World Families Forums - Old Norway Project

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 18, 2014, 04:57:23 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  Old Norway Project
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Old Norway Project  (Read 2557 times)
authun
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« on: October 19, 2011, 11:36:46 AM »

Dr Harding recently gave a lecture on his Old Norway Project in Gothenburg during a conference on Iron Age Sweden and North Sea links.

The paper is due to be published in 2012 but his lecture did include some preliminary results. The Old Norway project itself is, I presume, part of Dr Harding's continuing work on Vikings in England and also part of the Wellcome Trust's People of the British Isles Project. Tammy Day told me some time ago that they had obtained funding for sampling in Norway. In addition, they have sampled Northern Jutland, Skaraborg, Östergötland-Jönköping and Blekinge-Kristianstad as well.

You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf

It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
cheers
authun
« Last Edit: October 19, 2011, 11:42:47 AM by authun » Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2011, 08:46:41 PM »


Could you kindly post Jean M's map showing distribution of haplogroups and R1b subclades in Norway, Sweden and northern Denmark for those who don't read the DNA forum? There are a number of very interesting aspects of it.
Logged
authun
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2011, 05:16:04 AM »

It's on page 38 in the link above. That's where she took it from. I don't know how to embed a pic post this forum. It's not like the dna-forum where you can upload it, at least, it doesn't look like it.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 10:21:30 AM by authun » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2011, 10:49:29 AM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf

It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
Thanks, Athun.  

Very interesting to finally see R-M269 subclades broke out granularly some place in Scandinavia.

I'll just compare U152 and L21 right now....

U152's presence is quite narrow. It is strongest in Denmark and across the strait in Sweden in Skaraborg Co. That's about it. It hardly exists in Norway.

L21 is low in Denmark but strong in Skaraborg Co. L21 is higher in-land in Norway but has decent presence on the Norwegian coast. As you move towards the Baltic L21 definitely drops but still has a decent presences in Ostergotland.

Would it be reasonable to infer that L21 made it to Scandinavia earlier than U152, making deeper inroads and scattering a little further?
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 05:43:16 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2011, 10:55:52 AM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2011, 11:50:18 AM »

... You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf

It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
Let's review the Iberian subclades.

First a little background on the Z196 family. It is immediately downstream of P312 (aka S116.) It has three subgroups downstream - L176.2, M153 and Z196*. Underneath L176.2 further downstream are two additional subgroups - SRY2627 and L165. Z196 was not tested in the Old Norway study. However, M167 (aka SRY2627) and M153 were. Therefore, Z196* could be hidden in the red R1b-S116 (aka P312) slices, perhaps in significant numbers.

M167 is SRY2627 which has its highest concentration in Catalonia. It is has long been called an "Iberian subclade." Other than that its traditional higher frequency regions are Iberia and Southern France. However, besides the British Isles we've found a good number of folks from Germany and the Low Countries that are SRY2627+. STR variance is about the same in Germany as is Iberia.

M153 has long been called the "the Basque marker."  As far as I know, at least until now, it has only been found in Basque descendants.

Z196* as we know it today, is mostly the R1b North-South cluster. This was named because it has been found scattered all over from Scandinavia, England, Germany, Poland, France and down to Iberia. There is also a paragoup under Z196 known as L176.2* (SRY2627-.)  The small branch under L176.2, L165, found in far northern Scotland and Scandinavian. It is called a "Norse marker" by Ethnoancestry.

Let's go back to the map now.

First the surprise. M153 shows up. Perhaps just one person, and he is in Norway Inland. A long way from what we though was home.

SRY2627 (M167) shows up with a presence in Blekinge on the southern tip of Sweden and in Denmark. A long way from Catalonia, where some people think it must have originated because of its high frequency.  That's really about it so SRY2627 did not scatter wide and far in Scandinavia but does find a niche, a little bit similar to U152 with the exception SRY2627 may be slightly more Baltic facing with more affinity to U106.

Of course Z196*'s distribution is unknowable other than it can only be where the red R1b-S116 (P312) slices are. L176.2*'s and L165's distributions are also unknowable and could be hidden with S116 as well. From other sources, though we know Z196* and L176.2* appears in northern Europe and Z196* into Eastern Europe. As mentioned earlier L165 is considered Norse by some.

