Are the Scottish Highland Travellers and Scottish Lowland Travellers genetically distinct from the rest of the Scottish population?
Genetic studies conducted by the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin and the University of Edinburgh have found that Irish Travellers are distinct from the rest of the Irish population, retaining more ancient Irish DNA.
The study provided evidence that Irish Travellers are a genetically separate Irish ethnic minority which has been distinct from the settled Irish community for at least 1,000 years: The report claimed that Travellers are as distinct from the settled community as Icelanders are from Norwegians.
All of this has sparked my curiosity as to whether something similar is true of the Scottish Highland Travellers and Scottish Lowland Travellers.
by OtakuLibertarian2
19 comments
It depends.
King James V granted the Faa family of Kirk Yetholm their autonomy , however James VI had them banished and slaughtered. Therefore those that remained in Scotland, a majority having fled, then adopted Scots surnames like Tait, Douglas, Baillie, Young etc etc.
They also then intermarried with the locals, so in those families their genetic inheritance would be mixed. The best way to find non Romani traveller DNA in Scotland would be via a YDNA test for the males in the family. Especially the Faa family , many of whom are now using the surname FALL.
Also, checking family search for all marriages, births and deaths within Kirk Yetholm .
Well way back Highland Travellers speak a Gaelic based language. I’m not sure if that language has died out.
Lowland Gypsy/Traveler’s speak a Cant based on Romani.
Americans claiming to be Scottish travellers coming in 3…2…1
[removed]
Just as much as I am different to you. Or that guy there is different to that dude over yonder. They’d be white, tall and strong that’s about all there is.
All Scots isolated pretty heavily. My mother is the first to not reproduce with non Lorne region people’s. I’m the second.
Orkney folk had their own language and even have distinct genes.
Northern folk (think Elgin)
Glaswegian
Crofters
Sadly, most of the travellers were wiped out during the clearances and post war era policies.
Today. Many Scots stick local, there’s families with 500 years just in one area. Yikes for inbreeding.
Basically. No. And yes. Scots are diverse in their own country. But it’s from isolationism. Travellers are just more grounded to pre-colonial/preoccupation/pre-empirial times. Spoke gaelic, worshipped god, and overall were tied to our heritage longer. Giving them the distinctive outcasting we knew then for.
Genetic/ethnic difference is a social construct. You are g/e different to your family. You are genetically similar to a banana. It’s all in the eye of the beholder, If people want to draw divisions, for whatever reason, they can find a basis to do so. The useful/interesting bit is tracing how groups have moved/intermingled. Culturally it’s mostly a device for haters to ‘other’ people. Why does it matter to you?
I have a bit of a pet academic interest in Travellers. I haven’t been able to undertake any real original research yet- maybe one day- but I have read a sizeable portion of the academic/historic literature on them. I would suggest that any patterns seen in the Irish Travellers likely have a comparable equivalent among those in Scotland, both Highland and Lowland.
From what I’ve been able to discern the three groups most likely have the same origin point in the Late Iron Age/Early Medieval period when the distinction between what are now Scotland and Ireland was less clear. Linguistically this tracks- the various cants and dialects of these groups preserve older forms of Irish/Gaelic words.
While intermarriage with the settled population has happened throughout their history, the Travellers have always been a fairly insular people and, given the length of their distinction from settled people, very likely have some distinctive genetic markers. The academic work on Scottish Travellers of both kinds is more meagre than for Irish Travellers however so, for now, all we can do is speculate.
Anyone wealthy and curious reading this, drop me some funding and I’ll get some more concrete answers!
I’d love to see this study. I can probably go out on a limb here and guarantee that it doesn’t say “Irish travellers retain more ancient Irish DNA”.
If you have a good reason to know this, contact Timothy Neat at the School of Scottish Studies, who has probably done more cultural documentation on the Travellers than anyone. He’ll know if anybody’s been doing parallel genetic work.
Put that way because I can imagine a lot of bad reasons for curiosity about this.
My gut feeling is there will be differences but not large ones. An ex of mine was part Traveller but you would have had to go back a VERY long way to find a pool of her ancestors that weren’t interbreeding with other Scots.
I wonder what traces of Egypt are in the DNA, where the people are alleged to have come from?
Where are the guidelines for deciding what does and does not count as distinction, genetically speaking?
It’s a nothing argument, it’s not evidence of anything other than interbreeding or lack thereof
You can find genetic distinction between Grampian and Tayside, does that mean there different people’s? That should show you how fruitless and ultimately, eugenicist, this is. Let’s not draw rings around people based on genetic differences. That’s a can of worms.
My family story is descent from the tinkers that used to live in the Sidlaws too, so would that qualify me for in group status? In which case can I say no, I identify as Pictish.
The comparison makes sense in many ways. Scotland has a lot of historically remote areas where you’ll find pockets of “genetically different” people. Various isles in the Hebrides, Shetland and Orkney etc. They’re not “different” per se (minus the old Norse kingdoms, they’re obviously more Norse) they just intermixed with others a lot less. During the almost 1000 years after the Norman conquest of England, most people on the island have mixed with different groups of people – except the remote communities and travellers. Icelanders are genetically isolated as well; they didn’t change – Norwegians just mixed with others in the following millenium.
Irish man here with an ex traveller grandmother.
I can’t speak for Scottish Travellers, as they may be slightly different.
But I know in Ireland, when Cromwell invaded it generally left an awful lot of natives displaced, so they ‘travelled’ around Ireland and Britain.
It’s often argued that the traditions and attitudes of travellers mirror an untouched Irish society from that time.
I’m going to guess that because our two countries are so close in genetics and geography, that we basically just have a mix of traveller groups across Britain and Ireland that make up what we refer to as modern travellers.
I’ve lived in Glasgow myself for many years, what I’ve noticed is that Scottish Travellers or Gypsies are way more similar to Irish ones than English Gypsies let’s say, but that’s just my take and I could easily be wrong.
Your average Scot may have more diverse DNA, for sure. Traveler communities have higher rates of incest compared to regular communities.
Where is my traveller bride ?
The Irish study essentially means they are more hte ‘true Irish’. Interesting.
Regardless I remember reading somewhere there’s a problem with genetic illnesses because of a fairly small breeding pool. A lot of Scots have Italian, Irish and English ancestry, which I guess would be almost entirely absent in travellers who generally intermarry other travellers, so in a way they too would be like a ‘living fossil’ of representing the genetics of Scots from centuries ago.
I think all gypsies in the British isles are related in some way
I believe studies have shown the Orkney populations are quite genetically distinct from mainlanders. Not sure of any studies about travellers.
Comments are closed.