GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-07 > 1310697006


From: "Alister John Marsh" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] R1b-P312-L617 subclade 300 to 500 years old minimum
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:30:06 +1200
References: <61191372BFCF4460AA6034D5B16D7F9B@JohnPC>
In-Reply-To: <61191372BFCF4460AA6034D5B16D7F9B@JohnPC>


List,

I have some update information on the new "subclade" R1b-P312-L617. I have
left the original posting below for context, as it is quite a few weeks
since the original posting.

When FTDNA found the new SNP L617 in my Y-DNA recently, they advised it was
the first time it had been discovered, and it had not been found yet in
anyone else. Given that only WTY participants had tested for this SNP, and
only a handful of those being R1b-P312*, and none very close to my
haplotype, the SNP has not not been widely tested yet by FTDNA. There
appears to be a few from the thousand genomes project who have tested this
SNP and been found negative, but I can't say how many were R1b-P312*, and
how many were close to my haplotype.

I have 4 male line descendants, so the inference is that at least 5 living
males around the World are L617+. But although I optimistically consider 5
a small "subclade", in practical terms, this list would I think view a
proven subclade of 5 as a "private" SNP club until further notice. So I
have set about testing further afield to see if I can claim a few more in my
newfound R1b P312 subclade.

My male line is Marsh, tracing with a good paper trail to John Marsh born in
the Village of West Wratting in Cambridgeshire in 1787. There is a
reasonable probability that my line comes from a particular Marsh/ March
living in that village, born about 1450. To determine if others of the
Marsh family have this SNP, I ordered a test for a Marsh tracing to Leyton
Essex/ London around 200 years ago. That Marsh line may be the most
distantly related Marsh line to me I have tested so far. Based on a
combination of genealogy, and DNA results, my best guess is that this Marsh
is related to me between about 300 and 500 years ago. It seems most
improbable that we are related in the past 300 years.

This Marsh line tracing back to Leyton has just tested L617+. I am
delighted! Now I can claim my R1b-P312-L617 is at least 300 years old, and
very possibly 500 or more years old. So it is official, I am now claiming
R1b-P312-L617 is a proven subclade at least 300 to 500 years old. This
Marsh is 9 mutation steps from me on 111 markers, but has what may be a 4
step mutation on one marker. So the actual mutation events may only be 6
over 111 markers.

I have ordered a test for a line of another surname which is presumed to
relate to me on the direct male line between about the years 1100 and 1350
when the two families were believed to be in the same general neighbourhood.
If this were to also be L617+, then it would push back the subclade age to
about 650 to 900 years. Beyond that I have a few lines I am interested in
which may relate to me between 1000 and 2000 years ago, so that will be my
next testing step if needed.

I am not suggesting that others who are R1b-P312* rush out and test L617
yet. I suggest you at least wait until I have results pushing the subclade
back around the years 1100 to 1350. I should have these results in a couple
of weeks. If the subclade could be more than 900 years old, then there is a
serious risk it could be carried by quite a few more of the R1b-P312* brand.

John.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alister John Marsh
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 4:09 PM
To:
Subject: [DNA] R1b-P312-L617 subclade

List,

Someone once said be careful what you wish for in case it comes true.

As far back as 2005 at least, I was advocating on this list that it would be
useful for an organization to offer a test of around 100,000 bases of Y-DNA
looking for new Y-SNPs. My proposals were a bit vague on detail, but I was
trying to sell a concept for enabling wider involvement in Y-SNP discovery.

Thomas at FTDNA thought of a clever idea for testing around 100,000 bases of
non sequential sections of Y-DNA, and WTY came into being. That was
eventually expanded to 200,000 bases. Although WTY was just what I dreamed
of in 2005, I was unable to purchase a test myself until recently. WTY
results were in for me today, and L617 is a new SNP reported for me, a
mutation G to A at 8526862. As far as I know I am the only person with this
SNP to date, unless it was discovered in someone who has not allowed their
WTY results to be public, or in the 1000 genomes project.

