World Families Forums - Is R U106 In The Isles All Due To Germanic Expansion?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 19, 2014, 02:28:15 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)
| | |-+  Is R U106 In The Isles All Due To Germanic Expansion?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Is R U106 In The Isles All Due To Germanic Expansion?  (Read 15956 times)
ironroad41
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


« Reply #75 on: July 31, 2012, 09:29:55 AM »

. . .

Your sense of what is conscionable is disturbing . . .

Do I need to explain it?

This is a case of someone with an easily explicable y-dna test result who is struggling with the very obvious truth of it, desperately seeking some thin excuse to hold onto a preconceived notion of what his result should have been but was not. 

It is unconscionable to introduce highly subjective commentary regarding what Dienekes' himself called an "experiment" in dating to further inflame and aggravate this issue.

Vince Vizachero is quite knowledgeable on these matters and commented that the dating for that subclade of U106 was probably merely an estimate of the TMRCA for R-M269.


You are stirring me up sir!  You don't have the background to judge dating!

I have been doubtful of the STR approach for years, but I spent time trying to understand all the assumptions and test them.  Variance fails!

I repeat, this "experiment" has been repeated by two independent persons!

How can a interclade estimate of two U106 subclades give the TMRCA for M269 which is several levels above???

This whole house of cards built up on STR dating is crumbling.  I think it is you by not being objective and recognizing that fact who is unconscionable.

I'm outa here.
Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #76 on: July 31, 2012, 09:56:03 AM »

Please do not presume to know my actual motivations regarding the discussion on this subject, nor misrepresent my views as some form of personal desperation. The reason for my tenacity is very simple I don't take kindly, as a principle, to witnessing others trying to force what in truth is at best merely an informed an opinion, as fact, upon others. I suppose it's a cultured streak in me that ever since childhood I was always willing to take on the playground bully, who insisted that it was his ball that would be the best for the game :)

While I respect the freedom of others to hold a different position on the subject of R U106, it is entirely unreasonable for people to demean the discussion through misrepresentation or personalizing matters. I try my best to respect people and value how personal data or family information is regarded as confidential on forums such as this. As to the subject in hand clearly the orthodoxy prevails in which a Germanic answer is sought by the usual suspects every time the Haplogroup is discussed, that's fair enough, what is not so just however is the response which is so contemptuously dismissive of alternative ideas on the matter.
Logged
JeanL
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 425


« Reply #77 on: July 31, 2012, 10:00:59 AM »

The dates provided by Dienekes are actually lower bound dates, the upper bound dates would be those of the upstream clades, take for example the latest entry posted by Dienekes:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/07/on-age-of-y-chromosome-haplogroup-r1b.html

Here is a histogram of presumed TMRCA vs.frequency:



http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9c7WGlzyxfc/UBfLmLKI0fI/AAAAAAAAFII/7oHsFcOOLV8/s1600/hist.png

It is not labeled, so it is really hard to make any feasible conclusions as to the different subclades involved, but Dienekes does let’s know that the one of the peaks that occurs around 15 kya belongs to a Puerto Rican (HG00640), who appears to be R1b-M343+, R1b1-L278+, but R1b1-P297-. This is what Dienekes concludes based on upon the findings:

Quote
The estimate of the age difference between HG00640 and the remaining M343+ chromosomes that cluster on the right is: 15,426 years. We now have direct evidence that haplogroup R1b1 is quite old, and R1b-M343 itself must have emerged sometime between 23,657 years (the TMRCA of R1a vs. R1b) and 15,426 years.

So in a sense, what this is telling us, is that because the age of R1b-Z156 vs. R1b-Z301 is 6476 ybp, that R1b-U106 is at least 6500 ybp (Per Dienekes experiment).

It is interesting that there appears to be a small peak around 9-10 kya (With a frequency of around 150-200), I wonder what subclade this peaks belongs to.


Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #78 on: July 31, 2012, 11:33:00 AM »

The reason for my tenacity is very simple I don't take kindly...

That would be accepted as reasonable if you simply interjected a caveat in discussions that are already taking place on R1b-U106. What creates the impression of personal crusade is the constant starting of new threads on the topic, when there is no new data to discuss, and the posting of endless repetitions of statements made years earlier. This insistence on repeatedly going over the same ground, over and over and over and over again in an unending counter-productive cycle is bound to create the impression of desperation.

This is particularly sad because you are repeatedly attacking people who would agree with you that the question of U106 is a matter of informed opinion. It is a question of deduction from the available evidence. "Orthodoxy" does not enter into it. Bullying is even less in evidence. You keep building a straw man to burn, over and over and over and over and over and over ..... Why? Because you don't like the informed deduction. Which is not that it is completely and utterly impossible for any U106 to have entered the Isles that wasn't Germanic-speaking. The informed deduction is that most U106 in the Isles today probably derives from  Migration Period arrivals. We can't be certain. If new data appears, that can be debated. For now this subject is exhausted.
Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #79 on: July 31, 2012, 11:34:59 AM »

JeanL

And we are asked by a certain line of thinking that R U106, for the overwhelming majority of its calculated minimum age 6500 ybp, was supposedly not able to migrate westwards or have the capacity to reach the Isles until the arrival of Germanic culture. I find it puzzling why such supposed lack of mobility seems only to have affected this Haplogroup.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #80 on: July 31, 2012, 11:44:51 AM »

I find it puzzling why such supposed lack of mobility seems only to have affected this Haplogroup.

So you have said often before. And it leads nowhere. The fact of the matter is that people move when they feel like moving and the choice of destination is theirs. The age of a haplogroup does not tell us when it arrived at any particular location. Bear in mind that a SNP on the Y-chromosome occurs initially in just one man. In the days before air travel and steam ships, one man could not leave offspring all over the globe. A mutation could sit in one small, comfortable niche for millennia before some motive force moved it out.

We can only observe what actually happened, not what might have happened under different circumstances. The patterns we see are the result of countless individual choices made over millennia.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #81 on: July 31, 2012, 11:48:58 AM »

JeanL

And we are asked by a certain line of thinking that R U106, for the overwhelming majority of its calculated minimum age 6500 ybp, was supposedly not able to migrate westwards or have the capacity to reach the Isles until the arrival of Germanic culture. I find it puzzling why such supposed lack of mobility seems only to have affected this Haplogroup.

I dont know.  Many yDNA lines are patterned and confined due to many reasons, one of which is probably location of initial existence of an SNP and another the existing of previous settlers prevented them.  There is strong patterning in the L11 major divisions.  Something about the sequence of who settled where first probably is responsible.  L21 is very rare in east-central Europe, Italy etc and clearly its point of origin and other clades with a 'first in' advantage blocked them.  You get the impression that the main subclades of L11 carved up Europe in dominant blocks of each subclade (although there are exceptions). It seems like older non-R1b clades did not have much success in blocking L11 but the various L11 subclades seem to have been good at blocking each other.  They clearly had some advantage over the pre-R1b populations in Europe (what it was depends on the dating) but seem to have not been so good at shifting each other, probably due to being on a very similar par culturally and technologically (which they likely were given that so many of the root L11 subclades are of similar date).  
Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #82 on: July 31, 2012, 12:01:40 PM »

I have raised questions of interest and exchanged various opinions on a subject that I find of interest, that being why without any actual proven evidence, a few individuals choose to announce as a scientific truth that a certain Haplogroup is by definition Germanic or that its presence in the Isles is all due to Germanic expansion. People do have particular areas of inquiry and I for one do not choose to insult or seek to ridicule simply because a person say has opinions on any specific topic. I have on occasion, as is my right, speculated on the subject, and when required addressed people's differing views. Such exchanges hardly constitutes 'constant attacks' nor is my presence a crusade to advance any personal attachments concerning any particular Haplogroups.  It would be more accurate to describe it as a challenge to a prevailing dogma and what is of interest is just how aggressive and nasty matters become as a result, as if a blasphemy had occurred, that anyone who dared to suggest the earth was not flat, was clearly a heretic and thus deserving of vitriol. Clearly there exists a mindset which is intolerant of a dissenting voice regarding the orthodoxy of R U106 equals Germanic. Yet beyond the statistics, obtuse calculations and speculations the plain fact is that no one can state in any definitive or provable scientific sense when and where the Haplogroup migrated. So it is within that context that I resist the assertions of those who would write off the Haplogroup as entirely explained away and meanwhile I do my best to do so with courtesy and patience, despite the personalized abuse.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 12:04:16 PM by whoknows » Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #83 on: July 31, 2012, 12:29:48 PM »

I have raised questions of interest and exchanged various opinions on a subject that I find of interest, that being why without any actual proven evidence, a few individuals choose to announce as a scientific truth that a certain Haplogroup is by definition Germanic or that its presence in the Isles is all due to Germanic expansion. People do have particular areas of inquiry and I for one do not choose to insult or seek to ridicule simply because a person say has opinions on any specific topic. I have on occasion, as is my right, speculated on the subject, and when required addressed people's differing views. Such exchanges hardly constitutes 'constant attacks' nor is my presence a crusade to advance any personal attachments concerning any particular Haplogroups.  It would be more accurate to describe it as a challenge to a prevailing dogma and what is of interest is just how aggressive and nasty matters become as a result, as if a blasphemy had occurred, that anyone who dared to suggest the earth was not flat, was clearly a heretic and thus deserving of vitriol. Clearly there exists a mindset which is intolerant of a dissenting voice regarding the orthodoxy of R U106 equals Germanic. Yet beyond the statistics, obtuse calculations and speculations the plain fact is that no one can state in any definitive or provable scientific sense when and where the Haplogroup migrated. So it is within that context that I resist the assertions of those who would write off the Haplogroup as entirely explained away and meanwhile I do my best to do so with courtesy and patience, despite the personalized abuse.

@whoknows, by constantly bringing statements like this up, you are doing an incredible disservice to a very interesting topic.

It would be refreshing to hear your take on what happened (time periods, cultures, SNP relationships), rather than a drawn out history of how "some people" said this or that God knows how long ago.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #84 on: July 31, 2012, 12:38:01 PM »

Peter, do you have a guess as to what culture may have been associated with its inception? Funnel Beaker? If so, I can see a scenario where Corded Ware (R1a) may have pushed U106 over the Elbe. Perhaps there was a movement already in place near the Low Countries with a very small group of U152 which may have provided the Italic-like features that linguists see as the "Noordwestblok"? Perhaps the Noordwestblok already had some other forms of U106 (Z381)?

Well, this (pre-historic cultures) is not an area I know a lot about. My guess is, the migration of the Z18 south-west took place in the Iron Age (after 750 BC) and as far as I'm aware the Funnel Beaker culture is (much) older; in the Netherlands, where this culture has been present, it is considered Neolithic afaia.

For a number of reasons (some very serious and some mainly funny) I tend to relate the migration south-west of Z18 to the migration of the tribe of the Suabi/Suebi, who ended up in south-western Germany and are today called the Schwaben. But this leaves the question open why they went south-west and not west. Were they bypassing something ??

Peter, is there something specific that leads you to believe that is the direction of the migration?
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #85 on: July 31, 2012, 12:56:14 PM »

... why without any actual proven evidence, a few individuals choose to announce as a scientific truth that a certain Haplogroup is by definition Germanic

Once again the straw man to put to the flame. Has anyone on this thread said anything like this? No. And if anyone did, I would be happy to inform them that no haplogroup can be "by definition" allocated to a particular ethnic group. A haplogroup is a biological feature. It does not come with an ethnic label. What is going on constantly on this and many similar forums is attempted deduction from the data we have before us about the migrations that might have resulted in the haplogroup patterns in populations today. At its best, such discussion is rational and logical.

This kind of discussion goes on about all haplogroups not just U106. If what you object to on principle is any kind of debate, discussion or speculation about any kind of ethnic correlation, or perceived connection, with any haplogroup, then why the constant, unrelenting, obsessive focus on U106? It is not rational.
 
« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 12:59:40 PM by Jean M » Logged
princenuadha
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 115


« Reply #86 on: July 31, 2012, 03:55:45 PM »

And the Hitler/Nazi analogy in 5... 4... 3... 2...

Lol, you two are talking in some hyperbole : )

Quote from: alan trowel hands.
Many yDNA lines are patterned and confined due to many reasons, one of which is probably location of initial existence of an SNP and another the existing of previous settlers prevented them.

 Yes! I have been shocked by the adna that has come out in recent years. What we are finding, is a whole lot of order. The cardial groups seems to mostly reflect only two ydna hgs, the tamarin mummies, one, and the trb Swedes so different from the their hunter gatherer neighbors. Now, even the mtdna shows a lot of structure once we look closer, ie we even can deduce replacement of female lines. I wouldn't have thought things woukd be so structured.

[Warning] I'm getting off topic but, I don't quite know how to summarize the larger concept here. I think, on the small scale things are much more structured than we would have thought. But maybe on the large scale I should say that things are less structed. That's why one group can be dominated by r1a even though r1a is widely distributed amongst many other widely distributed hgs. One analogy I think of, is stiring oil and water together. On the small scale we have structure, oil droplers and water. On the large scale we have less structure, more of a homogenous mix of the two. So, that's my best model of human migration...

Back to the topic at hand, I think is is very well possible for most (which is what most ppl mean.as jean pointed out) the u106 in the isles came during the germanic migration. Of course I must say an Anglo Saxon migration that was mostly germanic : )

« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 03:56:18 PM by princenuadha » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #87 on: July 31, 2012, 04:47:26 PM »

Even if the age of U106 overall was pushed back to the early farmers of northern Europe c. 4200BC, this would not change the fact that prevous calculations indicated that a lot of this variance was east of the Elbe and that west of the Elbe it was something like a third less which in relative terms would make west of Elbe u106 about 2000BC.  I cant think of a thrust of a long settled group from east of the Elbe towards the Rhine in that sort of period.  That doesnt seem to make sense to me.  TRB was a pretty lightning spread as far as the Rhine area and didnt have the sort of delay of 2000 years you would expect between east and west of the Elbe given the one third(ish) difference in variance.  It just doesnt fit.  

if you push U106 any  further back you are in the Mesolithic.  Cant say I can imagine a Mesolithic group in somewhere like Poland sitting there for 1000s of years only to thrust west across Germany.  That doesnt in any way relate to what I know about the Mesolithic.  

All in all it is very hard to make sense of the relative variance of U106 east and west of the Elbe if you push the date back into the local early Neolithic or Mesolithic.  I would also add that the spread of Corded Ware from the Elbe to the Rhine was also far quicker (a matter of a few centuries-even if we believe the dodgy early dates in the east) than you would expect to produce a one third discrepancy in variance either side of the Elbe.  

I realise this is putting a lot of faith in variance but I cant make sense of the vone third variance diffential either side of the Elbe in either a TRB or Corded Ware scenario.  It really just doesnt fit.  

I would still see U106 as a local L11* mutation that happened in situ in the later beaker period among L11* people who had headed east and become north-eastern outliers in the beaker betwork.  That could be wrong but its the best fit I can see at the moment.   The relative diffrence in variance would appear to fit muvch better a beaker outlier origin of U106 and a back migration west in the late Bronze Age and Iron Age.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 04:51:06 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #88 on: July 31, 2012, 05:05:09 PM »

Of course it is most certainly probable that some R U106 entered the Isles during Germanic expansions, some would go further of course, yet the topic question is 'Is R U106 In The Isles ALL Due to Germanic Expansion? What is interesting to note is how forward folks are to press the case for Germanic reasons to explain the Haplogroup's presence in the Isles, yet seem reluctant to consider alternative models that may have possibly contributed. This creates an impression of a somewhat single sided perspective, which is why it is not too difficult to consider, on this Forum at least, that a mindset exists that concludes a Germanic explanation as the only reasonable explanation.

This seems to rest (along with an uncritical reliance upon linguistic considerations, and literary sources such as Bede) upon the interesting assumption that the Haplogroup was for the majority of its considered several thousand of years old age, bottled up somewhere and prevented by some unknown factors from migrating westwards. While any R U106 that may have managed to reach the North Sea coast was not able to cross water it seems, until that is the Germanics came along with their famed seafaring skills.

Now Rich much as I would love to be able to offer a carefully constructed statistical model based on various SNP and Cluster analysis given the basic nature of the questions posed here, we really do not need to go simple reasoning to see that there are questions about the 'R U106 did not make it to the Isles claims'.

Jean M Let me make this clear. I value your knowledge and respect the insights you offer on a range of aspects of this field of research. It is unfortunate that you view my comments through what seems a rather cynical and distrustful lens, I remain willing to learn from your contributions and am interested in your your views, as I am of all fellow contributors, no matter their position on this particular topic. I would hope that mutual respect among contributors would enable civilized and friendly exchanges of opinion, sadly sometimes that seems rather optimistic. Thanks to all who offered various ideas on this thread, including the Moderator for his patience and tolerance in allowing the discussion to ebb and flow, over territory some found terra recognito
Logged
Peter M
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #89 on: July 31, 2012, 05:37:10 PM »

For a number of reasons (some very serious and some mainly funny) I tend to relate the migration south-west of Z18 to the migration of the tribe of the Suabi/Suebi, who ended up in south-western Germany and are today called the Schwaben. But this leaves the question open why they went south-west and not west. Were they bypassing something ??

Peter, is there something specific that leads you to believe that is the direction of the migration?

It is my intention to write an article with maps and things for the L257.org web site on this, but it would be nice to have some discussion about the migration patterns of Z18 here. Please consider this is not a well thought-out piece of text; it describes some ideas.

Let's start with L257, a SNP downstream of Z18, because that's most easily used as a "Flag SNP". For me, a Flag SNP is a SNP whose geographic occurrence appears to be indicative of the migration of a group of people in a specific time frame. After that time the geographic distribution of a SNP tends to blur, therefore I'm convinced every SNP has a time period in which it is useful to migration studies. Note: I'm not saying that any SNP is EQUAL to ANY group of people.

Look at the test results (L257.org; select Y-DNA Profiles Z18+ L257+ in the menu on the left). The ordering of the results in the list are from older to newer profiles (as I tend to see them). More to the bottom of the list this ordering is proven by the DYS464x test results going cccg -> ccgg -> cggg -> gggg. (please assume for a moment this sequence necessarily implies an ordering, I will explain it on the web site.) One endpoint of this migration route was Scotland and an on-route station was Central Europe or a bit more precise South-Western Germany (Schwabenland) and Switzerland. The older profiles (more to the top) tend to originate more to the north-east and my assumption is the Baltic states, because L257 occurs there (and because other Z18 groups migrated further to Scandinavia).

So my assumed migration path for L257 is: Baltic States, then south-west to Schwabenland (south-west Germany), and then north-west to Scotland.

My personal guess (!!) would be that U106 emerged somewhere around Hungary/Ukraine; the Z18 subgroup travelled north and went to the Baltic States (e.g. Lithuania, were L257 is found); from there a few Z18 clusters went to Scandinavia and the rest south-west to Germany as described above. It would be nice to be able to prove all of this, but currently there's not enough data to have any hope of that. I guess other U106 subgroups most likely followed other paths (e.g. west from the origin point of U106), but I'm not aware of research in this area.

I'm fully aware that in telling this story, I make a LOT of assumptions (e.g. assuming origins for some people in Germany on the basis of their surname), but there's little else I can do, because of the relative paucity of actual test results from Continental/Eastern Europe.

Any comments that do not contain the word "Ireland" ?? The possible migration of Z18 to Ireland might be a follow-up subject, I guess.

Edit: btw, the word Schwabenland doesn't exist officially, but will be accepted/tolerated and understood by everyone on the European Continent.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 05:54:37 PM by Peter M » Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #90 on: July 31, 2012, 06:35:23 PM »

@ Peter M.

Thank you very much for your interesting thoughts. Good to see you here.

A flow from Ukraine to the Baltic? Hmm. Looks like Corded Ware/ Battle Axe.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #91 on: July 31, 2012, 07:26:46 PM »

@ Peter M.

Thank you very much for your interesting thoughts. Good to see you here.

A flow from Ukraine to the Baltic? Hmm. Looks like Corded Ware/ Battle Axe.

I ran that up the flag pole for U106 awhile back and then again after the two Beaker men from Kromsdorf were both found to be U106-. No one saluted, but I don't expect much of that. :-)

Logged

Peter M
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #92 on: July 31, 2012, 08:17:48 PM »

I ran that up the flag pole for U106 awhile back and then again after the two Beaker men from Kromsdorf were both found to be U106-. No one saluted, but I don't expect much of that. :-)
I guess, the U106- findings in Germany suggest that R1b entered Europe as a number of groups and not as a single wave. Could these people have been L21 or U152 ??

BTW, who were you expecting to salute ??
Logged
Peter M
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #93 on: July 31, 2012, 08:19:01 PM »

@ Peter M.
Good to see you here.

Thanks, Jean !! $:-)
Logged
sernam
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #94 on: July 31, 2012, 08:26:10 PM »

If you think it’s early iron age its movement could possibly represent Lustian people moving from the expansion of the Pomeranian from the north while avoiding the Jastorf to the west.

And you think the Jastorf culture might have extended to the River Elbe in the East in those days and the R-Z18 tribe was trying to avoid them ?? Interesting !!

It would be interesting to know if there's a more frequent occurring of a haplogroup (flag haplogroup) in the Jastorf culture.

Not really,I was trying to fit what you were saying was evidence & connect it, first w Alan’s date of U106 westerly movement & after your mentioned timeframe, so something would make sense. (at least until someone more knowledgeable came along)
Lusatian runs in your direction. caveat emptor

AFA Pomeranian expansion it's just pure speculation as a reason to move.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 08:27:00 PM by sernam » Logged
Mkk
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 95


« Reply #95 on: August 01, 2012, 04:40:43 AM »

Who knows,

You complain that we only use our Volkswanderung model but you as of yet haven't proposed any other models that fit the historical evidence as well as the present distribution of the clades.

Yes, it's good to keep a open mind, but at this point the only evidence is circumstantial, and as I explained before this circumstantial evidence supports the Volkswanderung theory.

Unless some ancient DNA samples are released showing a lot of U106 outside Northern Europe / a lot of U106 in Britain prior to the Germanic migrations, than any debate is basically pointless speculation.
Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #96 on: August 01, 2012, 05:55:42 AM »

Speculation indeed, pointless?, well I for one find the various contributions and deductions offered interesting and informative. As indicated previously whichever model is constructed it is in essence an exercise in interpretation drawn from statistical data, hence each can be debated as having validity or not. That's where I am in this subject, simply not knowing and appraising the value or probability of various suggested theories, I have no difficulty with the likely hood of the Haplogroup entering the Isles during Germanic expansions, but for reasons I have considered previously choose not to dismiss the possibility of earlier migration and settlement.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2012, 05:56:42 AM by whoknows » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #97 on: August 01, 2012, 03:18:09 PM »

Of course it is most certainly probable that some R U106 entered the Isles during Germanic expansions, some would go further of course, yet the topic question is 'Is R U106 In The Isles ALL Due to Germanic Expansion? What is interesting to note is how forward folks are to press the case for Germanic reasons to explain the Haplogroup's presence in the Isles, yet seem reluctant to consider alternative models that may have possibly contributed. This creates an impression of a somewhat single sided perspective, which is why it is not too difficult to consider, on this Forum at least, that a mindset exists that concludes a Germanic explanation as the only reasonable explanation.

This seems to rest (along with an uncritical reliance upon linguistic considerations, and literary sources such as Bede) upon the interesting assumption that the Haplogroup was for the majority of its considered several thousand of years old age, bottled up somewhere and prevented by some unknown factors from migrating westwards. While any R U106 that may have managed to reach the North Sea coast was not able to cross water it seems, until that is the Germanics came along with their famed seafaring skills.

Now Rich much as I would love to be able to offer a carefully constructed statistical model based on various SNP and Cluster analysis given the basic nature of the questions posed here, we really do not need to go simple reasoning to see that there are questions about the 'R U106 did not make it to the Isles claims'.

Jean M Let me make this clear. I value your knowledge and respect the insights you offer on a range of aspects of this field of research. It is unfortunate that you view my comments through what seems a rather cynical and distrustful lens, I remain willing to learn from your contributions and am interested in your your views, as I am of all fellow contributors, no matter their position on this particular topic. I would hope that mutual respect among contributors would enable civilized and friendly exchanges of opinion, sadly sometimes that seems rather optimistic. Thanks to all who offered various ideas on this thread, including the Moderator for his patience and tolerance in allowing the discussion to ebb and flow, over territory some found terra recognito

Noone is saying ALL.  It will never be possible to prove that.  It probability.  I am disappointed that there is not some analysis of STRs of Irish U106 and some discussion on that basis.  Do the Irish U106 haplotypes look like early outliers compared to continental?  It would be good if someone with the skills would look at the haplotypes and give some sort of comment on how distant or close they look to continental.  That would be a good basis for arguement.  Do Irish U106 haplotypes look 4000 years distant from NW continental?  You could also ask that about Britain.  Are British U106 haplotypes 4000 years divergent from continental ?  I recall some look at this being done by Mike W and there was not the sort of divergence you would expect if there was a big separation period.  Surely some form of comparison of matching is the way to go.  IF U106 was around in the beaker period then  and moved into Britain then from the Rhine then they would have to have some sort of STR divergence approaching 4500 years.
Logged
whoknows
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #98 on: August 01, 2012, 05:00:52 PM »

Alan I agree it would be interesting to have  more detailed examination of STR's regarding the Isles. I could have this wrong but had read some where that Rokus did some work with some R U106 folks. Dees that sound likely?
Logged
Peter M
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #99 on: August 05, 2012, 09:04:01 AM »

I am disappointed that there is not some analysis of STRs of Irish U106 and some discussion on that basis.  Do the Irish U106 haplotypes look like early outliers compared to continental?  It would be good if someone with the skills would look at the haplotypes and give some sort of comment on how distant or close they look to continental.  That would be a good basis for arguement.

You would be even more disappointed after such analysis and discussion. Afaia, there has been a sort of TMRCA calculation of Irish U106 in the past. The results lead people to believe U106 actually emerged (!!) in Ireland, but this is in conflict with lots of other insights and data. Apparently, these calculations are NOT the way to go (I think U106 and TMRCA/Variance are a VERY incompatible pair).

My personal opinion is that U106 simply is too old and its spread in Europe has "blurred" too much for its investigation to lead to any type of conclusion (apart from where it emerged). This is (again MY opinion) the reason no significant progress whatsoever is being made in the U106 world (people insist analysis must be done on U106 level). I personally am convinced the only way to make progress in the investigation of U106 is to concentrate on downstream SNPs. Most likely, there's a very, very different story for each subgroup of U106 that is not visible on U106 level. BTW, compare this to the problems the Genographic Project had to give a reasonable account of the migration into Europe of R1b (R-M343); this migration cannot be studied without first splitting the R1b tribe into the U106 and P312 branches.

If one goes down a few levels, then results can be obtained. We (another respected member of this forum and yours truly) are doing this analysis on Z18 level (Z18 is a much "smaller" SNP downstream of U106) and we have learned a lot in the process. As a result I personally DO believe it is possible (!!) for U106 to have arrived in Ireland well before the Romans, and thus Anglo-Saxons, came to the isles. But if this is so, they most likely came from/via Scandinavia. This migration route could have lead to Non-English and possibly Non-Germanic (depending on one's definition of the word Germanic) group(s) of U106 people in Ireland. If this is the case, then, I guess, the best chance is these early arrivals in Ireland were Z18.

Whether this is the case, and how large this group might turn out to be, would be a nice part of the Z18 research and we would be most willing to do this. For this research to be possible, more detailed testing of Irish U106 would be needed. The main problem here is that a lot of Irish simply refuse to do any further testing or respond to simple emails after finding out that they are U106 believing that U106 implies Germanic and Germanic implies either Germany or England. They just don't want to know, but as a result the truth of the matter will not be discovered.

@whoknows: I guess your best bet would be to start convincing Irish U106 to start to respond to emails and to order additional tests to get more information on their background.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 12:58:40 PM by Peter M » Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 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 0.137 seconds with 18 queries.