Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Ages of Z255 and L159.2

Expand Messages
  • marosjor
    Paul, How old would you say your Byrne Leinster cluster is? Does that include Beattys? I always think of the cluster as Beatty-Byrnes. Is this wrong? The
    Message 1 of 19 , Mar 2, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Paul,

      How old would you say your Byrne Leinster cluster is? Does that include Beattys? I always think of the cluster as Beatty-Byrnes. Is this wrong?

      The O'Sheas who are Z255+, L159.2- would seem to comprise a cluster which is less than 600 years old. These O'Sheas have distant matches (g.d. 5 and higher) at 67 markers with Beattys, Singletons, Herringtons and Harringtons etc. These Beattys, Singletons etc. seem to be L159.2+ unlike the O'Sheas.

      Any light which you can throw on the above, would be welcome.

      Regards,
      Margaret

      --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, pabloburns@... wrote:
      >
      > Kirsten and Margaret,
      > Thanks for your comments. I agree that decimal estimates are rather strange, especially when followed by a plus and minus of a couple hundred years. One reason I asked about the age of Z255 was curiosity about another SNP downstream of it, now that L159.2 is being questioned. Surely, whether the age is 1400 ybp or 1700 ybp there has been plenty of time for one or more. As you know, we hope to have our Byrne Leinsters divided into families later this year, and another SNP would help. lacking that we will have to depend on STRs. I have had a positive response from our Byrne Leinster members to a request to upgrade, with four 111 orders this past week and four others saying they plan to do it.
      > Paul
      >
    • Paul Burns
      Margaret, Interesting about the O Sheas being L159.2- and less than 600 years old. I assume that means that L159.2+ has to be less than that. The eight Byrne
      Message 2 of 19 , Mar 3, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Margaret,
        Interesting about the O'Sheas being L159.2- and less than 600 years old. I assume that means that L159.2+ has to be less than that. The eight Byrne who tested L159.2 were all positive which, if the less-than-600-years is correct, means that my Byrne Leinster cluster can only date back to a maximum of circa 1400 AD? Am I calculating correctly?
        I think Earl Beaty once calculated that the Byrne cluster dated to about 1500 AD, which is within the same ballpark. This was puzzling because there is plenty of documented evidence that the Clan O'Byrne was organized and active against the English of the Pale from at least 1271 AD on. I suppose there could have been some kind of a bottleneck, but it would have had to be a big bottle with a very narrow neck. And it couldn't have been the English who provided the constriction. Maybe a plague?
        As for the Byrne-Beatty link, the demise of Ysearch impedes comparisons, but I tried an eyeball check of the Leinster Modal, which was derived from the Byrne Modal, against the Beatty project page. They seem to be 67/4, (differences at 449, CDYb, 534, and 444) and 111/8 (additional differences at 714, 463, 497, and 435). These are not great. While Earl thought the Byrne cluster might have moved from Scotland/northern England to Leinster, John McLaughlin and I speculated that both clusters could have descended from a Dumnonii migration up both sides of the Irish Sea. Key word of course is speculate, though there is good evidence of the Dumnonii settling both in Leinster and Scotland.
        But back to your first question about the age of the Byrne cluster. History theorizes that they sprang from the Ui Brain faction of the Ui Faelain of Kildare. In the 11th century the Ui Brain lost an intra-tribal leadership struggle with the MacFaelain faction, and had to move to the southern Wicklows. There in time it became the Breens and the O'Byrnes. The earliest mention I could find was in Otway-Ruthven's "History of Medieval Ireland" who cited an English document dated 1271 AD concerning "activity against the O'Byrnes and O'Tooles," but from then on mentions were frequent.
        I was hoping that Geno 2.0 would help us decipher the Leinster connections by dividing Z255, but it is not looking good.
        Regards,
        Paul


