocket to exploit with feet on the ground and door to door knocking. Best, Daryl

JBlake18: That's a question for which we don't have enough information about, and may not be answerable unfortunately. Most surnames only became common within the last 500 yrs or so. L193 man was probably born about 2700-3200 yrs ago. His descendants didn't blossom -- through 4 separate Son subclades -- until around 200-400 AD per my calculations (Yfull says about 100 BC). We call that blossoming point the TMRCA (time to most recent ancestor) -- the point in time where all L193 men alive today share the same common ancestor. SNP, or Haplogroup, ageing is not an exact science by any means at the moment. The best way to attempt to find your more recent ancestors would be through more testing, like 111 STR testing and/or SNP testing like Big Y. Doing both STR and Big Y testing should help greatly to eliminate those that are not your closest paternal relations. Surnames may not be the best way to find your closest relations. For example, my last name is Martin but through STR and Big Y testing we discovered we are likely McClains because we are the only Martins amongst many McClains and a few other surnames. Most of us in the L193>BY207>>>A1067 subclade suspect we descend from the chiefly lineage of the McClain clan, but it hasn't yet been proven. One thing seems incontrovertible: if we hadn't all done 111 STR and Big Y SNP testing, we'd still be stumbling around in the dark. For the time being it's not quite so dark, and we do see much more light than most. We may even need to take more than 111 STR tests -- when available -- to help us further, but even then a breakthrough may be reliant on new testers coming into the mix. For more detailed analysis and recommendations we'd need to know your kit # and exactly which tests you've taken to date. Best, Daryl ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "jblake18@... [R1b-L513-Project]" <R1b-L513-Project@...> Date: Sep 21, 2017 9:37 AM Subject: Re: [R1b-L513 Project] Re: Galwyddel/Lidell/Little? To: <R1b-L513-Project@...> Cc: Hello everyone, So I have been trying to figure all this out but not very good at it any help would be very much appreciated. My surname is Blake and my family has been traced to Montgomery North Carolina. There are several books about these Blake's saying they are descendants of Sir Richard Cadell who changed his last name to Blake. So what I have found so far is that I have some matches with surname Black Blake and Campbell. What I have learned is that there was once a Black Scottish clan that for some reason was no longer recognized by the clans and I think the were taken into the Lamont clan and Campbell clan. The lamont clan killed a bunch of the Campbell clan so the Campbells destroyed the Lamont clan and the Lamont clan chief is supposed to be in Australia now. I am a Y-37 so far with snp L513 and L193 and the Campbell clan on your map I think is my match with a Black in it how can I find out who came first Black Campbell or Blake? . __,_._,___

This is a very informative thread for me, and I've learned some interesting facts from everybody. Keep it coming! I've been busy, or would have replied sooner. It seems I sometimes forget facts I once knew, or mistakenly jumble things up -- like the meaning of 'gall'. I think it was Sykes who dna sampled the Isles before he wrote his book on it (Saxons Vikings, and Celts). I still haven't finished it. I thought he sampled southwestern Scotland too, but perhaps his data was not included in the Oxford data. Here's another interesting link that gives comparative maps and data charts of the Y-DNA distribution in the Isles. R1b and L21 appear to dominate. http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/britain_ireland_dna.shtml One thing of great interest that Sykes remarked on was what some people he sampled considered 'foreign' to an area in UK. Sykes wanted to keep track of geographical differences, but one man said he wasn't from that area. Upon questioning, the man revealed he originated from an area about 5 miles away (can't remember the exact miles, but was small). Naturally Sykes was astounded that this man would consider himself a foreigner to an area only a few miles from his origins. So am I astounded. Which makes me wonder what people 1500 years ago defined as a foreigner. I'm not a linguist, but language does interest me in relation to surnames and placenames. To randomly pick a name like Malcolm, it's a reference to Columba, with 'Mal' (I hope I get this right) meaning 'servant of' and 'colm' meaning 'Columba' (the Christian priest/abbot/evangelist of Scotland), or 'servant/follower/believer of Columba and his Christian message. Which reminds me, Malcolm Beg is claimed to be an ancestor of our ZS4581 Drummonds. This past winter we believe we discovered that Gillespie Galbraith fathered Malcolm Beg, and that Gilchrist Bretnach fathered Gillespie Galbraith. So, are the Drummonds actually Galbraiths? Best, Daryl

The link below shows a map with a region in southwest Scotland called 'Galwyddel' in c.600 AD (not called that in the 300 AD Map) http://www.abroadintheyard.com/wp-content/uploads/British-Isles-3-Anglo-Saxon-600-final-JPG-e1462557647479.jpg It seems that Galwyddel was named after a mixture of cultures -- the Gaels and the Norseman, and/or represents the Gall Goidels. My interest lies in the possibility that the Little surname could possibly be a derivative of the 'Galwyddel' region. By dropping the 'Ga' we'd be left with 'lwyddel', and that could easily change into Liddell, and then Little. Hey Leake (or anybody), has this idea already been presented by others? Does it make sense to anybody but me? Here's the link to the list of 'Isles' Maps in different timeperiods: http://www.abroadintheyard.com/maps-britain-ireland-ancient-tribes-kingdoms-dna/ Galbraith would be another name that combines Gal (Gael) with Britain (braith), to mean 'a Gaelic Briton'. In addition to the above surnames mentioned, a few other L193 surnames have come out of the southwest Scotland/Galwyddel region. In fact a large majority of L193 surnames seem to come out of southern Scotland which is probably not more than 150 miles across. My TMRCA calculations for the births of the four L193 Son subclades is approximately 200-400 AD. All four Son subclades would likely have been born around the same time -- like all established Son subclades they would likely have been born within 150 years of each other: in this case within a 150 years of the last of the 9 equivalent SNPs in the L193 'block' on Alex's Big Y chart. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=538&star=false Best, Daryl

Michael: I'm not sure where you see that on Yfull. From what I see, on the link below, Yfull sees our BY207 subclade as A1069, with 6 more equivalents: FGC32127 * A5865+4 SNPs. Click on those "+4 SNPs" and a small black popup reveals those four are Z17816, FGC39651, FGC39759, Z17813. YFULL only has 4 men under A1069: 3 under A1067, and one A1069* (paragroup) -- the former 3 are Dugger (YFO8219), Duncan (YFO9454) and McDonald (YFO5328), so does that make you the latter, with ID #YFO7101? https://yfull.com/tree/R-A1069/ The problem with ageing SNPs, using an algorithm like Yfull does, is that you need lots of samples. Alex's Tree has over 20 samples to draw upon, so his Tree will automatically be more accurate than one with only 4, like Yfull's A1069 Tree per link above. If BY207 men like Galbraith, Duff, and Grant were to send their BAMs to YFull, I suspect the Yfull A1069 Tree would start to resemble Alex's Tree -- with Z17813 descending from Z17816, and A1069 descending from Z17813. One of the major hurdles with understanding our paternal roots through SNP testing is the different interpretations of SNPs. Yfull has their rigid interpretation while FTDNA has their own, and then individuals -- with more interests in our own subclades -- will have even different interpretations. Lucky for us FTDNA has Sager working on the SNP Tree (full time?), and he has access to all BIG Y BAM files and others. When we question a SNPs placement, we can present to Mr. Sager to help us sort it out. Ageing of SNPs, once sorted chronologically, is another whole different can of worms. If I may be so bold, I think the L193 TMRCA calculated by the "algorithms" are too old (100 BC), and my SNP calculations of around 250-450 AD (sweetspot of 350 AD) are more aligned with previous STR calculations. This younger age would also account for the STR homogeneity amongst L193 men. So, for clarity, it seems likely that all L193 men alive today descended from one man born no later than around 100 AD (250 AD minus 1 SNP, with the SNP rate no greater than 150 yrs: thus 250-150=100 AD). That man would be the last born SNP in the L193 block of equivalents, and of which we don't know the chronological order. But my "sweetspot" age for that same man would be closer to 250 AD (350 AD minus 1 SNP, with a likely SNP rate closer to 100 years than the 150 years given above -- so 350-100=250 AD). Best, Daryl