World Families Forums - The Origin of L21

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 27, 2014, 03:45:03 AM
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)
| | |-+  The Origin of L21
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Origin of L21  (Read 28948 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #25 on: December 11, 2008, 09:10:51 AM »

I saw that. Tim had few continental haplotypes to go on, even fewer than are reported on my R-L21* Map because he used the R-L21 Plus Project, and two of our known L21+ don't have haplotypes available yet.

It's very unlikely that L21 arose in Ireland. It's possible, but it doesn't seem likely, unless, of course, L21 just suddenly stops showing up in France and Germany and elsewhere.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2008, 09:11:14 AM »

Okay, I'm reading more of Henri Hubert's  The History of the Celts (originally published in two volumes: The Rise of the Celts and The Greatness and Decline of the Celts), and really getting into it and enjoying it, but there's a great deal of information there to wade through and sift. Hubert had an encyclopedic knowledge of European history, prehistory, archaeology, and linguistics.

Anyway, he identifies the Goidels, who he believes were the first Celts to enter the British Isles, and who, he says, did so in the early Bronze Age, as the Beaker folk, whose men were tall, roundheaded, and who were buried on their sides in round barrows with "flint and copper daggers, arrowheads, and flat perforated pieces of shist which are 'bracers', or bowman's wristguards" (Book I, p. 172). Recall that this is exactly the type of burial in the case of the famous "Amesbury Archer":
http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/projects/amesbury/archer.html

Now I had thought the Beaker folk were a good match for P312+ in general, and that may still be the case, but if we are trying to connect L21+ with the Goidels, then, using Hubert's ideas, that would make them mostly L21+ rather than a more generalized P312+.

In this connection, Hubert notes that the people buried with beakers in Iberia were of a different physical type with a different skeleton. He also sees more similarities between the Beaker folk of Britain and those of NW Germany, in their round-barrow burials, their grave goods, and in their skeletal types.

The main strength of the Goidels=L21+=Beaker folk argument, as far as I can see, is the very obvious linguistic argument and the connection to Ireland. Irish is a Goidelic language, which is Q-Celtic, and Q-Celtic is believed to be the older form of the two branches of Celtic (Q and P). The idea is that the Q-Celtic-speaking Goidels entered Britain first, moved west and occupied Ireland, which still speaks a modernized version of their language. The P-Celtic-speaking Brythonic Celts arrived later, from the same direction (the East) mainly. Their language spread throughout Britain, being easy for the Q-Celts to adopt as a lingua franca, but made little impact in Ireland, probably because fewer Brythonic speakers went there (although some did).

Hubert also places the original homeland of the Brythonic P-Celts farther south than that of the Goidels in Germany, which might lead us to expect rather more L21- and U152+ there than L21+, but time will tell.

He does say the following on page 176 of Book I, which might lead us to despair of finding much L21+ left on the Continent:

Quote
. . . it is a dogma of German Siedelungsgeschichte ["settlement history"] that all the north-west seaboard, Westphalia, and Hanover were emptied of their inhabitants before the second period of the Bronze Age.

Hubert cites a lot of archaeological, linguistic, and anthropological evidence for what he believes, and he's pretty convincing. Right or wrong, his book is one of the most fascinating I have ever read. The man was a genius.

Hubert mentions an alternative theory, that of a man he calls "the great Celticist, Zimmer" (Book I, p. 169):

Quote
He [Zimmer] maintained that the Goidels came from France, and probably by the Atlantic coast, starting from south of the mouth of the Loire . . . [H]e held that men had gone to Ireland by the same route as goods.

Note in this connection that one of our French L21+ comes from very near the south bank of the Loire and two of the others aren't too far from there (but, of course, we need many more results).

Hubert argues that the Beaker burials in France are less similar to those in Britain than those of NW Germany are, but perhaps the Goidels and L21 advanced into Britain using more than one route.

It also seems likely to me that L21 did not enter Britain alone, as a single, completely homogenous group. There were probably some P312+ L21- men among the Goidels and perhaps even members of other y haplogroups, although in fewer numbers than the L21+ (if this L21+=Goidels=Beaker folk idea is correct, that is).

Anyway, it's something to toss around. Rick Arnold first pointed me in the direction of Hubert's book with the caveat that the material might be somewhat dated: Hubert, a French scientist, linguist and archaeologist, died in 1927. His great work on the Celts was published posthumously.

It is interesting that as a Frenchman writing in the years following WWI, Hubert overcame nationalist temptations to believe the evidence indicated the P-Celtic-speaking Gauls originated in SW Germany.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2008, 10:12:14 AM by rms2 » Logged

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2008, 01:15:07 PM »

Hubert's work is very interesting. The one thing that has always blown up  the "La Tene Celts were the first Celts in Ireland theory", is the fact that the Irish speak an older form of Celtic than the La Tene Celts. I think it can safely be said that Q-Celtic is indeed older than P-Celtic, since PIE retains the "kw" sound. The shift from "kw" to "p" is not uncommon in IE languages and "kw" has always been the earlier form. Irish in fact has gone a step further in its shift and has, in many cases, dropped the "p" sound completely. Pater (Latin) = Father (English) = Athair (Irish). Still the question remains why the only other place where evidence of Q-Celtic has been found is in Iberia. At least now we may be getting away from the "great magic trick" of the La Tene Celts bringing the Celtic culture to the Irish and giving them a form of their language older in form than what they themselves spoke!

Thanks,  Miles
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2008, 01:42:53 PM »

Hubert's work is very interesting. The one thing that has always blown up  the "La Tene Celts were the first Celts in Ireland theory", is the fact that the Irish speak an older form of Celtic than the La Tene Celts. I think it can safely be said that Q-Celtic is indeed older than P-Celtic, since PIE retains the "kw" sound. The shift from "kw" to "p" is not uncommon in IE languages and "kw" has always been the earlier form. Irish in fact has gone a step further in its shift and has, in many cases, dropped the "p" sound completely. Pater (Latin) = Father (English) = Athair (Irish). Still the question remains why the only other place where evidence of Q-Celtic has been found is in Iberia. At least now we may be getting away from the "great magic trick" of the La Tene Celts bringing the Celtic culture to the Irish and giving them a form of their language older in form than what they themselves spoke!

Thanks,  Miles

Didier pointed out something similar regarding Iberia in an email to me recently. Some L21+ may yet turn up in Iberia in especially Celtic areas, like Galicia in the northwest, but it may be the Celts went there as something of an elite, so that L21 may be far less frequent in Iberia than in, say, France or Germany.

I think I mentioned this before, but it was Rick Arnold who first put two and two together concerning L21, Hubert's book, and the Goidels. Even if it turns out to be wrong, it makes a lot of sense, and it very well could be right straight dead on.
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2008, 10:46:19 AM »

Anyway, he identifies the Goidels, who he believes were the first Celts to enter the British Isles, and who, he says, did so in the early Bronze Age, as the Beaker folk, whose men were tall, roundheaded, and who were buried on their sides in round barrows with "flint and copper daggers, arrowheads, and flat perforated pieces of shist which are 'bracers', or bowman's wristguards" (Book I, p. 172). Recall that this is exactly the type of burial in the case of the famous "Amesbury Archer":
http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/projects/amesbury/archer.html
Are there some ADN tests done from the bones of "Amesbury Archer" ?
I think it is possible to process ADN tests on such archeological bones.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #30 on: December 15, 2008, 12:20:07 PM »

Anyway, he identifies the Goidels, who he believes were the first Celts to enter the British Isles, and who, he says, did so in the early Bronze Age, as the Beaker folk, whose men were tall, roundheaded, and who were buried on their sides in round barrows with "flint and copper daggers, arrowheads, and flat perforated pieces of shist which are 'bracers', or bowman's wristguards" (Book I, p. 172). Recall that this is exactly the type of burial in the case of the famous "Amesbury Archer":
http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/projects/amesbury/archer.html
Are there some ADN tests done from the bones of "Amesbury Archer" ?
I think it is possible to process ADN tests on such archeological bones.

I wrote the archaeologist in charge of the Amesbury Archer case (I can't recall his name right offhand - Fitzpatrick? Fitzgerald?) a year ago or so. He said there are no plans to test the remains for dna, and they don't believe they could get any, etc.

I wish they would at least try, but it did not sound like they intend to.
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2008, 01:44:02 PM »

Hubert's work is very interesting. The one thing that has always blown up  the "La Tene Celts were the first Celts in Ireland theory", is the fact that the Irish speak an older form of Celtic than the La Tene Celts. I think it can safely be said that Q-Celtic is indeed older than P-Celtic, since PIE retains the "kw" sound. The shift from "kw" to "p" is not uncommon in IE languages and "kw" has always been the earlier form. Irish in fact has gone a step further in its shift and has, in many cases, dropped the "p" sound completely. Pater (Latin) = Father (English) = Athair (Irish). Still the question remains why the only other place where evidence of Q-Celtic has been found is in Iberia. At least now we may be getting away from the "great magic trick" of the La Tene Celts bringing the Celtic culture to the Irish and giving them a form of their language older in form than what they themselves spoke!

Thanks,  Miles
There isn't only linguistic argument concerning Iberia, but also the extent of beaker culture which were very present in Iberia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #32 on: December 16, 2008, 09:02:00 PM »

Hubert's work is very interesting. The one thing that has always blown up  the "La Tene Celts were the first Celts in Ireland theory", is the fact that the Irish speak an older form of Celtic than the La Tene Celts. I think it can safely be said that Q-Celtic is indeed older than P-Celtic, since PIE retains the "kw" sound. The shift from "kw" to "p" is not uncommon in IE languages and "kw" has always been the earlier form. Irish in fact has gone a step further in its shift and has, in many cases, dropped the "p" sound completely. Pater (Latin) = Father (English) = Athair (Irish). Still the question remains why the only other place where evidence of Q-Celtic has been found is in Iberia. At least now we may be getting away from the "great magic trick" of the La Tene Celts bringing the Celtic culture to the Irish and giving them a form of their language older in form than what they themselves spoke!

Thanks,  Miles
There isn't only linguistic argument concerning Iberia, but also the extent of beaker culture which were very present in Iberia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture

But according to Hubert the skeletons associated with the beakers in Iberia are different from those in Britain, Germany, and France.

« Last Edit: December 17, 2008, 08:02:52 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #33 on: December 19, 2008, 11:02:02 PM »

We just had a man join this evening who traces his ancestry to Lugo in Galicia, Spain. Galicia is supposed to be a particularly Celtic part of Spain, and this new member ordered the L21 test (at my suggestion) this evening.

It should be interesting to see how he comes out.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2008, 04:14:26 PM »

Here's something archaeologist Alan Reilly posted on Rootsweb today:
 
http://archiver. rootsweb. ancestry. com/th/read/ GENEALOGY- DNA/2008- 12/1229793381

Quote

There is little doubt in my mind that the vast majority of  continental Celts were S116 and that a considerable chunk of these may have been L21.  S28 seems to have been a marker of the Alpine Celts but not of the Celts as a whole.  People tend to forget that the Alpine Celts lay at the southernmost fringe of the Celtic world albeit close to and more accessible for observation from the classical world but that the greater body of Celts or Gauls lay between the Alps and the British Isles (i.e. most of Gaul) and its likely that the majority of these non-Alpine Gauls were either L21 or S116*. 
 
Genetics has therefore really contributed towards our understanding of the Celts.  It had become common to say that the Irish and British were Celtic speakers but somehow not genetically Celtic or were pre-Celts who had learned the language.  However, S116 and L21 now seem to indicate that the vast majority of the British Isles 'Celtic fringe' people share common ancestry in the not too distant past with a majority of the people residing in primary areas once occupied by the continental Celts.  So, the rather silly pretence that British Isles Celts were somehow less Celtic than the Gauls has to be thrown out.  This idea had its roots in racist Victorian antiquarian thinking and its good to see it now bites the dust.  I am surprised this very important sea change in how we must now view the insular and continental Celts (i.e. they are the same) has not been commented on.  So many papers even recently have tried to offset the Atlantic
Celts from the main body of continental ones but now that we know most are S116 people there seems no basis for this and quite the opposite conclusion should be reached.  There are surely few now who could say that its valid to see the differences within S116 as being significant given the fact that the branches of S116 are so similar that its even impossible to distinguish most by STRs.
 
TMRCA dates suggest that all of the S116 clades diverged at about the same time and that they also diverged from S116-/S21+ about the same time, a clade that has a non-Celtic, more north Germanic, focus today.   That suggests that when they split the common ancestor was probably just west Indo-European rather than specifically Celtic and that the difference  between Celts and Germans only came subsequently or perhaps was just emerging at the split.  Another thing worth noting is that L21 and S116* seem to have been together in mixed populations throughout France and England, a very substantial chunk of the old Celtic core.  There seems to be a large area of mix suggesting early on mixed populations were formed before they migrated northwards in an already mixed state.  The increase in L21 in Scotland and further still in Ireland is likely due to founder effects IMO, likewise the S116* predominance in Iberia. I think that is more about
chance than any sort of cultural or ethnic significance.
 
Debate!
 
Alan
Logged

vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #35 on: December 20, 2008, 07:04:35 PM »

Tom Gull (the R-U106 administrator) commented on the similarity of the distribution of U106+ and P312+ after the R-U106 map was updated on dna-forums.org.

I will certainly agree that a good part of celtic culture consisted of men of L21+ descent, but it doesn't look like it was exclusive to L21+, or vice versa.  Actually it seems that "germanic" and "keltic" tribal affiliations and differentiation may simply be due to gross Roman-era generalizations.

But what do I know.

Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #36 on: December 20, 2008, 09:17:59 PM »

Tom Gull (the R-U106 administrator) commented on the similarity of the distribution of U106+ and P312+ after the R-U106 map was updated on dna-forums.org.

I will certainly agree that a good part of celtic culture consisted of men of L21+ descent, but it doesn't look like it was exclusive to L21+, or vice versa.  Actually it seems that "germanic" and "keltic" tribal affiliations and differentiation may simply be due to gross Roman-era generalizations.

But what do I know.



I agree with Alan's assessment that the U106/P312 split occurred among Western Indo-Europeans probably about the time the Celtic and Germanic languages were becoming distinct, separate entities.

But, yeah, the border between Celt and German was pretty hazy, and they influenced each other a great deal.
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2008, 04:31:56 AM »

If i understand what Alan said, can we tell that Beakers culture correspond to "west Indo-European rather than specifically Celtic" before split between celts and germans ? And than L21 migration towards British isles is more recent than early Bronze age?
I notice than germans L21 are very close to Hallstat culture. For example John Leonard Marth lived very close to Heuneburg.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2008, 01:34:28 PM »

If i understand what Alan said, can we tell that Beakers culture correspond to "west Indo-European rather than specifically Celtic" before split between celts and germans ? And than L21 migration towards British isles is more recent than early Bronze age?
I notice than germans L21 are very close to Hallstat culture. For example John Leonard Marth lived very close to Heuneburg.

I think you understood him correctly.

There have been many ancient Celtic archaeological finds in Western Germany. The famous Hochdorf Chieftain's burial mound is there:

http://home.bawue.de/~wmwerner/hochdorf/hgl1.html

I cannot say whether or not he was L21+, but it's fun to think that maybe he was!
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #39 on: December 21, 2008, 02:01:00 PM »

i red a few weeks ago a very interesting and complete study about Hochdorf grave: www.archeo.ens.fr/IMG/pdf/SIRIS7Hochdorf.pdf
Unfortunately for you it is in french and i am not sure you can read it.
It is incredible to see all the informations archeologist can get from such grave.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #40 on: December 21, 2008, 02:08:55 PM »

i red a few weeks ago a very interesting and complete study about Hochdorf grave: www.archeo.ens.fr/IMG/pdf/SIRIS7Hochdorf.pdf
Unfortunately for you it is in french and i am not sure you can read it.
It is incredible to see all the informations archeologist can get from such grave.
I remember than Stephane Verger in his paper about Hochdorf grave speaks about mitochondrial ADN test done on Hochdorf prince and the result gives he his a close parent of prince of Grafenbühl (a tumulus near Hochdorf) (see page 6 and 7). He doesn't say in his paper if Y DNA tests have been done. But it would be very interesting to get the results of this tests!
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #41 on: December 21, 2008, 02:33:38 PM »

i red a few weeks ago a very interesting and complete study about Hochdorf grave: www.archeo.ens.fr/IMG/pdf/SIRIS7Hochdorf.pdf
Unfortunately for you it is in french and i am not sure you can read it.
It is incredible to see all the informations archeologist can get from such grave.
I remember than Stephane Verger in his paper about Hochdorf grave speaks about mitochondrial ADN test done on Hochdorf prince and the result gives he his a close parent of prince of Grafenbühl (a tumulus near Hochdorf) (see page 6 and 7). He doesn't say in his paper if Y DNA tests have been done. But it would be very interesting to get the results of this tests!

Wow! I didn't know they had done any dna testing on the Hochdorf Chieftain. Do you know what mtDNA haplogroup he belonged to?
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #42 on: December 21, 2008, 03:39:52 PM »

Wow! I didn't know they had done any dna testing on the Hochdorf Chieftain. Do you know what mtDNA haplogroup he belonged to?
No, Stephane Verger doesn't give the mtDNA haplgroup.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #43 on: December 23, 2008, 01:02:49 PM »

Wow! I didn't know they had done any dna testing on the Hochdorf Chieftain. Do you know what mtDNA haplogroup he belonged to?
No, Stephane Verger doesn't give the mtDNA haplgroup.

Too bad.

Man, I wish he could have gotten some y dna from the Hochdorf Chieftain!

(As long as the Hochdorf Chieftain wasn't U152+! Sorry, but I have my reasons.)
Logged

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #44 on: December 23, 2008, 04:20:47 PM »

Stephane Verger give two references for these DNA tests, I suppose in the same book:

D. Krauße, Vetternwirtschaft?, in Biel, Krauße 2005, pp.63-66

and

S. Hummel, D. Schmidt, B. Herrmann, Molekulargenetische Analysen zur Verwandtschaftfeststellung an Skelettproben aus Gräbern frühkeltischer Fürstensitze, in Biel, Krauße 2005, pp. 67-70
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #45 on: December 23, 2008, 04:30:06 PM »

Stephane Verger give two references for these DNA tests, I suppose in the same book:

D. Krauße, Vetternwirtschaft?, in Biel, Krauße 2005, pp.63-66

and

S. Hummel, D. Schmidt, B. Herrmann, Molekulargenetische Analysen zur Verwandtschaftfeststellung an Skelettproben aus Gräbern frühkeltischer Fürstensitze, in Biel, Krauße 2005, pp. 67-70
That's the reference:
J. Biel, D. Krauße, Frühkeltische
Fürstensitze. Älteste Städte und Herrschaftszentren
nördlich der Alpen?, Esslingen 2005.
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2008, 04:43:49 PM »

That's the reference:
J. Biel, D. Krauße, Frühkeltische
Fürstensitze. Älteste Städte und Herrschaftszentren
nördlich der Alpen?, Esslingen 2005.
That' the reference: http://urts173.uni-trier.de:9080/minev/SFB/themengliederung/iii-regionale-siedlungsforschung-auch-burgwalle-und-burgen-sowie-landschaftsforschung-ohne-stadtforschung/iii-2-urgeschichte-und-romerzeit/bookreference.2007-12-19.1133114020
Logged

YDNA: R-DF13+ L69+ DYS464X: cccc.3
mtDNA: U6a7a1
mtDNA of my father: U5a2c
YDNA of my maternal uncle: I1*
Ysearch and Mitosearch: UE9BU
Ysearch of my maternal uncle: CEC59

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #47 on: December 27, 2008, 11:43:05 AM »

Here are the way things stand thus far for Germany and France. The pool includes only test subjects who are R-P312 (x M153, M222, SRY2627, U152).

Germans -

Derived (L21+): 6

Ancestral (L21-): 6

French -

Derived (L21+): 5

Ancestral (L21-): 4

I counted ethnic Germans as Germans, regardless of how the Polish-German border has shifted, etc. If I included the one Swiss-German member of the R-P312 and Subclades Project in the count, that would bring the German L21+ total to 7. But I didn't want to be accused of trying to pad the L21+ column, so I left him out.

I did not count the one French L21+ result about which there was some question of nationality, Purviance. That's the one I originally placed a marker for on my R-L21* Map in Saintonge, France. I have since removed that marker from the map. Its source has advised me that she is only sure about the paper trail back to colonial Virginia.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2008, 12:10:27 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #48 on: December 27, 2008, 12:57:42 PM »

I was just counting up the L21 result totals for England. Here they are thus far.

Derived (L21+)
14

Ancestral (L21-)
16

That is interesting. The sample sizes for Germany and France are small, but percentage-wise there is more L21+ in France and Germany than in England.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2008, 01:27:10 PM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #49 on: December 27, 2008, 01:26:14 PM »

Scotland

Derived (L21+):

11

Ancestral (L21-):

6

Ireland

Derived (L21+):

33

Ancestral (L21-):

4
« Last Edit: December 27, 2008, 01:40:45 PM by rms2 » Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10 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 0.113 seconds with 19 queries.