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

Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

Expand Messages
  • Charles Moore
    The triangulated results of Somerset s descendants creates the presumed Plantagenet signature, regardless of whether they are able to obtain anything decent
    Message 1 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013
      The triangulated results of Somerset's descendants creates the presumed Plantagenet signature, regardless of whether they are able to obtain anything decent from Richard's remains.

      If they are able to obtain a reasonable result, and it matches, then that would push the triangulation much further back in time.

      If they obtain a result, and it doesn't match, that won't mean that it isn't Richard.  It will create a presumption that his type is the Plantagenet type, and that there has been an NPE on the line that leads to Somerset, over the intervening centuries.

      As Brian said, it's less than ideal.  On any old paperwork line of descent, there could be one or two or more NPEs, and we wouldn't know, unless we have triangulated DNA results that match the paper.

      However, that all 4 of these guys match via an ancestor who was born over 260 years ago, is encouraging re the lurking possibilities of NPEs elsewhere.

      Even so, if Richard's remains match, that will only mean that we will have the signature of Edward III.  That will create a presumption about Edward II etc further back up the line, but only a presumption.

      This shows the value of ancient remains, and even more so when they are entombed in marked tombs.  However, although these are the most valuable remains, they are also the least likely to ever be disturbed.

      We simply have to take whatever information we have at any point along the way, and make the best decision we can about it, until such time as we might have better information.  That is genealogy.  It isn't about proving anything.

      However, triangulated results that match matching DNA to well-documented paper, are as good as it gets, back to the point of the triangulation, but only on the triangulated lines, and only to the tested descendants of those lines.

      Charles


      On Feb 12, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

       

      Ah, so not reassuring at all.  And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
      Piero



      On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann <bps@...> wrote:
       

      I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

       

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

       

      So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

       

      This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

       

      As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

       

      And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

       

      Brian

       

      From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
      Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
      To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

       

      It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

       

      Piero

       

      On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:13 AM, GTC <gtc@...> wrote:

       

      Thanks. Here's the NYT link:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/more-dna-tests-to-confirm-skeleton-is-richard-iiis.html?_r=0



      --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Debbie Kennett" wrote:
      >
      > I am told that there is an article in the New York Times with further
      > information on the Y-chromosome testing of Richard III. I can't seem to find
      > the article online at the moment but here are the relevant details:
      >
      > February 11, 2013
      > Tracing a Royal Y Chromosome
      > By NICHOLAS WADE New York Times
      >
      > Researchers last week developed DNA evidence to help identify the remains of
      > a skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester, England, as those of
      > Richard III, the last English king to die in battle, in 1485. But the
      > researchers' work is only half-done. They have made a strong but not
      > conclusive link through the female line, and are now turning to the male
      > side for corroboration.
      >
      > Turi King, a geneticist at the University of Leicester, found a match in the
      > mitochondrial DNA extracted from the parking lot skeleton and that of two
      > living descendants of Anne of York, Richard III's sister. About 1 percent of
      > the English population carries this type. Mitochondrial DNA is bequeathed
      > exclusively through the female line.
      >
      > Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute near
      > Cambridge, said the mitochondrial DNA type identified by Dr. King was "rare
      > enough to be interesting, but not rare enough to be conclusive."
      >
      > The Leicester team plans to investigate the paternal DNA of the remains.
      > Kevin Schürer, a historian at the university, has already found four living
      > descendants of John of Gaunt, the son of Edward III, who was Richard III's
      > great-great-grandfather. Dr. King has found that their Y chromosome, which
      > is carried only by men, match, establishing that they are all true
      > descendants of John of Gaunt.
      >
      > The Y chromosome DNA from the skeleton is very degraded, but Dr. King said
      > she had found that she could amplify it and hopes to get enough to make a
      > match with the living descendants.
      >

       


    • Brian Swann
      Just discovered that one of these lines is certainly very interesting. It leads to FitzRoy Somerset, 1st Baron Raglan (1788-1855), who was in command of the
      Message 2 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013

        Just discovered that one of these lines is certainly very interesting.  It leads to FitzRoy Somerset, 1st Baron Raglan (1788-1855), who was in command of the British Army at the beginning of the Crimean War, and also played quite an important part in the Peninsular War.