        --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, "marosjor" <m.jordan246@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Paul,
        >
        > How old would you say your Byrne Leinster cluster is? Does that include Beattys? I always think of the cluster as Beatty-Byrnes. Is this wrong?
        >
        > The O'Sheas who are Z255+, L159.2- would seem to comprise a cluster which is less than 600 years old. These O'Sheas have distant matches (g.d. 5 and higher) at 67 markers with Beattys, Singletons, Herringtons and Harringtons etc. These Beattys, Singletons etc. seem to be L159.2+ unlike the O'Sheas.
        >
        > Any light which you can throw on the above, would be welcome.
        >
        > Regards,
        > Margaret
        >
        > --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, pabloburns@ wrote:
        > >
        > > Kirsten and Margaret,
        > > Thanks for your comments. I agree that decimal estimates are rather strange, especially when followed by a plus and minus of a couple hundred years. One reason I asked about the age of Z255 was curiosity about another SNP downstream of it, now that L159.2 is being questioned. Surely, whether the age is 1400 ybp or 1700 ybp there has been plenty of time for one or more. As you know, we hope to have our Byrne Leinsters divided into families later this year, and another SNP would help. lacking that we will have to depend on STRs. I have had a positive response from our Byrne Leinster members to a request to upgrade, with four 111 orders this past week and four others saying they plan to do it.
        > > Paul
        > >
        >
      • Paul Ó Duḃṫaiġ
        For bottlenecks the obviously ones in that time period are: - Tudor Conquest of Ireland 1540-1600 - Confederate war of 1641-53 including the Cromwellian
        Message 3 of 19 , Mar 3, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          For bottlenecks the obviously ones in that time period are:
          • Tudor Conquest of Ireland 1540-1600
          • Confederate war of 1641-53 including the Cromwellian Conquest (50% population died)
          • War of the Two Kings 1689-1691
          Basically Ireland was a "land of war" on an extreme level during this period. The Cromwellian war probably had higher effect in Ireland on population loss then the Black Death had.

          As for the O'Shea's and age of L159.2+, well they could be on a parellel but closely related branch within Z255. What you would need to do is find the TMRCA for the O'Shea's versus the O'Byrnes. That would give you the earliest possible date that the common lineage was probably Z255+/L159.2-

          -Paul

          As a result you have two closely related lines one been Z255+/L159.2- and the other Z255+/L159.2+

          On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Paul Burns <pabloburns@...> wrote:
           

          Margaret,
          Interesting about the O'Sheas being L159.2- and less than 600 years old. I assume that means that L159.2+ has to be less than that. The eight Byrne who tested L159.2 were all positive which, if the less-than-600-years is correct, means that my Byrne Leinster cluster can only date back to a maximum of circa 1400 AD? Am I calculating correctly?
          I think Earl Beaty once calculated that the Byrne cluster dated to about 1500 AD, which is within the same ballpark. This was puzzling because there is plenty of documented evidence that the Clan O'Byrne was organized and active against the English of the Pale from at least 1271 AD on. I suppose there could have been some kind of a bottleneck, but it would have had to be a big bottle with a very narrow neck. And it couldn't have been the English who provided the constriction. Maybe a plague?
          As for the Byrne-Beatty link, the demise of Ysearch impedes comparisons, but I tried an eyeball check of the Leinster Modal, which was derived from the Byrne Modal, against the Beatty project page. They seem to be 67/4, (differences at 449, CDYb, 534, and 444) and 111/8 (additional differences at 714, 463, 497, and 435). These are not great. While Earl thought the Byrne cluster might have moved from Scotland/northern England to Leinster, John McLaughlin and I speculated that both clusters could have descended from a Dumnonii migration up both sides of the Irish Sea. Key word of course is speculate, though there is good evidence of the Dumnonii settling both in Leinster and Scotland.
          But back to your first question about the age of the Byrne cluster. History theorizes that they sprang from the Ui Brain faction of the Ui Faelain of Kildare. In the 11th century the Ui Brain lost an intra-tribal leadership struggle with the MacFaelain faction, and had to move to the southern Wicklows. There in time it became the Breens and the O'Byrnes. The earliest mention I could find was in Otway-Ruthven's "History of Medieval Ireland" who cited an English document dated 1271 AD concerning "activity against the O'Byrnes and O'Tooles," but from then on mentions were frequent.
          I was hoping that Geno 2.0 would help us decipher the Leinster connections by dividing Z255, but it is not looking good.
          Regards,
          Paul