I think all of this can mean only a one of two things
1 - Z196, nor even SRY2627 are from Iberia, but probably from Central Europe.
2 - Z196 along with its SRY2627 and M153 spread far and wide in the Atlantic Bronze Age.

Although, it is old enough, I think there is too much Z196 in land in Central Europe for Z196 to have been an primarily scattered by the Atlantic Bronze Age.

It would be great to see several M153 haplotypes from Scandinavia.  M153 appears to be less than half the age of Z196, but that's M153 among the Basques.  Perhaps a Scandinavian M153 splinter would have large genetic distances???

Iberian subclades? LOL.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 05:25:41 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2011, 07:24:08 PM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.

Or maybe same source but earlier period (before most of the historic clades arose).  I think its pretty clear from the distribution in Scandinavia and the Baltic that L21 likely came from the west by sea.  The most likely source for a reasonable level of L21 is either Britain or maybe north France/Belgium.  Probably its easier to think it was from Britain albeit not Celtic thrawls of the Viking age but perhaps in the Bronze Age??
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2011, 12:03:51 AM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.

Or maybe same source but earlier period (before most of the historic clades arose).  I think its pretty clear from the distribution in Scandinavia and the Baltic that L21 likely came from the west by sea.  The most likely source for a reasonable level of L21 is either Britain or maybe north France/Belgium.  Probably its easier to think it was from Britain albeit not Celtic thrawls of the Viking age but perhaps in the Bronze Age??
England or France could easily be source for L21* folks sprawling along the Atlantic.

In my mind I envision Bronze Age people traversing the Atlantic Coast and then through the English Channel over to Scandinavia.   Ireland/Scotland can not be ruled out completely, but it must have been the pre-M222 days, and as you pointed out, Britain's L21* would have had an easier go of it to Scandinavia.

We know from our FTDNA projects that there are some people, particularly along Norway that cluster with L21 in the Isles so I think it is safe to say that some L21 came from the Isles during historic periods. It just looks like the bulk of them were there way earlier.

What's the possibility that the Roman expansion into Gaul caused a significant number of Gauls to go to Scandinavia then?
« Last Edit: October 21, 2011, 12:06:16 AM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
IALEM
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2011, 02:51:02 AM »




M153 has long been called the "the Basque marker."  As far as I know, at least until now, it has only been found in Basque descendants.


That is not correct. Adams et alii (2008) found it scattered all over Spain, although at low levels. It has been supposed those levels can be explained by Basque migration, but that wasn´t especifically checked over the individuals that tested possitive out of the Basque Country. M153 was found to be 13% of the population in the Basque Country and 17% in Gascony, so even there a minority.
I can´t find now the M-153 project in FTDNA, but I think I recall there were some members from England as well.
Logged

Y-DNA L21+


MDKA Lope de Arriçabalaga, born c. 1390 in Azcoitia, Basque Country

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2011, 07:22:25 PM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.

Or maybe same source but earlier period (before most of the historic clades arose).  I think its pretty clear from the distribution in Scandinavia and the Baltic that L21 likely came from the west by sea.  The most likely source for a reasonable level of L21 is either Britain or maybe north France/Belgium.  Probably its easier to think it was from Britain albeit not Celtic thrawls of the Viking age but perhaps in the Bronze Age??
England or France could easily be source for L21* folks sprawling along the Atlantic.

In my mind I envision Bronze Age people traversing the Atlantic Coast and then through the English Channel over to Scandinavia.   Ireland/Scotland can not be ruled out completely, but it must have been the pre-M222 days, and as you pointed out, Britain's L21* would have had an easier go of it to Scandinavia.

We know from our FTDNA projects that there are some people, particularly along Norway that cluster with L21 in the Isles so I think it is safe to say that some L21 came from the Isles during historic periods. It just looks like the bulk of them were there way earlier.

What's the possibility that the Roman expansion into Gaul caused a significant number of Gauls to go to Scandinavia then?

Although I have made a point of the need to test the assumption that L21 was an isles originated clade and still think a north French origin likely, I have always had a suspicion that the Norway group is a different story.  It is separated from the main block of L21 west of the Rhine by an area of low L21 and its perfectly possible that L21 in Norway is from the isles (far more likely eastern England than elsewhere) in prehistory although if it is it must be down to out of proportion impact of traders etc because there is no trace of any migration.  Norway though is the very sort of place where small numbers of settlers could make an impact genetically in a way they would not have been able to in a densely populated area. 

It is possible that in the Bronze Age the trade elite were very different from the elites based more on land and cattle we see in the Iron Age and in Dark Ages in the Celtic fringe.  Maybe they were far more mobile and less territorial.  More of a trading elite than tribal.  Some of the results from the isotope analysis has produced very odd patterns.  Even just looking at the isles many of the new L21 clades still seem incredibly patternless and scattered around Irish, English, Scottish etc.  Maybe the mistake is we are imposing an Iron Age/Dark Ages type model of territorial based inward looking cultures based on land and cattle of the Celts in their later periods onto the outward looking mobile Bronze Age elites and getting this all wrong.  Maybe even marriage patterns were different and males moved among trading elites.  You can see the advantage of that in a society based on external contacts.  People tend to try and back-project what we first see in the light of history instead of seeing it as a snapshot of a moment in time or a phase. 
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2011, 07:52:48 PM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.

Or maybe same source but earlier period (before most of the historic clades arose).  I think its pretty clear from the distribution in Scandinavia and the Baltic that L21 likely came from the west by sea.  The most likely source for a reasonable level of L21 is either Britain or maybe north France/Belgium.  Probably its easier to think it was from Britain albeit not Celtic thrawls of the Viking age but perhaps in the Bronze Age??
England or France could easily be source for L21* folks sprawling along the Atlantic.

In my mind I envision Bronze Age people traversing the Atlantic Coast and then through the English Channel over to Scandinavia.   Ireland/Scotland can not be ruled out completely, but it must have been the pre-M222 days, and as you pointed out, Britain's L21* would have had an easier go of it to Scandinavia.

We know from our FTDNA projects that there are some people, particularly along Norway that cluster with L21 in the Isles so I think it is safe to say that some L21 came from the Isles during historic periods. It just looks like the bulk of them were there way earlier.

What's the possibility that the Roman expansion into Gaul caused a significant number of Gauls to go to Scandinavia then?

Although I have made a point of the need to test the assumption that L21 was an isles originated clade and still think a north French origin likely, I have always had a suspicion that the Norway group is a different story.  It is separated from the main block of L21 west of the Rhine by an area of low L21 and its perfectly possible that L21 in Norway is from the isles (far more likely eastern England than elsewhere) in prehistory although if it is it must be down to out of proportion impact of traders etc because there is no trace of any migration.  Norway though is the very sort of place where small numbers of settlers could make an impact genetically in a way they would not have been able to in a densely populated area. 

It is possible that in the Bronze Age the trade elite were very different from the elites based more on land and cattle we see in the Iron Age and in Dark Ages in the Celtic fringe.  Maybe they were far more mobile and less territorial.  More of a trading elite than tribal.  Some of the results from the isotope analysis has produced very odd patterns.  Even just looking at the isles many of the new L21 clades still seem incredibly patternless and scattered around Irish, English, Scottish etc.  Maybe the mistake is we are imposing an Iron Age/Dark Ages type model of territorial based inward looking cultures based on land and cattle of the Celts in their later periods onto the outward looking mobile Bronze Age elites and getting this all wrong.  Maybe even marriage patterns were different and males moved among trading elites.  You can see the advantage of that in a society based on external contacts.  People tend to try and back-project what we first see in the light of history instead of seeing it as a snapshot of a moment in time or a phase. 

I know Rich mentioned it earlier, and you are implying now, that L21 looks to be associated with the sea. This study of Scandinavia supports L21's position in Western Scandinavia (especially Norway) along the coasts.

So there was movement from the British Isles to Scandinavia during/before the Bronze Age?
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2011, 06:14:37 AM »

It  is an interesting thing that p312*, presumably including Z196 clades has a good showing but U152 does not.  That must be telling us something about the early positioning and routes taken by the 2 lineages.  I am not sure what though.  So many studies lump non U106/U152/L21/M222 into a single p312* pot that its hard to interpret. 
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2011, 06:17:53 AM »

...
You'll have to wait for the results but preliminary ones are shown on slide 38 of this PDF, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf
....
It shows the distribution of 10 R1b subclades.
I'll compare L21* and M222.

I guess the main thing is I just don't see hardly any M222 at all.  The ratio of M222 to L21* is much, much lower in Scandinavia than in Ireland/Scotland.

That infers to me that there was not much migration from Ireland/Scotland to Scandinavia, be it merchants, thralls or whatever.  L21* came from a different source.

Or maybe same source but earlier period (before most of the historic clades arose).  I think its pretty clear from the distribution in Scandinavia and the Baltic that L21 likely came from the west by sea.  The most likely source for a reasonable level of L21 is either Britain or maybe north France/Belgium.  Probably its easier to think it was from Britain albeit not Celtic thrawls of the Viking age but perhaps in the Bronze Age??
England or France could easily be source for L21* folks sprawling along the Atlantic.

In my mind I envision Bronze Age people traversing the Atlantic Coast and then through the English Channel over to Scandinavia.   Ireland/Scotland can not be ruled out completely, but it must have been the pre-M222 days, and as you pointed out, Britain's L21* would have had an easier go of it to Scandinavia.

We know from our FTDNA projects that there are some people, particularly along Norway that cluster with L21 in the Isles so I think it is safe to say that some L21 came from the Isles during historic periods. It just looks like the bulk of them were there way earlier.

What's the possibility that the Roman expansion into Gaul caused a significant number of Gauls to go to Scandinavia then?

Although I have made a point of the need to test the assumption that L21 was an isles originated clade and still think a north French origin likely, I have always had a suspicion that the Norway group is a different story.  It is separated from the main block of L21 west of the Rhine by an area of low L21 and its perfectly possible that L21 in Norway is from the isles (far more likely eastern England than elsewhere) in prehistory although if it is it must be down to out of proportion impact of traders etc because there is no trace of any migration.  Norway though is the very sort of place where small numbers of settlers could make an impact genetically in a way they would not have been able to in a densely populated area. 

It is possible that in the Bronze Age the trade elite were very different from the elites based more on land and cattle we see in the Iron Age and in Dark Ages in the Celtic fringe.  Maybe they were far more mobile and less territorial.  More of a trading elite than tribal.  Some of the results from the isotope analysis has produced very odd patterns.  Even just looking at the isles many of the new L21 clades still seem incredibly patternless and scattered around Irish, English, Scottish etc.  Maybe the mistake is we are imposing an Iron Age/Dark Ages type model of territorial based inward looking cultures based on land and cattle of the Celts in their later periods onto the outward looking mobile Bronze Age elites and getting this all wrong.  Maybe even marriage patterns were different and males moved among trading elites.  You can see the advantage of that in a society based on external contacts.  People tend to try and back-project what we first see in the light of history instead of seeing it as a snapshot of a moment in time or a phase. 

I know Rich mentioned it earlier, and you are implying now, that L21 looks to be associated with the sea. This study of Scandinavia supports L21's position in Western Scandinavia (especially Norway) along the coasts.

So there was movement from the British Isles to Scandinavia during/before the Bronze Age?

I honestly do not know.  Although there was trade contact in the Bronze Age and I think there was recently a number of burials from southern England with Scandinavian isoltopes, it is not something that would have been expected from the other archaeological evidence.  Even the Amber trade with Britain seems more likely to have been Denmark.  All I think seems clear is that Scandinavian L21 came from the west by the sea.  I dont think its clear when or from where.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2011, 10:16:43 AM »

Its pretty remarkable how little L21 is in Northern Denmark. Looks like only a couple of percent of the population. So, kind of suggests Jutes and Danish Vikings would not have been responsible for bringing L21 to Britain in any significant quantities. It overall confirms the impression that L21 is not strong in north Germanic Europe other than Norway and so it seems likely to me that L21 in England really does not originate in what is now Germanic Europe. So, i think L21 is a very strong candidate to be PART of any calculation of pre-Germanic survival in England although a small amount could also be Medieval settlers from Normandy, Brittany etc.

Another point is the virtual absence of U152 in Norway (apart from Danish held Osloford). I think that should be noted by anyone who sees U152 in the far north of Scotland, the Orkneys etc and attributes it to Vikings. Its clearly not down to Vikings on the Norwegian raiding/settlement trail, something that is clear by the lack of U152 in the western part of their Scottish settlement trail. I think U152 looks like it has to be pre-Germanic or possibly Norman (in the broadest sense of the word). when found in areas where there is only a story of Celts followed by Norwegian Vikings and finally Norman/High Medieval settlement.

As for northern Denmark it suggests Jutes or Danes might have brought a little U152 but the overall distribution of U152 in Britain is not a great match for Danish settlement. In places south, west or north of the Danelaw the U152-Danes/Jutes correlation is not possible. So, it is probably safe to conclude again that in England and Scotland outside the Danelaw and the Jutish area of Kent U152 is either pre-Germanic or Norman (in the broadest sense). Also, there seems to be rather more U152 in England than Denmark anyway. L21 in England anywhere except perhaps the Norwegian settlement areas (limited) surely must be either pre-Germanic or Norman. There may be individual exceptions but I think the probability is very high. It is confusing that the Normans, their Breton allies etc who invade Britain and Ireland in the 11th-12th centuries are from an area which is also the most similar on the continent to the more Celtic areas of the British Isles. However, I think it is far easier to spot the likely influence from the north European Plain albeit the question of timing and flow of that remains debatable (i.e. was there already a flow in prehistoric times).

A big question from all of this must be is why is Norway far higher in L21 than Denmark and adjacent areas? It seems almost impossible to explain that without imagining sea traffic from Britain or the continent west of the Rhine that bypassed Denmark. I am at a bit of a loss to account for that in archaeological terms in prehistory. So, I have an open mind on whether this is down to Viking raiding in the west or earlier. I do recall variance being low for Norway so if I was a betting man I would probably still have to think that Norwegian L21 may be possibly down to slaving. However, it does not look in clade terms that the slaving was from M222 rich areas. It doesnt have to have been slaving. We know there was mixing of Norse and Gaels into mixed groups so perhaps that is how some L21 got into Norway. How much L21 is there in iceland?
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 11:34:33 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2011, 11:04:24 AM »

M153 has long been called the "the Basque marker."  As far as I know, at least until now, it has only been found in Basque descendants.
That is not correct. Adams et alii (2008) found it scattered all over Spain, although at low levels. It has been supposed those levels can be explained by Basque migration, but that wasn´t especifically checked over the individuals that tested possitive out of the Basque Country. M153 was found to be 13% of the population in the Basque Country and 17% in Gascony, so even there a minority.
I can´t find now the M-153 project in FTDNA, but I think I recall there were some members from England as well.
Yes, your right. I should have said Iberian and Aquitanian descendants.
...but it is called the "Basque Marker".  This project has been around for a while.
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-M153_The_Basque_Marker/default.aspx?section=yresults

I've been searching Ysearch and FTDNA projects. I can't find any other M153's that don't appear to be from Iberia/Aquitaine.   The two guys in Ysearch from England coded as R1b1a2a1b2 (M153) are actually not once I found their real kit#s at FTDNA.

Please.  I'd love you to find more M153 guys somewhere, anywhere. We don't enough to do an adequate TMRCA.  They look like a young subclade.  So I guess I'm challenging you to find more.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 12:19:20 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2011, 11:23:52 AM »

I think U152 came to southern England with the Belgic tribes and, still later, the Romans and spread with the English to the other places in the British Isles where it is found.

In Orkney and the Shetlands it may have arrived with Lowland Scots who were ultimately of English derivation.

Just my opinion.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 11:26:15 AM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2011, 12:27:16 PM »

Its pretty remarkable how little L21 is in Northern Denmark. Looks like only a couple of percent of the population. So, kind of suggests Jutes and Danish Vikings would not have been responsible for bringing L21 to Britain in any significant quantities. It overall confirms the impression that L21 is not strong in north Germanic Europe other than Norway and so it seems likely to me that L21 in England really does not originate in what is now Germanic Europe. So, i think L21 is a very strong candidate to be PART of any calculation of pre-Germanic survival in England although a small amount could also be Medieval settlers from Normandy, Brittany etc.

Another point is the virtual absence of U152 in Norway (apart from Danish held Osloford). I think that should be noted by anyone who sees U152 in the far north of Scotland, the Orkneys etc and attributes it to Vikings. Its clearly not down to Vikings on the Norwegian raiding/settlement trail, something that is clear by the lack of U152 in the western part of their Scottish settlement trail. I think U152 looks like it has to be pre-Germanic or possibly Norman (in the broadest sense of the word). when found in areas where there is only a story of Celts followed by Norwegian Vikings and finally Norman/High Medieval settlement.

As for northern Denmark it suggests Jutes or Danes might have brought a little U152 but the overall distribution of U152 in Britain is not a great match for Danish settlement. In places south, west or north of the Danelaw the U152-Danes/Jutes correlation is not possible. So, it is probably safe to conclude again that in England and Scotland outside the Danelaw and the Jutish area of Kent U152 is either pre-Germanic or Norman (in the broadest sense). Also, there seems to be rather more U152 in England than Denmark anyway. L21 in England anywhere except perhaps the Norwegian settlement areas (limited) surely must be either pre-Germanic or Norman. There may be individual exceptions but I think the probability is very high. It is confusing that the Normans, their Breton allies etc who invade Britain and Ireland in the 11th-12th centuries are from an area which is also the most similar on the continent to the more Celtic areas of the British Isles. However, I think it is far easier to spot the likely influence from the north European Plain albeit the question of timing and flow of that remains debatable (i.e. was there already a flow in prehistoric times).

A big question from all of this must be is why is Norway far higher in L21 than Denmark and adjacent areas? It seems almost impossible to explain that without imagining sea traffic from Britain or the continent west of the Rhine that bypassed Denmark. I am at a bit of a loss to account for that in archaeological terms in prehistory. So, I have an open mind on whether this is down to Viking raiding in the west or earlier. I do recall variance being low for Norway so if I was a betting man I would probably still have to think that Norwegian L21 may be possibly down to slaving. However, it does not look in clade terms that the slaving was from M222 rich areas. It doesnt have to have been slaving. We know there was mixing of Norse and Gaels into mixed groups so perhaps that is how some L21 got into Norway. How much L21 is there in iceland?
I am in pretty much general agreement with you. I think that it is possible that a higher percent than we think of the Vikings directly from the Scandinavia Peninsula (Norway primarily) brought L21 to the Isles becoming parts of the Hiberno-Vikings and the like.

The reason I say this is that L21 appears to be an early maritime leader. As such they may have been among the elite pre-Vikings who helped develop maritime transportation in Norway.

I'm not trying to say that majority of Vikings from Norway were L21, just perhaps more than most think.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2011, 12:30:55 PM »

I think U152 came to southern England with the Belgic tribes and, still later, the Romans and spread with the English to the other places in the British Isles where it is found.

In Orkney and the Shetlands it may have arrived with Lowland Scots who were ultimately of English derivation.

Just my opinion.

I think as better distibution maps have slowly been appearing it becomes easier to guess direction and to a lesser degree sequence.  However the timing (perhaps multiphase) is harder to nail down.  It seems clear a trickle of U152 ended up in Jutland and crossed into Osloford, a corner of Norway the Danes held.  The main areas the Norwegian Vikings settled Britain from seem to have had almost no U152 so I doubt U152 is a Norwegian marker in Britain or Ireland with the rarest exceptions.  The lack of L21 in Jutland and adjacent does indicate to me that Norway got is L21 from the west, probably Britain.  Again the arguement seems to mainly be one of timing.  In the case of U152 Britain has been linked to NE France and Belgium for far too long to think the Iron Age was its first crossing.  Perhaps the Belgae were the end product of long connections between SE England and NE France/Belgium/southern Holland.  it really doesnt look like a north Germanic marker so I doubt a lot of it arrived with Germanic speakers.  The direction of U106 seems clear enough from its distribution but again its timing and possibility of it being multi-phase remain.  
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2011, 02:12:22 PM »

I think U152 came to southern England with the Belgic tribes and, still later, the Romans and spread with the English to the other places in the British Isles where it is found.

In Orkney and the Shetlands it may have arrived with Lowland Scots who were ultimately of English derivation....
I think as better distibution maps have slowly been appearing it becomes easier to guess direction and to a lesser degree sequence.  However the timing (perhaps multiphase) is harder to nail down.  It seems clear a trickle of U152 ended up in Jutland and crossed into Osloford, a corner of Norway the Danes held.  The main areas the Norwegian Vikings settled Britain from seem to have had almost no U152 so I doubt U152 is a Norwegian marker in Britain or Ireland with the rarest exceptions.  The lack of L21 in Jutland and adjacent does indicate to me that Norway got is L21 from the west, probably Britain.  Again the arguement seems to mainly be one of timing.  In the case of U152 Britain has been linked to NE France and Belgium for far too long to think the Iron Age was its first crossing.  Perhaps the Belgae were the end product of long connections between SE England and NE France/Belgium/southern Holland.  it really doesnt look like a north Germanic marker so I doubt a lot of it arrived with Germanic speakers.  The direction of U106 seems clear enough from its distribution but again its timing and possibility of it being multi-phase remain.  
What do you think of this?  

In a pre-Belgae era, could there have been a lot more L21 in the Low Countries.  We know there a lot in N and NW France. Benelux is next door.

The linkage I'm asking about is really between L21 and the Rhenish Bell Beakers who would have been Rhine-centric.  In this scenario, a maritime Rhenish Bell Beakers could have expanded into the Isles as well as west along the French coast of the English channel to Bretagne.  They also could have been early entrants (along with P312*) to the coasts of Norway and to some degree the southern tip of Sweden, the latter of where U106, P312*, Z196 people were also arriving from a more direct south to north route from the Jutland and the Baltic coast of Germany and Poland.

In the meantime, U152 was controlling the old homeland further south along the Rhine and Alps. A surge of U152 would also come later, but when it did it was reaching areas where his R-L11 brothers were already in control of whatever advantage it was that they seemed to share in common.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 02:20:52 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2011, 07:55:47 PM »

That is what I was thinking, too. I think the Channel coast may have been largely L21 prior to the La Tene period, when U152 may have moved in at the eastern end. Later, U106 moved west and south and pushed west the Celts who inhabited what is now the Netherlands. The Germanic tribes may have been part of the reason the Belgae went looking for new lands in what is now southern England.

That is one reason why I don't think there was much U106 in Britain prior to the Migration Period: U106 wasn't all over the Netherlands and Flanders like it is now. It was farther east and north.

I also don't think U152 in Britain is all that ancient. There's not that much of it, and what is there, it seems to me, is most frequent in the old Belgic areas. The Romans also had their biggest impact in the south, where most of the U152 is found.
Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2011, 05:36:54 PM »

Yes if it is being conisidered that L21-rich Britons were diluted by U106 and I clade Germanics in England then it is quite possible that L21 has been diluted in north-east France and the Low Countries too.  L21 in the Busby project does seem to drop off very significantly in the east or south-east of England.  The same may be true especially for places like NE France, Flanders and south Holland.  Perhaps those area and SE England once had two or three times as much L21 than they do now. 
Logged
samIsaack
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 200


« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2012, 12:49:07 PM »

Has anyone heard anymore about this study?
Logged

Y-Dna: R1b-SRY2627

Mtdna: J1c8
Jarman
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2012, 05:15:30 PM »

Does R-L23* have any Scandinavian presence? If yes, are any maps available showing that distribution?
Logged
A_Wode
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2012, 05:44:16 PM »

Does R-L23* have any Scandinavian presence? If yes, are any maps available showing that distribution?

Surprisingly - it does. A recall a few Swedes are L23*. How far back their paper trails are...I do not know. There are also L23* Poles so whether these two groups are connected, I am not sure either.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2012, 05:45:03 PM by A_Wode » Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.165 seconds with 18 queries.