Pictish ancestry

[DevonCruwys]

The internet allows us to find much infomation. Unfortunately much of it is written by self-appointed experts and malcontents!

Your link is broken. Here it is (hopefully)

http://www.scotlandsdna.com/files/press-release/Press%20Release:%20Who%20are%20the%20Picts%20%5BScotlandsDNA%2025-03-2013%5D.pdf

The headline does say "Who are the Picts?" but then if you go on it says "R1b-S530 is ten times more common in men with Scottish grandfathers than it is in men with English grandfathers! 10% of over 1,000 Scottish men tested carry R1b-S530 while only 0.8% of Englishmen have it. *** This difference is highly statistically significant and so can be applied to the general population and it is clear evidence of a very Scottish marker"


This and other data imply this marker flourished in what is now Scotland (in the absence of any evidence of large scale immigrations into Scotland during that time period); date estimates make it several thousand years old, which pre-dates the group of people that became what is known as the Picts but a lot of people bearing this marker would likely have been among the Picts from 0-999 A.D.  It is early days yet so future data may change things but at the moment it does look to have strong Scottish bias.

Maybe a better name would be "a marker suggestive of some of the people that inhabited the area now known as Scotland a thousand or so years ago"? Hmmm then again, maybe not

*** N.B. I believe the reason for not publishing people's results is that the participants of the survey were promised their results would be used for analysis only and that their personal data would not be made public.

Thanks for correcting the link.  The internet is indeed full of lots of self-appointed experts and there is also a lot of nonsense published in the press. That is precisely why the scientific process of peer review is so important. For the reasons why read this guide from Sense About Science:

http://www.senseaboutscience.org/blog.php/41/sense-about-genealogical-dna-testing

Any company can issue a press release and make whatever claim they like but we cannot judge whether such claims stand up to scrutiny without the independent process of peer review. Without publication in a proper scientific journal we do not have all the critical facts (eg, how were the samples collected, is there any bias in the sampling process, etc). It also seems rather silly to claim that a marker is "Scottish" when samples have only been collected from the British Isles and we therefore do not know if it is prevalent in other populations. Even if a marker is found today in one population that is not proof that the marker arose in that same region over one thousand years ago. A lot can happen in 1000 years. The picture is clouded by founder effects and genetic drift. Research results are usually aggregated and anonymised but this does not prevent the publication of the results. However, this Pictish "research" has to my knowledge not been published in any peer-reviewed scientific journal so there is no way for any independent experts to check it. It is nothing but a PR exercise for the company who wish to get people to buy their test.

[hdw]

http://www.pictishstones.org.uk/pictishstones/pictishstoneshome.htm

Skoosh.

Yes, whether or not there is such a thing as Pictish DNA that can be scientifically tested for, we always have the symbol stones which were set up in indisputably Pictish areas of Scotland, and their other legacy is the names they have left in the landscape. Researchers at Glasgow University have now brought out the final volume of the magnificent 5-volume "The Place Names of Fife", in which they discuss the various languages, including Pictish, which have been used over the last
couple of millennia to coin place-names in Fife.

Although the Picts left no written documents, a great deal can be inferred about their language from place-names, many of which are Pictish-Gaelic compounds. In cases where a Fife place-name element is clearly Celtic, but more similar to Welsh than Gaelic (e.g. the Aber- names like Aberdour), the editors of these volumes have concluded that it is probably Pictish.

http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_219418_en.pdf

Harry

[Skoosh]

hdw,  another interesting read is "Welsh Origins of Scottish Placenames", by William Oxenham, Carreg Gwalch.
 Pictish carvings tend to coincide with sandstone, harder rocks don't carve well but no indication of no Picts.

Skoosh.

[hdw]

hdw,  another interesting read is "Welsh Origins of Scottish Placenames", by William Oxenham, Carreg Gwalch.
 Pictish carvings tend to coincide with sandstone, harder rocks don't carve well but no indication of no Picts.

Skoosh.

Yes, there are lots of Brythonic or early Welsh place-names in the Lothians and Borders, and the earliest poem in any form of the Welsh language is the "Gododdin", which recounts how war-bands of the Votadini from the Edinburgh area headed down the A1 to Catraeth or Catterick to get walloped by invading Angles, the first known humiliation out of many at the hands of the "auld enemy"!

Harry

[Skoosh]

Harry, this author has Old Welsh placenames covering the entire lowlands and right up the east coast. Is Pictish/Old Welsh the same lingo?

Skoosh.

[hdw]

Harry, this author has Old Welsh placenames covering the entire lowlands and right up the east coast. Is Pictish/Old Welsh the same lingo?

Skoosh.