          --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, "marosjor" wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > Paul,
          >
          > How old would you say your Byrne Leinster cluster is? Does that include Beattys? I always think of the cluster as Beatty-Byrnes. Is this wrong?
          >
          > The O'Sheas who are Z255+, L159.2- would seem to comprise a cluster which is less than 600 years old. These O'Sheas have distant matches (g.d. 5 and higher) at 67 markers with Beattys, Singletons, Herringtons and Harringtons etc. These Beattys, Singletons etc. seem to be L159.2+ unlike the O'Sheas.
          >
          > Any light which you can throw on the above, would be welcome.
          >
          > Regards,
          > Margaret
          >
          > --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, pabloburns@ wrote:
          > >
          > > Kirsten and Margaret,
          > > Thanks for your comments. I agree that decimal estimates are rather strange, especially when followed by a plus and minus of a couple hundred years. One reason I asked about the age of Z255 was curiosity about another SNP downstream of it, now that L159.2 is being questioned. Surely, whether the age is 1400 ybp or 1700 ybp there has been plenty of time for one or more. As you know, we hope to have our Byrne Leinsters divided into families later this year, and another SNP would help. lacking that we will have to depend on STRs. I have had a positive response from our Byrne Leinster members to a request to upgrade, with four 111 orders this past week and four others saying they plan to do it.
          > > Paul
          > >
          >


        • marosjor
          Thanks Paul and Paul. There is an analysis on the Results webpage in the DYS464X Project:
          Message 4 of 19 , Mar 4, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks Paul and Paul.

            There is an analysis on the "Results" webpage in the DYS464X Project: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/DYS464x%20ccgg/default.aspx?section=results

            In the analysis, the Beatty-Byrnes-McLaughlin cluster are said to have a common ancestor.

            Z255+, L159.2- O'Sheas are cccg on DYS464X whereas the Beatty-Byrnes-McLaughlin cluster seem to be L159.2+ and ccgg.

            More work definitely needs to be done on seeing how these surnames relate to each other.

            Regards,
            Margaret




            --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, Paul Ã" DuḃṫaiÄ¡ <pduffy81@...> wrote:
            >
            > For bottlenecks the obviously ones in that time period are:
            >
            > - Tudor Conquest of Ireland 1540-1600
            > - Confederate war of 1641-53 including the Cromwellian Conquest (50%
            > population died)
            > - War of the Two Kings 1689-1691
            >
            > Basically Ireland was a "land of war" on an extreme level during this
            > period. The Cromwellian war probably had higher effect in Ireland on
            > population loss then the Black Death had.
            >
            > As for the O'Shea's and age of L159.2+, well they could be on a parellel
            > but closely related branch within Z255. What you would need to do is find
            > the TMRCA for the O'Shea's versus the O'Byrnes. That would give you the
            > earliest possible date that the common lineage was probably Z255+/L159.2-
            >
            > -Paul
            >
            > As a result you have two closely related lines one been Z255+/L159.2- and
            > the other Z255+/L159.2+
            >
            > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Paul Burns <pabloburns@...> wrote:
            >
            > > **
            > >
            > >
            > > Margaret,
            > > Interesting about the O'Sheas being L159.2- and less than 600 years old. I
            > > assume that means that L159.2+ has to be less than that. The eight Byrne
            > > who tested L159.2 were all positive which, if the less-than-600-years is
            > > correct, means that my Byrne Leinster cluster can only date back to a
            > > maximum of circa 1400 AD? Am I calculating correctly?
            > > I think Earl Beaty once calculated that the Byrne cluster dated to about
            > > 1500 AD, which is within the same ballpark. This was puzzling because there
            > > is plenty of documented evidence that the Clan O'Byrne was organized and
            > > active against the English of the Pale from at least 1271 AD on. I suppose
            > > there could have been some kind of a bottleneck, but it would have had to
            > > be a big bottle with a very narrow neck. And it couldn't have been the
            > > English who provided the constriction. Maybe a plague?
            > > As for the Byrne-Beatty link, the demise of Ysearch impedes comparisons,
            > > but I tried an eyeball check of the Leinster Modal, which was derived from
            > > the Byrne Modal, against the Beatty project page. They seem to be 67/4,
            > > (differences at 449, CDYb, 534, and 444) and 111/8 (additional differences
            > > at 714, 463, 497, and 435). These are not great. While Earl thought the
            > > Byrne cluster might have moved from Scotland/northern England to Leinster,
            > > John McLaughlin and I speculated that both clusters could have descended
            > > from a Dumnonii migration up both sides of the Irish Sea. Key word of
            > > course is speculate, though there is good evidence of the Dumnonii settling
            > > both in Leinster and Scotland.
            > > But back to your first question about the age of the Byrne cluster.
            > > History theorizes that they sprang from the Ui Brain faction of the Ui
            > > Faelain of Kildare. In the 11th century the Ui Brain lost an intra-tribal
            > > leadership struggle with the MacFaelain faction, and had to move to the
            > > southern Wicklows. There in time it became the Breens and the O'Byrnes. The
            > > earliest mention I could find was in Otway-Ruthven's "History of Medieval
            > > Ireland" who cited an English document dated 1271 AD concerning "activity
            > > against the O'Byrnes and O'Tooles," but from then on mentions were frequent.
            > > I was hoping that Geno 2.0 would help us decipher the Leinster connections
            > > by dividing Z255, but it is not looking good.
            > > Regards,
            > > Paul
            > >
          • burnspaulj
            Paul D, Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a
            Message 5 of 19 , Mar 4, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Paul D,
              Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a possible bottleneck in the Clan O'Byrne, though since the O'Byrnes were very active against the English of the Pale just a few decades later, it probably was not a true bottleneck--at least for them. A bottleneck that reduced the Wicklow Irish would have had to occur a century earlier.
              One account said the Black Death was much more devastating to town people than rural people, for obvious reasons, so the English town dwellers were more affected than the Irish clans. The result was that the boundaries of the Pale shrank inwards after the plague passed through.
              I don't know if anyone has done a TMRCA comparison of the O'Byrnes, O'Sheas, or any other Z255 tribes. Kirsten, would you know?
              Paul B
            • Paul Ó Duḃṫaiġ
              Paul, You may find the following useful for putting 16th century in context with regards to Leinster:
              Message 6 of 19 , Mar 4, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Paul,

                You may find the following useful for putting 16th century in context with regards to Leinster:


                ------
                Martial law made its first appearance in Ireland in the late 1550s, and was brought in by one of its most committed Tudor advocates, Lord Lieutenant Sussex. Those in receipt of a commission were given extra ordinary powers over those subject to its power. In general, commissioners were required to search out all disorders within their jurisdiction, and to execute all felons, rebels, "enemies" and "evil doers". The terms of the commissions were intentionally vague, though those who owned more than £2 per annum freehold or £10 in chattels were usually exempt from its remit unless they were actually caught in the act. Everyone else, in practice the vast majority of the populace, faced the prospect of sudden arrest and execution without warrant or trial, to be determined at the whim of the commissioner. At its outset, the prime motivation behind this judicial approach was to rid these territories of private soldiers, and hence make the Captains' jobs that much easier. In effect it became the standard judicial code employed throughout the country (especially within the Gaelic lordships) for most of the reign of Elizabeth I.
                -----

                In general the Black Death is regarded as having less an effect on Gaelic lordships then on the colony. It along with the Bruce Wars in earlier part of 14th century put the colony into near terminal decline, which resulted in a near complete "Gaelic reconquista" by the turn of the 16th century.

                As for bottlenecks, well if for example the Uí Faoláin were driven from North Kildare by the Norman invasion it's quite probable that the original "Wicklow settlement" was quite minimum in numbers. After all the surname only first arose about 100 years before the invasion. The titular Bran having died in 1052 -- in Cologne of all places!

                -Paul
                (DF41+)

                On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:03 PM, <pabloburns@...> wrote:
                 

                Paul D,
                Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a possible bottleneck in the Clan O'Byrne, though since the O'Byrnes were very active against the English of the Pale just a few decades later, it probably was not a true bottleneck--at least for them. A bottleneck that reduced the Wicklow Irish would have had to occur a century earlier.
                One account said the Black Death was much more devastating to town people than rural people, for obvious reasons, so the English town dwellers were more affected than the Irish clans. The result was that the boundaries of the Pale shrank inwards after the plague passed through.
                I don't know if anyone has done a TMRCA comparison of the O'Byrnes, O'Sheas, or any other Z255 tribes. Kirsten, would you know?
                Paul B


              • burnspaulj
                Daniel, A problem with Spencer s theory, that the O Byrnes came from Wales, is that many of the Leinster tribes are genetically close, having Z255 and 464=ccgg
                Message 7 of 19 , Mar 4, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Daniel,
                  A problem with Spencer's theory, that the O'Byrnes came from Wales, is that many of the Leinster tribes are genetically close, having Z255 and 464=ccgg in common. L159.2 may divide them, which is why its age is especially important. Geno 2.0 has yet to provide another Z255 divider, so perhaps we should focus on L159.2 for that. If, however, Spencer meant that several or many Leinster tribes came from Wales, perhaps that takes us back to the Dumnonii or Brigantes?

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Daniel at" <maxinej28@...>
                  To: pabloburns@...
                  Cc: "Beatty Byrnes DNA" <Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com>, "Kirsten Saxe" <dnalister@...>, "Daniel Byrne-Rothwell" <maxinej28@...>
                  Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 8:13:37 AM
                  Subject: Re: Ages of Z255 and L159.2


                  Paul,
                  Nothing I can see that would seem to indicate a bottleneck in the 1200s. At that time the Leinster Byrnes appear to be numerically small, and politically insignificant, especially compared to the neighbouring Kavanaghs. They survive as loyal tenants on the Wicklow lands of the FitzGeralds of Kildare.


                  What we have before that is a noble family - feudal tenets by grace of the MacMurrough in 1172 - of the strategic fort at the Duffrey. When they appear at Shillelagh a while later there is no indication that they are going to absorb all Wicklow as far as The Pale, or capable of it, or become major players on the scene.


                  I have looked for one genetic line that might be the "Kildare Byrne royal family" so to speak, who perhaps became adopted leaders of a local Wicklow clan or clans, who eventually formed the majority of the Clann Byrne. Genetically unrelated in near times? There again, was Spencer partly right, did the Wicklows provide a refuge from those fleeing the English military campaign/genocide in Wales of the 1200s? If so, then it is possible that Byrne military strength went from 10s to 100s in a very short time. Whatever the scenario, their rise to power and political significance so quickly is a mystery and still unaccounted for. It is a very interesting DNA problem.



                  Daniel.







                  On 4 March 2013 12:03, < pabloburns@... > wrote:


                  Paul D,
                  Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a possible bottleneck in the Clan O'Byrne, though since the O'Byrnes were very active against the English of the Pale just a few decades later, it probably was not a true bottleneck--at least for them. A bottleneck that reduced the Wicklow Irish would have had to occur a century earlier.
                  One account said the Black Death was much more devastating to town people than rural people, for obvious reasons, so the English town dwellers were more affected than the Irish clans. The result was that the boundaries of the Pale shrank inwards after the plague passed through.
                  I don't know if anyone has done a TMRCA comparison of the O'Byrnes, O'Sheas, or any other Z255 tribes. Kirsten, would you know?
                  Paul B
                • kirstensaxe
                  Margaret, thank you for your comments. I was about to call attention to the cccg status of the O Sheas. I think the O Sheas did branch off from the line with
                  Message 8 of 19 , Mar 4, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Margaret, thank you for your comments. I was about to call attention to the cccg status of the O'Sheas. I think the O'Sheas did branch off from the line with the L159.2 mutation before the L159.2 mutation occurred. This would fit well with your research into the history of the O'Shea line, which you did say would not be expected to be closely related to the Beatty-Byrnes-McLaughlin cluster. As far as I can tell from the test results that I have seen, L159.2 has been stable and reliably divides R-Z255. We might run into evidence of a L159.2 back mutation in the future, but most of the Z255+ L159.2- haplotypes seem to fit into clusters which are reasonably old and have signatures suggestive of descent from a cousin of the L159.2+ founder.

                    Kirsten


                    From: "marosjor" <m.jordan246@...>
                    To: "Beatty Byrnes DNA" <Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 5:31:28 AM
                    Subject: [Beatty_Byrnes_DNA] Re: Ages of Z255 and L159.2

                     



                    Thanks Paul and Paul.

                    There is an analysis on the "Results" webpage in the DYS464X Project: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/DYS464x%20ccgg/default.aspx?section=results

                    In the analysis, the Beatty-Byrnes-McLaughlin cluster are said to have a common ancestor.

                    Z255+, L159.2- O'Sheas are cccg on DYS464X whereas the Beatty-Byrnes-McLaughlin cluster seem to be L159.2+ and ccgg.

                    More work definitely needs to be done on seeing how these surnames relate to each other.

                    Regards,
                    Margaret

                    --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, Paul Ã" DuḃṫaiÄ¡ wrote:
                    >
                    > For bottlenecks the obviously ones in that time period are:
                    >
                    > - Tudor Conquest of Ireland 1540-1600
                    > - Confederate war of 1641-53 including the Cromwellian Conquest (50%
                    > population died)
                    > - War of the Two Kings 1689-1691
                    >
                    > Basically Ireland was a "land of war" on an extreme level during this
                    > period. The Cromwellian war probably had higher effect in Ireland on
                    > population loss then the Black Death had.
                    >
                    > As for the O'Shea's and age of L159.2+, well they could be on a parellel
                    > but closely related branch within Z255. What you would need to do is find
                    > the TMRCA for the O'Shea's versus the O'Byrnes. That would give you the
                    > earliest possible date that the common lineage was probably Z255+/L159.2-
                    >
                    > -Paul
                    >
                    > As a result you have two closely related lines one been Z255+/L159.2- and
                    > the other Z255+/L159.2+
                    >
                    > On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Paul Burns wrote:
                    >
                    > > **
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Margaret,
                    > > Interesting about the O'Sheas being L159.2- and less than 600 years old. I
                    > > assume that means that L159.2+ has to be less than that. The eight Byrne
                    > > who tested L159.2 were all positive which, if the less-than-600-years is
                    > > correct, means that my Byrne Leinster cluster can only date back to a
                    > > maximum of circa 1400 AD? Am I calculating correctly?
                    > > I think Earl Beaty once calculated that the Byrne cluster dated to about
                    > > 1500 AD, which is within the same ballpark. This was puzzling because there
                    > > is plenty of documented evidence that the Clan O'Byrne was organized and
                    > > active against the English of the Pale from at least 1271 AD on. I suppose
                    > > there could have been some kind of a bottleneck, but it would have had to
                    > > be a big bottle with a very narrow neck. And it couldn't have been the
                    > > English who provided the constriction. Maybe a plague?
                    > > As for the Byrne-Beatty link, the demise of Ysearch impedes comparisons,
                    > > but I tried an eyeball check of the Leinster Modal, which was derived from
                    > > the Byrne Modal, against the Beatty project page. They seem to be 67/4,
                    > > (differences at 449, CDYb, 534, and 444) and 111/8 (additional differences
                    > > at 714, 463, 497, and 435). These are not great. While Earl thought the
                    > > Byrne cluster might have moved from Scotland/northern England to Leinster,
                    > > John McLaughlin and I speculated that both clusters could have descended
                    > > from a Dumnonii migration up both sides of the Irish Sea. Key word of
                    > > course is speculate, though there is good evidence of the Dumnonii settling
                    > > both in Leinster and Scotland.
                    > > But back to your first question about the age of the Byrne cluster.
                    > > History theorizes that they sprang from the Ui Brain faction of the Ui
                    > > Faelain of Kildare. In the 11th century the Ui Brain lost an intra-tribal
                    > > leadership struggle with the MacFaelain faction, and had to move to the
                    > > southern Wicklows. There in time it became the Breens and the O'Byrnes. The
                    > > earliest mention I could find was in Otway-Ruthven's "History of Medieval
                    > > Ireland" who cited an English document dated 1271 AD concerning "activity
                    > > against the O'Byrnes and O'Tooles," but from then on mentions were frequent.
                    > > I was hoping that Geno 2.0 would help us decipher the Leinster connections
                    > > by dividing Z255, but it is not looking good.
                    > > Regards,
                    > > Paul
                    > >

                  • kirstensaxe
                    Paul B, I don t know of any recent TMRCA work for families within R-Z255. It would be nice to be able to do some TMRCA work including intraclade and interclade
                    Message 9 of 19 , Mar 5, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Paul B,

                      I don't know of any recent TMRCA work for families within R-Z255.

                      It would be nice to be able to do some TMRCA work including intraclade and interclade comparisons for some of the clusters and clades that we have recognized which include more than one family. I am thinking about R-L159.2 and the various mystery clusters, and also about clusters within R-L159.2. One of the more interesting groups is the Mystery Group 2. Few have tested to confirm that they are L159.2-, Z255+, and to find out if they are ccgg, so we really haven't explored the bounds of this cluster, which might be fairly large. There is potential to do those sorts of estimates now and to gather more data and do calculations later. This is a worthy project, and if I did not have other commitments at the moment, I would be working on it. It may be that someone else will be able to work on this before I am.

                      Kirsten


                      From: pabloburns@...
                      To: "Beatty Byrnes DNA" <Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com>
                      Cc: "Kirsten Saxe" <dnalister@...>, "Daniel Byrne-Rothwell" <maxinej28@...>
                      Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 7:03:25 AM
                      Subject: Ages of Z255 and L159.2

                      Paul D,
                         Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a possible bottleneck in the Clan O'Byrne, though since the O'Byrnes were very active against the English of the Pale just a few decades later, it probably was not a true bottleneck--at least for them. A bottleneck that reduced the Wicklow Irish would have had to occur a century earlier.
                         One account said the Black Death was much more devastating to town people than rural people, for obvious reasons, so the English town dwellers were more affected than the Irish clans. The result was that the boundaries of the Pale shrank inwards after the plague passed through.
                         I don't know if anyone has done a TMRCA comparison of the O'Byrnes, O'Sheas, or any other Z255 tribes. Kirsten, would you know?
                      Paul B
                    • mikewww7
                      For all of the people in the L21plus project or otherwise on my R1b-L21_Haplotypes spreadsheet, Mark Jost can do estimates using Ken Nordtvedt s methods. He
                      Message 10 of 19 , Mar 5, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        For all of the people in the L21plus project or otherwise on my R1b-L21_Haplotypes spreadsheet, Mark Jost can do estimates using Ken Nordtvedt's methods. He can do it pretty quickly.

                        Mike W

                        --- In Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com, dnalister@... wrote:
                        >
                        > Paul B,
                        >
                        > I don't know of any recent TMRCA work for families within R-Z255.
                        >
                        > It would be nice to be able to do some TMRCA work including intraclade and interclade comparisons for some of the clusters and clades that we have recognized which include more than one family. I am thinking about R-L159.2 and the various mystery clusters, and also about clusters within R-L159.2. One of the more interesting groups is the Mystery Group 2. Few have tested to confirm that they are L159.2-, Z255+, and to find out if they are ccgg, so we really haven't explored the bounds of this cluster, which might be fairly large. There is potential to do those sorts of estimates now and to gather more data and do calculations later. This is a worthy project, and if I did not have other commitments at the moment, I would be working on it. It may be that someone else will be able to work on this before I am.
                        >
                        > Kirsten
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: pabloburns@...
                        > To: "Beatty Byrnes DNA" <Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com>
                        > Cc: "Kirsten Saxe" <dnalister@...>, "Daniel Byrne-Rothwell" <maxinej28@...>
                        > Sent: Monday, March 4, 2013 7:03:25 AM
                        > Subject: Ages of Z255 and L159.2
                        >
                        > Paul D,
                        > Thanks for your comments. For the record, I did check on the Black Death, and it arrived in Ireland in 1348. That is much closer to the time of a possible bottleneck in the Clan O'Byrne, though since the O'Byrnes were very active against the English of the Pale just a few decades later, it probably was not a true bottleneck--at least for them. A bottleneck that reduced the Wicklow Irish would have had to occur a century earlier.
                        > One account said the Black Death was much more devastating to town people than rural people, for obvious reasons, so the English town dwellers were more affected than the Irish clans. The result was that the boundaries of the Pale shrank inwards after the plague passed through.
                        > I don't know if anyone has done a TMRCA comparison of the O'Byrnes, O'Sheas, or any other Z255 tribes. Kirsten, would you know?
                        > Paul B
                        >
                      • Lisa Polk
                        Where can I find Mike Walsh s spreadsheet?
                        Message 11 of 19 , Mar 5, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Where can I find Mike Walsh's spreadsheet?
                        • Kim Fields
                          http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b-L21-Project/ under links ________________________________ From: Lisa Polk To:
                          Message 12 of 19 , Mar 5, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment


                            From: Lisa Polk <lpolk008c@...>
                            To: "Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com" <Beatty_Byrnes_DNA@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Tue, March 5, 2013 11:03:41 AM
                            Subject: [Beatty_Byrnes_DNA] SpreadSheet

                             

                            Where can I find Mike Walsh's spreadsheet?
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.