         

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzroy_James_Henry_Somerset,_1st_Baron_Raglan

         

        The current descendant from this line, is the 6th Baron:

         

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Somerset,_6th_Baron_Raglan

         

        Brian

         

        From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brian Swann
        Sent: 12 February 2013 09:45
        To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

         

         I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

        So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

        This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

        As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

        And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

        Brian

        From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
        Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
        To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

        It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

        Piero

        On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:13 AM, GTC <gtc@...> wrote:

      • Piero Sinclair
        Unlikely I know, but if Richard III doesn t match up to the Somerset descendants there is the possibility that they are the ones who actually descend from
        Message 3 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013
          Unlikely I know, but if Richard III doesn't match up to the Somerset descendants there is the possibility that they are the ones who actually descend from Edward III, and there was an NPE with either Edward III's youngest son Edmund, or Richard Earl of Cambridge or Richard Plantagenet (father of Edward IV and Richard III).
          Personally though I like to think NPEs are rare in most families.  
          Piero



          On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Charles Moore <cdmo29@...> wrote:
           

          The triangulated results of Somerset's descendants creates the presumed Plantagenet signature, regardless of whether they are able to obtain anything decent from Richard's remains.

          If they are able to obtain a reasonable result, and it matches, then that would push the triangulation much further back in time.

          If they obtain a result, and it doesn't match, that won't mean that it isn't Richard.  It will create a presumption that his type is the Plantagenet type, and that there has been an NPE on the line that leads to Somerset, over the intervening centuries.

          As Brian said, it's less than ideal.  On any old paperwork line of descent, there could be one or two or more NPEs, and we wouldn't know, unless we have triangulated DNA results that match the paper.

          However, that all 4 of these guys match via an ancestor who was born over 260 years ago, is encouraging re the lurking possibilities of NPEs elsewhere.

          Even so, if Richard's remains match, that will only mean that we will have the signature of Edward III.  That will create a presumption about Edward II etc further back up the line, but only a presumption.

          This shows the value of ancient remains, and even more so when they are entombed in marked tombs.  However, although these are the most valuable remains, they are also the least likely to ever be disturbed.

          We simply have to take whatever information we have at any point along the way, and make the best decision we can about it, until such time as we might have better information.  That is genealogy.  It isn't about proving anything.

          However, triangulated results that match matching DNA to well-documented paper, are as good as it gets, back to the point of the triangulation, but only on the triangulated lines, and only to the tested descendants of those lines.

          Charles


          On Feb 12, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

           

          Ah, so not reassuring at all.  And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
          Piero



          On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann <bps@...> wrote:
           

          I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

           

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

           

          So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

           

          This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

           

          As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

           

          And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

           

          Brian

           

          From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
          Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
          To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

           

          It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

           

          Piero

           

          On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:13 AM, GTC <gtc@...> wrote:

           

          Thanks. Here's the NYT link:

          http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/more-dna-tests-to-confirm-skeleton-is-richard-iiis.html?_r=0



          --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Debbie Kennett" wrote:
          >
          > I am told that there is an article in the New York Times with further
          > information on the Y-chromosome testing of Richard III. I can't seem to find
          > the article online at the moment but here are the relevant details:
          >
          > February 11, 2013
          > Tracing a Royal Y Chromosome
          > By NICHOLAS WADE New York Times
          >
          > Researchers last week developed DNA evidence to help identify the remains of
          > a skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester, England, as those of
          > Richard III, the last English king to die in battle, in 1485. But the
          > researchers' work is only half-done. They have made a strong but not
          > conclusive link through the female line, and are now turning to the male
          > side for corroboration.
          >
          > Turi King, a geneticist at the University of Leicester, found a match in the
          > mitochondrial DNA extracted from the parking lot skeleton and that of two
          > living descendants of Anne of York, Richard III's sister. About 1 percent of
          > the English population carries this type. Mitochondrial DNA is bequeathed
          > exclusively through the female line.
          >
          > Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute near
          > Cambridge, said the mitochondrial DNA type identified by Dr. King was "rare
          > enough to be interesting, but not rare enough to be conclusive."
          >
          > The Leicester team plans to investigate the paternal DNA of the remains.
          > Kevin Schürer, a historian at the university, has already found four living
          > descendants of John of Gaunt, the son of Edward III, who was Richard III's
          > great-great-grandfather. Dr. King has found that their Y chromosome, which
          > is carried only by men, match, establishing that they are all true
          > descendants of John of Gaunt.
          >
          > The Y chromosome DNA from the skeleton is very degraded, but Dr. King said
          > she had found that she could amplify it and hopes to get enough to make a
          > match with the living descendants.
          >

           



        • Charles Moore
          Right. I was just saying the probabilities would be the other way, because of the greater distance, unless there was other information creating more suspicion
          Message 4 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013
            Right.  I was just saying the probabilities would be the other way, because of the greater distance, unless there was other information creating more suspicion on his line. 

            Charles


            On Feb 12, 2013, at 10:44 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

             

            Unlikely I know, but if Richard III doesn't match up to the Somerset descendants there is the possibility that they are the ones who actually descend from Edward III, and there was an NPE with either Edward III's youngest son Edmund, or Richard Earl of Cambridge or Richard Plantagenet (father of Edward IV and Richard III).
            Personally though I like to think NPEs are rare in most families.  
            Piero



            On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Charles Moore <cdmo29@...> wrote:
             

            The triangulated results of Somerset's descendants creates the presumed Plantagenet signature, regardless of whether they are able to obtain anything decent from Richard's remains.

            If they are able to obtain a reasonable result, and it matches, then that would push the triangulation much further back in time.

            If they obtain a result, and it doesn't match, that won't mean that it isn't Richard.  It will create a presumption that his type is the Plantagenet type, and that there has been an NPE on the line that leads to Somerset, over the intervening centuries.

            As Brian said, it's less than ideal.  On any old paperwork line of descent, there could be one or two or more NPEs, and we wouldn't know, unless we have triangulated DNA results that match the paper.

            However, that all 4 of these guys match via an ancestor who was born over 260 years ago, is encouraging re the lurking possibilities of NPEs elsewhere.

            Even so, if Richard's remains match, that will only mean that we will have the signature of Edward III.  That will create a presumption about Edward II etc further back up the line, but only a presumption.

            This shows the value of ancient remains, and even more so when they are entombed in marked tombs.  However, although these are the most valuable remains, they are also the least likely to ever be disturbed.

            We simply have to take whatever information we have at any point along the way, and make the best decision we can about it, until such time as we might have better information.  That is genealogy.  It isn't about proving anything.

            However, triangulated results that match matching DNA to well-documented paper, are as good as it gets, back to the point of the triangulation, but only on the triangulated lines, and only to the tested descendants of those lines.

            Charles


            On Feb 12, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

             

            Ah, so not reassuring at all.  And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
            Piero



            On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann <bps@...> wrote:
             

            I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

             

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

             

            So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

             

            This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

             

            As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

             

            And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

             

            Brian

             

            From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
            Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
            To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

             

            It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

             

            Piero

             

            On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:13 AM, GTC <gtc@...> wrote:

             

            Thanks. Here's the NYT link:

            http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/more-dna-tests-to-confirm-skeleton-is-richard-iiis.html?_r=0



            --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Debbie Kennett" wrote:
            >
            > I am told that there is an article in the New York Times with further
            > information on the Y-chromosome testing of Richard III. I can't seem to find
            > the article online at the moment but here are the relevant details:
            >
            > February 11, 2013
            > Tracing a Royal Y Chromosome
            > By NICHOLAS WADE New York Times
            >
            > Researchers last week developed DNA evidence to help identify the remains of
            > a skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester, England, as those of
            > Richard III, the last English king to die in battle, in 1485. But the
            > researchers' work is only half-done. They have made a strong but not
            > conclusive link through the female line, and are now turning to the male
            > side for corroboration.
            >
            > Turi King, a geneticist at the University of Leicester, found a match in the
            > mitochondrial DNA extracted from the parking lot skeleton and that of two
            > living descendants of Anne of York, Richard III's sister. About 1 percent of
            > the English population carries this type. Mitochondrial DNA is bequeathed
            > exclusively through the female line.
            >
            > Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute near
            > Cambridge, said the mitochondrial DNA type identified by Dr. King was "rare
            > enough to be interesting, but not rare enough to be conclusive."
            >
            > The Leicester team plans to investigate the paternal DNA of the remains.
            > Kevin Schürer, a historian at the university, has already found four living
            > descendants of John of Gaunt, the son of Edward III, who was Richard III's
            > great-great-grandfather. Dr. King has found that their Y chromosome, which
            > is carried only by men, match, establishing that they are all true
            > descendants of John of Gaunt.
            >
            > The Y chromosome DNA from the skeleton is very degraded, but Dr. King said
            > she had found that she could amplify it and hopes to get enough to make a
            > match with the living descendants.
            >

             



          • Piero Sinclair
            Absolutely. Piero ... Absolutely. Piero On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Charles Moore wrote:   Right.  I was just saying the
            Message 5 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013
              Absolutely.
              Piero


              On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Charles Moore <cdmo29@...> wrote:
               

              Right.  I was just saying the probabilities would be the other way, because of the greater distance, unless there was other information creating more suspicion on his line. 

              Charles


              On Feb 12, 2013, at 10:44 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

               

              Unlikely I know, but if Richard III doesn't match up to the Somerset descendants there is the possibility that they are the ones who actually descend from Edward III, and there was an NPE with either Edward III's youngest son Edmund, or Richard Earl of Cambridge or Richard Plantagenet (father of Edward IV and Richard III).
              Personally though I like to think NPEs are rare in most families.  
              Piero



              On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Charles Moore <cdmo29@...> wrote:
               

              The triangulated results of Somerset's descendants creates the presumed Plantagenet signature, regardless of whether they are able to obtain anything decent from Richard's remains.

              If they are able to obtain a reasonable result, and it matches, then that would push the triangulation much further back in time.

              If they obtain a result, and it doesn't match, that won't mean that it isn't Richard.  It will create a presumption that his type is the Plantagenet type, and that there has been an NPE on the line that leads to Somerset, over the intervening centuries.

              As Brian said, it's less than ideal.  On any old paperwork line of descent, there could be one or two or more NPEs, and we wouldn't know, unless we have triangulated DNA results that match the paper.

              However, that all 4 of these guys match via an ancestor who was born over 260 years ago, is encouraging re the lurking possibilities of NPEs elsewhere.

              Even so, if Richard's remains match, that will only mean that we will have the signature of Edward III.  That will create a presumption about Edward II etc further back up the line, but only a presumption.

              This shows the value of ancient remains, and even more so when they are entombed in marked tombs.  However, although these are the most valuable remains, they are also the least likely to ever be disturbed.

              We simply have to take whatever information we have at any point along the way, and make the best decision we can about it, until such time as we might have better information.  That is genealogy.  It isn't about proving anything.

              However, triangulated results that match matching DNA to well-documented paper, are as good as it gets, back to the point of the triangulation, but only on the triangulated lines, and only to the tested descendants of those lines.

              Charles


              On Feb 12, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Piero Sinclair <pierosinclair@...> wrote:

               

              Ah, so not reassuring at all.  And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
              Piero



              On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann <bps@...> wrote:
               

              I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

               

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

               

              So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

               

              This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

               

              As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

               

              And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

               

              Brian

               

              From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
              Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
              To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

               

              It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

               

              Piero

               

              On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:13 AM, GTC <gtc@...> wrote:

               

              Thanks. Here's the NYT link:

              http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/more-dna-tests-to-confirm-skeleton-is-richard-iiis.html?_r=0



              --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Debbie Kennett" wrote:
              >
              > I am told that there is an article in the New York Times with further
              > information on the Y-chromosome testing of Richard III. I can't seem to find
              > the article online at the moment but here are the relevant details:
              >
              > February 11, 2013
              > Tracing a Royal Y Chromosome
              > By NICHOLAS WADE New York Times
              >
              > Researchers last week developed DNA evidence to help identify the remains of
              > a skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester, England, as those of
              > Richard III, the last English king to die in battle, in 1485. But the
              > researchers' work is only half-done. They have made a strong but not
              > conclusive link through the female line, and are now turning to the male
              > side for corroboration.
              >
              > Turi King, a geneticist at the University of Leicester, found a match in the
              > mitochondrial DNA extracted from the parking lot skeleton and that of two
              > living descendants of Anne of York, Richard III's sister. About 1 percent of
              > the English population carries this type. Mitochondrial DNA is bequeathed
              > exclusively through the female line.
              >
              > Chris Tyler-Smith, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute near
              > Cambridge, said the mitochondrial DNA type identified by Dr. King was "rare
              > enough to be interesting, but not rare enough to be conclusive."
              >
              > The Leicester team plans to investigate the paternal DNA of the remains.
              > Kevin Schürer, a historian at the university, has already found four living
              > descendants of John of Gaunt, the son of Edward III, who was Richard III's
              > great-great-grandfather. Dr. King has found that their Y chromosome, which
              > is carried only by men, match, establishing that they are all true
              > descendants of John of Gaunt.
              >
              > The Y chromosome DNA from the skeleton is very degraded, but Dr. King said
              > she had found that she could amplify it and hopes to get enough to make a
              > match with the living descendants.
              >

               




            • Belinda Dettmann
              May I remind you of a number of successful triangulations back to Alexander Stewart, 4th High Steward of Scotland (1214-1283)? So NPEs at that distance are not
              Message 6 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013

                May I remind you of a number of successful triangulations back to Alexander Stewart, 4th High Steward of Scotland (1214-1283)? So NPEs at that distance are not inevitable.

                 

                Alexander 5th HS has modern descendants from two of his sons: James, 5th High Steward, and Sir John of Bonkyl. James 5th HS was the ancestor of the Stewart Kings of Scotland, via King Robert II.  Sir John of Bonkyl was the ancestor of the Lennox Stuarts, Henry Darnley (husband of Mary Queen of Scots) and the English Royal Stuarts. The Stewart DNA Project has representatives of both sides of the family and their Y-DNA matches. However I will admit that we also have a few testers who claim the same descent but whose Y-DNA doesn’t match, so, as you would expect, there are a few NPEs involved. The true line is R1b-L744, with 78 matching testers, of which 13 have proven or suspected lines from Alexander 4th HS. We also have claimed descendants from Alexander 4th HS in I2b1 ( 9 members, 1 claimant) and R1b-L2 (9 members, 2 claimant).

                 

                Belinda

                 

                From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                Sent: Tuesday, 12 February 2013 11:58 PM
                To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

                 

                Ah, so not reassuring at all.  And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.

                Piero

                 

                On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann <bps@...> wrote:

                I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).  So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown

                So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in 1485.  If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the words - only son – occur several times.

                This is quite similar to my Picton family.  Although we can get a paper trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this line before a Picton born in 1713/14.  Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines probably triangulate on him.

                As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas Picton’s male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.

                And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried.  I have decided that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral.  But I would still rate chances of success at below one per-cent.

                Brian

                From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
                To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA

                It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended on the male line from John of Gaunt.  Just shows that NPEs are not that common.

                Piero

              • BradML
                Brian, The following link shows quite a few living descendants of John of Gaunt:
                Message 7 of 15 , Feb 12, 2013
                  Brian,

                  The following link shows quite a few living descendants of John of Gaunt:
                  http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00000812&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=6

                  Thanks,
                  Brad (www.the-kings-son.com)


                  --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Belinda Dettmann" wrote:
                  >
                  > May I remind you of a number of successful triangulations back to Alexander
                  > Stewart, 4th High Steward of Scotland (1214-1283)? So NPEs at that distance
                  > are not inevitable.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Alexander 5th HS has modern descendants from two of his sons: James, 5th
                  > High Steward, and Sir John of Bonkyl. James 5th HS was the ancestor of the
                  > Stewart Kings of Scotland, via King Robert II. Sir John of Bonkyl was the
                  > ancestor of the Lennox Stuarts, Henry Darnley (husband of Mary Queen of
                  > Scots) and the English Royal Stuarts. The Stewart DNA Project has
                  > representatives of both sides of the family and their Y-DNA matches. However
                  > I will admit that we also have a few testers who claim the same descent but
                  > whose Y-DNA doesn't match, so, as you would expect, there are a few NPEs
                  > involved. The true line is R1b-L744, with 78 matching testers, of which 13
                  > have proven or suspected lines from Alexander 4th HS. We also have claimed
                  > descendants from Alexander 4th HS in I2b1 ( 9 members, 1 claimant) and
                  > R1b-L2 (9 members, 2 claimant).
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Belinda
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
                  > On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                  > Sent: Tuesday, 12 February 2013 11:58 PM
                  > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Ah, so not reassuring at all. And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y
                  > dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
                  >
                  > Piero
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann
                  > wrote:
                  >
                  > I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of
                  > Beaufort (1744-1803). So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.
                  >
                  > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown
                  >
                  > So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in
                  > 1485. If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the
                  > words - only son - occur several times.
                  >
                  > This is quite similar to my Picton family. Although we can get a paper
                  > trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this
                  > line before a Picton born in 1713/14. Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton
                  > who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines
                  > probably triangulate on him.
                  >
                  > As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or
                  > daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas
                  > Picton's male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.
                  >
                  > And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously
                  > about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in
                  > Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried. I have decided
                  > that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral. But I would still rate
                  > chances of success at below one per-cent.
                  >
                  > Brian
                  >
                  > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
                  > On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                  > Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
                  > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA
                  >
                  > It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended
                  > on the male line from John of Gaunt. Just shows that NPEs are not that
                  > common.
                  >
                  > Piero
                  >
                • allenbrown_u106_z9_null425
                  But as Brian says, all the living descendants shown on that page descend from Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).
                  Message 8 of 15 , Feb 13, 2013
                    But as Brian says, all the living descendants shown on that page descend from Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803).


                    --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "BradML" wrote:
                    >
                    > Brian,
                    >
                    > The following link shows quite a few living descendants of John of Gaunt:
                    > http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00000812&tree=LEO&displayoption=male&generations=6
                    >
                    > Thanks,
                    > Brad (www.the-kings-son.com)
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Belinda Dettmann" wrote:
                    > >
                    > > May I remind you of a number of successful triangulations back to Alexander
                    > > Stewart, 4th High Steward of Scotland (1214-1283)? So NPEs at that distance
                    > > are not inevitable.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Alexander 5th HS has modern descendants from two of his sons: James, 5th
                    > > High Steward, and Sir John of Bonkyl. James 5th HS was the ancestor of the
                    > > Stewart Kings of Scotland, via King Robert II. Sir John of Bonkyl was the
                    > > ancestor of the Lennox Stuarts, Henry Darnley (husband of Mary Queen of
                    > > Scots) and the English Royal Stuarts. The Stewart DNA Project has
                    > > representatives of both sides of the family and their Y-DNA matches. However
                    > > I will admit that we also have a few testers who claim the same descent but
                    > > whose Y-DNA doesn't match, so, as you would expect, there are a few NPEs
                    > > involved. The true line is R1b-L744, with 78 matching testers, of which 13
                    > > have proven or suspected lines from Alexander 4th HS. We also have claimed
                    > > descendants from Alexander 4th HS in I2b1 ( 9 members, 1 claimant) and
                    > > R1b-L2 (9 members, 2 claimant).
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Belinda
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
                    > > On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                    > > Sent: Tuesday, 12 February 2013 11:58 PM
                    > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                    > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Ah, so not reassuring at all. And as yet no real evidence for Plantagenet y
                    > > dna until/unless they manage to extract a decent signature.
                    > >
                    > > Piero
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Brian Swann
                    > > wrote:
                    > >
                    > > I think all four candidates triangulate on Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of
                    > > Beaufort (1744-1803). So no NPEs from 1766 downwards is not so surprising.
                    > >
                    > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_successions_of_the_English_crown
                    > >
                    > > So we would normally regard this as less than ideal for someone who died in
                    > > 1485. If you look at the Somerset / Beaufort line you can see that the
                    > > words - only son - occur several times.
                    > >
                    > > This is quite similar to my Picton family. Although we can get a paper
                    > > trail back to about 1280 on one line, I cannot triangulate on anyone on this
                    > > line before a Picton born in 1713/14. Until you get back to a Jenkin Picton
                    > > who had four sons and who lived about 1434, and then all surviving lines
                    > > probably triangulate on him.
                    > >
                    > > As often discussed, the fate of the other male lines were to die out or
                    > > daughter out, with some lasting the best part of 200 years; and Sir Thomas
                    > > Picton's male lineage being traceable from 1542 to 1861.
                    > >
                    > > And I must admit, that in light of King Richard III, I am thinking seriously
                    > > about what would be involved in getting into the family vault at Ewenny in
                    > > Glamorganshire where the last of this male line were buried. I have decided
                    > > that would be easier than St. Pauls Cathedral. But I would still rate
                    > > chances of success at below one per-cent.
                    > >
                    > > Brian
                    > >
                    > > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
                    > > On Behalf Of Piero Sinclair
                    > > Sent: 12 February 2013 07:59
                    > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                    > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Richard III's Y-DNA
                    > >
                    > > It's reassuring that all four testees match who are genealogically descended
                    > > on the male line from John of Gaunt. Just shows that NPEs are not that
                    > > common.
                    > >
                    > > Piero
                    > >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.