S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

This forum is for discussions of R1b-DF104+/R1b-DF105- clades.
Post Reply
Muireagain
Maccfuirmid Senchada
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat, 2021-Oct-23 12:58 pm

S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Muireagain »

Has there been any discussion of the O'Nolans of Carlow claim that they are the descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother Eochaidh Fionn Fohart?

M222>Z2959>S568>FT45504>A10857>A10853>A10854>Y63653>Y62520

The line being per O'Hart, from:

John m. Donal m. Shane m. Teige m. Donogh m. Awly m. Ughare m. Melaghlin m. Eocha m. Eocha m. Dunlong m. Eile m. Cuinee m. Dungus m. Moroch m. Nuallan m. Fealan m. Dunan m. Dungus m. Congal m. Fergus m. Maonach m. Fionnan m. Ronan m. Eocha m. Baithin m. Ninneadh m. Fiacha m. Iar m. Cuibhe m. Mughna m. Art Corb m. Cairbre m. Cormac m. Aeneas m. Eochaidh Fionn Fohart

Here is the Book of Leinster version:
GENELACH RÍG FOTHART FEA.
Dunlang m Eochada m Dunlaing m Céle m Mael Muaid m Dunlaing m Murchada m Nuallain m Fhollomain m Dunain m Dondgusa m Congaile m Fhergusa m Moenaig m Fhinain m Ronain m Echdach m Baeth m Nannida m Fheic mc Ieir m Cathbath m Adnaig m Airt Chirp m Corpri Niad m Cormaic m Oengusa m Echach Find Fuath Airt.


Could also the annals for 1141: Creach-shluaighedh lá Toirrdhealbhach Ua Conchobhair i f-Fothartaibh Airbhreach, & ro oircc dream d'Feraibh Midhe, & d'Fhothartaibh, & regles h-Uí Dhúnáin. Be in regard to the S568+ O'Dunn who are:

M222>Z2959>S568>FGC440>FGC84301>FGC458
User avatar
Ollam
Site Admin
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed, 2019-Jun-26 2:47 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Ollam »

Based on the age estimation given for R1b-DF104 on The Big Tree and the families we are seeing under it, I am convinced that the Dál Cuinn did not begin until R1b-DF104 or after it. I cannot see that it could have begun at R1b-DF106 or earlier.
Image
User avatar
Ollam
Site Admin
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed, 2019-Jun-26 2:47 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Ollam »

This was asked on the unaffiliated Dál Cuinn FB group:
What of the Dál Cuinn roots?
Conn's brother (or half brother from another mother) Eochaid was considered ancestral to the Nolans, who were exiled/invited to the Carlow area.

Conn's branch: M222 > Z2959 > S658 > DF104
Eochaid>Nolans: M222 > Z2959 > S568 > FT45504

Z2959 estimated @ 3 BC. Any other well-known surnames on the Z2959 > S568 branch?

The Nolan project has 6 testers w/ R-Y62520 780 AD.
A split at ~3 BC is almost a century and a half before Conn Cétchathach's estimated milieu of ~125 to 150 AD. So as far as I can see the R1b-S568 (FGC451) branch is definitely NOT from any brother of Conn Cétchathach.

Some speculation exists that Túathal Techtmar, Conn Cétchathach's grandfather, MAY have been the exiled Irish prince that the Romans in Britannia thought to use as a pretext to invade Ireland.
The Annals of the Four Masters gives the date of Túathal's exile as AD 56, his return as 76 and his death as 106. Geoffrey Keating's Foras Feasa ar Érinn broadly agrees, dating his exile to 55, his return to 80 and his death to 100. The Lebor Gabála Érenn places him a little later, synchronising his exile with the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian (81–96), his return early in the reign of Hadrian (122–138) and his death in the reign of Antoninus Pius (138–161).
...
Taking the native dating as broadly accurate, another theory has emerged. The Roman historian Tacitus mentions that Agricola, while governor of Roman Britain (AD 78–84), entertained an exiled Irish prince, thinking to use him as a pretext for a possible conquest of Ireland. Neither Agricola nor his successors ever conquered Ireland, but in recent years archaeology has challenged the belief that the Romans never set foot on the island.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Túathal_Techtmar
So if we take the earlier dates of Túathal Techtmar's return from exile ~80 AD and the possible Roman records of Britannia corroborating an Irish prince returning to Ireland in that same time frame, then that definitely removes any brother of Conn Cétchathach from consideration.

Looking at the Book Of Ballymote genealogies, a split ~3 BC looks like it best fits the two sons of Feradach Find Fechtnach, Túathal Techtmar's grandfather. Those would be Túathal Techtmar's father, Fiachu Findolach, and uncle, Óengus.

112. Da mc. la Feradach .i. Aengus & Fiachu find .f.

So, R1b-S568 MAY be the descendants of Óengus. AFAIK, there is not much info about Óengus. Putting it all in context:

Crimthann Nia Nár (b. ~41 BC) > Feradach Find Fechtnach (b. ~11 BC) > Fiachu Findolach (b. ~20 AD) > Túathal Techtmar (b. ~50 AD) > Feidlimid Rechtmar (b. ~80 AD) > Conn Cétchathach (b. ~110 AD)

There is some slop in the timing, but it is reasonably close.

Further, quoting from Bernard's previous post:
Muireagain wrote: Sun, 2023-Jul-30 10:51 pm GENELACH RÍG FOTHART FEA.
Dunlang m Eochada m Dunlaing m Céle m Mael Muaid m Dunlaing m Murchada m Nuallain m Fhollomain m Dunain m Dondgusa m Congaile m Fhergusa m Moenaig m Fhinain m Ronain m Echdach m Baeth m Nannida m Fheic mc Ieir m Cathbath m Adnaig m Airt Chirp m Corpri Niad m Cormaic m Oengusa m Echach Find Fuath Airt.
Could the Óengus in that genealogy be the same as Óengus son of Feradach Find Fechtnach? It is clear that conflation and confusion are rampant in the ancient texts, unfortunately. Also, there were obvious attempts made to bring descent closer to a famous ancestor or relative than was the actual reality.

That is the best I have. Regardless, I absolutely cannot see the R1b-S568 (FGC451) branch as descending from any brother of Conn Cétchathach.
Image
Muireagain
Maccfuirmid Senchada
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat, 2021-Oct-23 12:58 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Muireagain »

Just a quick response to S568:

As touch on above the O’Nolans, associated with the barony of Fore [Fothairt] in County Carlow are: M222>Z2959>S568>FT45504>A10857>A10853>A10854>Y63653>Y62520

And are said to descend via:
Eochaidh Fionn>Oengus>Cormac>Carbre>Art Chirp>Adnach>Cathbath>Meicc-hIeir >Feich>Ninnida>Baeth>Echach>Ronan>Finain>Moenaig>Fhergusa>Congaile>Dondgusa>Dunain> Fhollomain>Nuallain

There also one S568 Sword presently, however there are other M222+ Swords that seem related. There is also a Sword pedigree gives them the same ancestor figure as the O’Nollans:

Eochaidh Fionn>Oengus>Cormac>Carbre>Art Chirp>Condláed>Déin>Cúlduib>Eain>Fergusa>Enna> Énnae Bicc>Éogain>Énna>Oiblean>Culduib>Beici>Caithniad>Focartai>Duneachaid>Suairt


There are also the Dunns who are also S568, yet have a Ui Failge pedigree? However, Rawlinson B.502 has a comment that might explain this:

Úi Bresail la h-Uu Failge, translates to "Úi Bresail with the descendants of Uí Failge."

Úi Bresail are from the line Eochaidh Fionn>Oengus>Cormac>Carbre>Art Chirp> Condlaed> Dian> Bresal

Suggesting that Fothairt families could also be found amongst the Ui Failge. Potentially then, the Dunns (who are then M222>Z2959>S568>S566>FGC440>FGC84301>FGC458) are also the descends of Art Chirp of the Fothairt.

The S568 Daltons from Co. Westmeath are closely related to the Dunns. They occupy the lands associated with the Cenel Maine, noted followers of St Brigit. St Brigit herself was a descent of Art Chirp of the Fothairt and as was a Úi Bresail, the same line later incorporated into the Ui Failge.

It seems possible that Art Chirp is last common ancestor claimed by S568 population.

Art Chirp in Irish genealogical tradition is either a descendant of Echach Fínd Fuath n-Airt (from whom the Fothairt are said to descend from) or from Fiachu Suidge (from whom the historical Deisi ("vassal"), who are said by an 8th century source to have been expelled by Conn's grandson). Both ancestorial figures are considered brothers of Conn.

Notably, the sons of Artchirp appears leading the Deisi in "The Expulsion of the Déisi", (aka the Irish settlement of Dyfed in Wales), with Artchirp's son Eochaid Allmuir considered as the ancestor of the last king of Dyfed, Tualodor mac Rígin.

Like other Irish tales combining ancestral ancestors as brothers within a single family, the truth lies in pre-history and cannot be proven as brothers. However, "The Expulsion of the Déisi" functions in similar to other explanations as to why rival branches within a patrilineal line are now exclude from the kingship because of prior actions.
User avatar
Ollam
Site Admin
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed, 2019-Jun-26 2:47 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Ollam »

Again, while I do not place a whole lot of stock in the dating methodologies being used for SNP formations, the FTDNA website says:
The R-S568 Story
R-S568 's paternal line was formed when it branched off from the ancestor R-Z2959 and the rest of mankind around 1 BCE. The man who is the most recent common ancestor of this line is estimated to have been born around 100 CE.
So a median age of 1 BC is still almost a century and a half before Conn Cétchathach's milieu of 125-150 AD. I am not sure how a date of 100 AD was derived as the ending date of the R1b-S568 phylogenetic node, since according to The Big Tree it is composed of 5 SNPs, which using the rough factor of 83 years per SNP mutation for a BigY 700 test, would indicate:

S568 ~1BC
FGC445 ~83AD
FGC448 ~166AD
20065768-A-G ~249AD
22853844-C-T ~332AD
[ The SNP names/positions are strictly being used as placeholders and are NOT meant to indicate the actual order of occurrence. ]
[ https://www.ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=1467 ]

Anyway, I still think the formation of the R1b-S568 clade was far too early to be in Conn Cétchathach's milieu.
Image
Muireagain
Maccfuirmid Senchada
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat, 2021-Oct-23 12:58 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Muireagain »

FamilyTree DNA has the age of S568 as 100 CE, i.e., 100 AD. (There is a margin of error to be add to.) https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-S568/story

While I read in the thread "Conn Cétchathach's milieu of 125-150 AD"
User avatar
Ollam
Site Admin
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed, 2019-Jun-26 2:47 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Ollam »

Please read FTDNA's quote carefully.

FTDNA says the FIRST mutation in the R1b-S568 phylogenetic node occurred ~1 BC. The LAST mutation occurred ~100 AD. So the R1b-S568 lineage started ~1 BC with the first man who had one of the 5 mutations occur in him. Remember, as far as we currently know, only ONE mutation occurs in any individual man; or in other words, only ONE mutation occurs per generation. The 100 AD date of the MRCA refers to the man who had the 5th mutation in the R1b-S568 phylogenetic node, MANY decades after the first man who founded the lineage ~1 BC.
Image
Muireagain
Maccfuirmid Senchada
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat, 2021-Oct-23 12:58 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Muireagain »

And FTDNA.com says for S568 from which the potential Fothairt line descend from:
"R-S568's paternal line was formed when it branched off from the ancestor R-Z2959 and the rest of mankind around 1 BCE." https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-S568/story

Compared to what they say for S658 from which the Dal Cuinn descend from:
"R-S658's paternal line was formed when it branched off from the ancestor R-Z2959 and the rest of mankind around 1 BCE." https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/R-S658/story

I am left with the opinion (given ysearch.org as conflicting predictions) that predicted ages of SNPs seem even less reliable than using the Gael's own pre-history of tribal associations.
User avatar
Ollam
Site Admin
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed, 2019-Jun-26 2:47 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Ollam »

Oh, I agree, the estimation of clade ages is very much not to be used for historical dating, merely for relative era dating at most.

We already know that the Cland Colla/Airgíalla genealogies are incorrect since they purportedly descend from Conn Cétchathach, but the Y-DNA shows something completely different. The same for the O’Kelly, who purportedly descend from the Cland Colla/Airgíalla.

Image

The above is a couple of years out of date, but it provides a general indication of when the various branches occurred. The age estimations can be taken with a grain of salt or two, but again, it provides a general idea of the branch relationships. The dates appear to be those of the MRCA in each phylogenetic node, NOT the beginning of the node. Also, you can substitute O’Kelly where the chart says Uí Maini.

Back in the day EVERYONE tried to tie themselves directly to Conn Cétchathach, whether through a patrilineal relationship or a sibling relationship. The Cland Mac Donald of the Isles tied their genealogy to Conn Cétchathach through the Cland Colla/Airgíalla; but the Y-DNA shows conclusively the chieftain lines are R1a Norse Viking lineages, not even R1b Gaelic lineages.
Image
Muireagain
Maccfuirmid Senchada
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat, 2021-Oct-23 12:58 pm

Re: S568+ descendants of Conn of Hundred Battles brother

Post by Muireagain »

No EVERYONE ties themselves directly to Conn Cétchathach. The Dal Cais, Eoghanacht and numerous other tribes to do not, even the Fothairt do not.

As for the Somerled line's claim, this may have its origins in medieval praise poetry, as example Baile suthach síth Emhna, where it is claimed that Ragnall mac Gofraid, king of the Isle of Man (r. 1187-1229), is a descendant of Cormac and Conn. However, the understanding is it is so through a maternal line and not a direct patrilineal claim.

"Offspring of fleet-rich Lochlann,
offspring of bright Conn of the chains,
you'll seek a harbour behind Aran
while probing Ireland's cold shores."

and

"Conn's offspring, Cormac's offspring ,
with the ship which is red brindled,
a herd of plunder for a worthy steed
a man of unsure steed has traded."


It is common to find stems transplants in Gael genealogies, due to internal tribal politics. The Airgialla (is there a single Airgialla line?) were subjects of the Northern Ui Neill, and as typical for close allies they were given a common ancestor with the Ui Neill to raise their status from Doar/unfree members of the tribal and justify the their status as Soar/freemen of the tribe.

Whereas the Fothairt are not seen as subjects to any Ui Neill faction and instead appear in the sources as killers of descendants of Conn.

So if we are going to use the logic that the Ui Neill, Ui Briuin and Ui FIachrach are descend from sons of Eocho Mugmedón based on the interconnected yDNA results. Then the same logic leads to the same result that Dal Cuinn and Fothairt are descend from sons of Feidilmid Rechtaid due to their interconnected yDNA results.
Post Reply