They're supposed to be closely related, if not identical. Closer to each other than either of them is to Gaelic. The P-Celtic/Q-Celtic divide.

Harry

[supermoussi]

Any company can issue a press release and make whatever claim they like but we cannot judge whether such claims stand up to scrutiny without the independent process of peer review.

FALSE. Over the last few years thousands of new SNP markers have been found by Geno 2 project, etc. Many have no known significance as they are found in too few individuals but there are also many, like S530, that are more widespread. Other Company's results support the Scottish-centricness of S530 as you would know if you were familiar with Y-DNA SNP testing.

As there are so many SNPs that are being researched it is perfectly understandable that detailed studies of each is not yet done (or proabably ever will be). To make a statement saying initial results point to X is fine if it is of interest to the public, and also help the DNA testing community to find new volunteers. Common sense says that more detailed studies are best left to when we have more results.

It also seems rather silly to claim that a marker is "Scottish" when samples have only been collected from the British Isles and we therefore do not know if it is prevalent in other populations.

FALSE. S530 has been tested for in a wide range of people who originate from all over the world. It is a subgroup of the Western European P312 Haplogroup, separate to other groups like U106, etc, which we already know make up the majority of the British and European population. We know that the overwhelming majority of Europeans or Britains or anyone else do not have the S530 SNP. Of those that do, they are predominantly Scottish.

Even if a marker is found today in one population that is not proof that the marker arose in that same region over one thousand years ago.

And that is not what is claimed in the Press Release. It only says that the SNP was likely found in the Picts i.e., between 0 and 900 A.D. The Press release states that the marker is much older (3000 yrs) but doesn't state where its first occurrence was. As the Picts were a confederation of tribes it could have originally been brought in from England, Wales, Belgium, France, etc, by a small number of people before flourishing in Scotland and multiplying many times.

It is nothing but a PR exercise for the company who wish to get people to buy their test.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with DNA testing companies making press releases informing the public of developments. There should be more if anything!

[supermoussi]

Incidentally someone has produced a little diagram listing surnames of people found so far with the S530/L1335 marker:-

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/94/dd/70/94dd70c30ea42ad1a8244b20c53fbf51.jpg

Seems pretty Scottish orientated...

N.B. I think the size of each surname is proportional to the number of people of that name who have tested +ve

[DevonCruwys]

FALSE. Over the last few years thousands of new SNP markers have been found by Geno 2 project, etc. Many have no known significance as they are found in too few individuals but there are also many, like S530, that are more widespread. Other Company's results support the Scottish-centricness of S530 as you would know if you were familiar with Y-DNA SNP testing.

The databases of all the genetic genealogy companies are hugely biased towards people of European and especially British origin, with disproportionate numbers of Americans in the databases. You cannot therefore extrapolate from those results because there are so many countries that are either missing or have been poorly sampled. The Genographic Project quite rightly publish the results of their research in scientific journals. It is a shame that BritainsDNA/ScotlandsDNA does not do the same so that we can verify their results.

As there are so many SNPs that are being researched it is perfectly understandable that detailed studies of each is not yet done (or proabably ever will be). To make a statement saying initial results point to X is fine if it is of interest to the public, and also help the DNA testing community to find new volunteers. Common sense says that more detailed studies are best left to when we have more results.

No it is not fine to make such unsupported claims in press releases which then get exaggerated by a gullible press. This misleads people about genetic ancestry testing and gives people false promises. Such questions can only be answered, if ever, by proper scientific studies with carefully controlled sampling.

FALSE. S530 has been tested for in a wide range of people who originate from all over the world. It is a subgroup of the Western European P312 Haplogroup, separate to other groups like U106, etc, which we already know make up the majority of the British and European population. We know that the overwhelming majority of Europeans or Britains or anyone else do not have the S530 SNP. Of those that do, they are predominantly Scottish.

So where is the scientific paper that provides the evidence of this testing in a wide range of people from all over the world? You won't find one because nothing has been published. This is simply anecdotal evidence. It is not science.

And that is not what is claimed in the Press Release. It only says that the SNP was likely found in the Picts i.e., between 0 and 900 A.D. The Press release states that the marker is much older (3000 yrs) but doesn't state where its first occurrence was. As the Picts were a confederation of tribes it could have originally been brought in from England, Wales, Belgium, France, etc, by a small number of people before flourishing in Scotland and multiplying many times.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with DNA testing companies making press releases informing the public of developments. There should be more if anything!

I quote from the press release: "So far, we have found 170 men who carry the Pictish marker. We believe that they are Pictish and Proud!" Why make such a silly claim when it is completely unsupported by the evidence? It is fine for companies to issue press releases about new developments. It is not fine for companies to make nonsensical exaggerated claims which mislead the public.