Help me find my clan :(

[MacSpadger]

A large number of Perth-shire and Stirling-shire M'Millans moved to Glasgow and Lanarkshire between c. 1800 and 1850, the result of crop failure and (beginning in 1846) the potato famine, which struck Scotland with the same ferocity that it decimated Ireland. It is easy to surmise that along with M'Millans, any number of Bells, Blues, Baxters, and yes, Walkers would have moved south in search of employment.

Some moved even earlier. A direct male ancestor of mine married Agnes McMillan in Stonehouse, Lanarkshire, Scotland, 4th December 1778.
They went on to have 8 children, which is partly how I got to be here.

[Meggers]

I do have perth-shire family but, from what I remember off the top of the head of someone who just woke up 5 minutes ago, I believe they were the Bairds and not the Walkers. Ive only been able to trace the Walkers to Glasgow and I got as far back as 1812 I think. The Bairds I took further back and found them in Perthshire and Lanarkshire and then Glasgow where they married into the Walker family.

[Alan H]

Couple of things....

1. Interpreting mtDNA or Y chromosome DNA analyses, either sequences or polymorphisms without REALLY understanding some basic human genetics and a whole lot of human cultural anthropology is a very wide road to disillusionment. Understanding the nuts and bolts of how this works is not easy, but if you don't understand it, you're wasting your $40 if you ask me.

"DNA Analysis" is the new "go-to" for people researching their ancestry and the overwhelming majority of them haven't got the vaguest clue how it's done or what the limitations are. All they know is that they sent in $40 and got back a piece of paper that lists some countries, names and counties.

I'm sorry, but that's not going to get you anywhere.

2. There's a very large temptation to "expect" a certain result. Then the lab comes back with something different, and you automatically don't trust the lab result because it's not what you expected. Certainly labs can make mistakes. Even the person labelling the package can make a mistake. It can't hurt to independently verify the results. BUT....you're playing with "science" here and one of the basic tenents of science is that "data doesn't lie" and if you get consistent results that don't support your hypothesis, then you reject the hypothesis.


Regarding 2.) Meggers, your Irish friend and you may be upset that "Ireland"is #10 on the list, and so you think the lab is making a mistake. I'd politely suggest that instead of rejecting the lab results, A.) get tested again and see if the results come back the same and B.) start learning about some molecular biology and some cultural anthropology and see if you can't make sense out of what they've told you.


Famous example..... a number of years ago when all of this DNA testing was getting started, it was discovered that a lot of people around the Borders region shared a lot of gene polymorphisms with populations of people living in Central Asia.

This is ridiculous, right? Obviously the lab is doing it all wrong. What a waste!!!

But wait a minute....turns out that during Roman times, the Roman Empire fought a number of battles with the Sarmatian Empire. Take a look on Wikipedia:

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

Well, in the aftermath of this particular war, the Romans demanded, and got several tens of thousands of young Sarmatian men as hostages. What to do with them? It sure doesn't make sense to keep them around Rome.... so what they did was ship them off to Gaul (the UK) and station them there. They were primarily stationed in the Borders region and functioned as Roman soldiers.

Over time, those young men reproduced with local women and their genes and polymorphisms were incorporated into the local gene pool.


Be careful about what you "know" and "expect" when it comes to your genetic background, eh? If you don't get the result you "want" there is probably a very logical explantion for it, which you may or may not ever discover.

[Meggers]

^I respect your post, Alan, but I sort of got a bad taste in my mouth that it was aimed at the fact that I might be ignorant when it comes to cultural anthropology and history. I was actually getting a degree in anthropology before I switched to English. It's the subject I am most passionate about in the world and I know, more than most of my peers, what cultural history needs to be considered when looking at these tests. Again, I state that I was skeptical at the placing of the countries in the order that they were in becuase, from what she told me, they were ranked at what individuals share most of your genetic makeup and where they live. I know nothing more about the test she took.

I know you didnt mean for it to be a put down, but I have pride that I did cultural anthropology, physical anthropology, and biology at one of the top universities in the country and I understand genetics enough to back up my reasons as to why I was questioning the results. I would not be the kind of person who takes one of these tests as a shortcut and then assumes it's the holy grail of all of my geneology questions. I realize those people are out there, but I am proudly not one of them.

[Alan H]

Well, my semi-rant was only partially directed at you, and it was really set off by your friends DNA test. There are several different tests out there. Some are DNA sequencing tests, but those usually cost a lot more. Others are DNA binding tests where a "chip" contains large numbers of DNA sequences, stuck to the chip. These sequences are specific to different polymorphisms of various genes, which are of interest. Then there's the whole statistics end of the thing, which is by no means trivial.

At the end of what his a huge amount of biology, statistics, chemistry, and anthropology, your friend gets a piece of paper which lists some countries on it. Huh?

I understand why it's done this way. The overwhelming majority of people in the world do not have the time, patience, or inclination to actually understand, at a fundamental level, how the results are obtained. Yet, precisely because this whole "DNA Testing" process is so phenomenally complex, people really DO need to understand it, to make sense of what the results say. That takes a very large investment in time and education....something which the majority of folks aren't willing to put in.

In fact, you might be willing to put in that time. I dunno, I hope so, if you spend the money!

That's all I intended to get across.

[Alan H]

All that said, I'm glad you figured out your Walker connections, and feel that you have a clan affiliation that you believe in, and trust, now!

[Meggers]

That's all I intended to get across.

I know that By no means did I get any hard feelings from it. There would be no point to as you never said "Meghan. You are a big dummy." lol. I just felt like I needed to point out that I do know a thing or two about biology and cultural anthropology since a few posts on here suggested that perhaps I dont (In a totally non-offensive way. I dont expect anyone here to know that since when would it have even come up?) so my feathers got a little ruffled by the end.

And thanks for your other post about me finding my Walker roots. It's quite possible that I have no ties to MacMillan and that my Walkers from Glasgow were just regular old Walkers with no ties to anyone but, at this point, they are the one that I am comfortable supporting and when I register, then I guess that's all that really matters. Then I have ties in the present whether or not I had them in the past. I know some may want to ask "so why does it even matter?" but theres a nice sense of community and kinship when you belong to something like that. It makes ME feel good when I can stake claim to something that possibly is connected with my own history so...does it really matter? Nah. Probably not. But it feels good and I like it so I'm going to do it