I am R1b-P312, and have tested negative for all the main SNPs down stream.
I am effectively (or was until today) P312*, although I have not tested
every one of the growing number of presumed private SNPs discovered in WTY
to date. Presumably if I have results for 215,000 bases in WTY, it is
unlikely that I am positive for any of the other L SNPs discovered in WTY,
or I might have been advised of this.

So the job is half done. I now have to track down the root of L617.

I have some insights into my Y-DNA line for the past 900 or so years. My
Y-DNA traces in my Marsh line certainly back to around 1560 in
Cambridgeshire England, but is almost certain to go back at least as far as
1450 in the Marsh line. My Marsh line is a relatively close Y-DNA match to
a Tyndall/ Tindale etc family which is thought to descend from a Robert de
Tyndall or Adam de Tyndall both who were Barons of Tyne-Dale and Langley in
Northumberland. I am currently awaiting a DNA result which may corroborate
or otherwise this speculated connection to Barons de Tyndall.

My presumption at this stage is that Marshes descend from a male Tyndall
some time between about 900 and 1450. There seems a possibility of a
connection after about 1200 when the families were in roughly the same
geographic area.

One of this Tyndall family is believed to be the Rev William Tyndall who was
burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. William Tyndall
was roasted on 6 Oct 1536. Curiously that has been a bad day in my Marsh
family. My father, my grandfather Marsh, and my gt gt gt grandfather Marsh
were all buried on 6 Oct in various years. Before I knew about Rev Tyndall
I used to say that if a Marsh lived past 6 Oct he stood a good chance of
living another year.

Families carrying what is supposed to be Tyndall Y-DNA from around the year
1100, include
1) TYNDALL/ TINDALE: possibly found in Yorkshire today, certainly found in
Gloucestershire, Ireland, Australia, USA, Canada in reasonable numbers
today. The family after about 1200 were common in Dene in Northamptonshire,
and in Norfolk and Essex, but may not be common in those areas today.
2) MARSH: Generally spreading out from around West Wratting in
Cambridgeshire England around 1500 or earlier, now found in Cambridgeshire,
Suffolk, Essex, London, Kent, Sussex, New Zealand, Australia, Pacific
Islands, USA, Canada.
3) TEAGUE: USA.
4) PAYNE: Originally Tindale, currently in USA.
5) SPINK: USA, tracing to Yorkshire.

I am 2SMFH on Y-Search, and have tested about 130 Y-DNA markers. Off R1b
modal markers shared by Tyndalls and Marshes include...
DYS385a/b= 12-14
DYS439= 11 (also found in some Chimpanzees.... !)
DYS458= 16
DYS464a= 14
DYS456= 15
DYS607= 14
DYS446= 12
DYS640= 12
DYS452= 29
DYS463= 25.

One presumes that because the Tyndalls and Marshes share all of these
distinctive off modal markers, that these were the markers of a common
ancestor possibly about the year 1200. The last 3 markers above are
relatively slow mutating, so matches on these might be more significant.

The “de Tyndalls” of around the year 1100 are a little difficult to trace
back earlier. The name sounds Norman, but I am told that some Anglo-Saxons
found it convenient to adopt “de” surnames after 1066 to improve their
opportunities. Another theory is that the de Tyndalls may descend from
early royal Northumbrian lines, possibly tracing back to Denmark around 1500
years ago. I think it is too early to get carried away with speculations
about pre year 1100 origins of Tyndalls, but in time more light should be
shed on this. I am interested in a few Scottish families who share some of
the above markers with me.

As soon as FTDNA offer a test for L617, I propose to test members of the
Tyndall and Marsh lines for it. If it is only found in the Marsh family, it
is probably younger than about 1450, but if it is found in both Tyndalls and
Marshes, the SNP is likely older than about the year 1200. At that point I
have a few families, including Redmond & Tracy families, (with speculated
Norman ancestry) which may related to Tyndall/ Marsh families between 1000
and 2000 years ago. I will keep the list informed on progress, and if the
SNP looks to be older than 1000 or 2000 years, I will be advising who might
benefit from testing L617. So far it is only inferred that 5 living males
from one family have the SNP L617, so does 5 males warrant the title “sub
clade”.... perhaps not yet.... but work in progress at least....

John.

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: