GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-10 > 1161922644


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] E3b1's in England and their distance from each other
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:17:24 -0400 (EDT)
References: <BAY105-F2256CDC73988BD3EB2ABDCC070@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY105-F2256CDC73988BD3EB2ABDCC070@phx.gbl>(stevenbird1000@hotmail.com)


Steve wrote:
> John, you're badly mistaken. All six of these particular families can trace
> their lineage to Britain

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. Let me repeat it here:

The problem is that you can't assume the common ancestor ever came to
Britain.

Note that I said THE common ancestor, not the ancestorS. Think back
to the context of this thread, please, in which you hypothesized that
the common ancestor of all the families in question may have lived
about two millennia ago. It seems to me you have been assuming that
the one MRCA must have lived in Britain, since you are focusing on his
time as compared with the times of various migration events. What I
suggested is that you must consider migrations -- plural -- that
occurred AFTER him as well.

> With regard to the rest of your statement, I sense that you are resisting my
> "Roman" immigrant hypothesis for whatever reason.

Not at all. I am resisting your temptation to settle on an
oversimplified cartoon version of the story.

> plausible, there is plenty of historical and archaeological evidence to
> support it, and the TMRCA projections tend to fit the expected period,
> 1860-2010 years before 1950, which would place it squarely in the first
> century, at or shortly after the invasion of 43 A.D. There is nothing
> "rash" about it.

There you go again. As I tried to emphasize, and as you said yourself
on one occasion, those figures of two millennia do not even have one
significant figure -- and yet you are quoting THREE figures. The
numbers should be read as "probably between one and four millennia
before now". There is no question of placing it "squarely" in any
millenium, let alone any particular century. It is rash in the
extreme to focus on this one event when there are so many other
possibilities, and you can't even be sure only one event was
responsible.

John Chandler


This thread: