World Families Forums - Bretagne (Brittany) and R-L21

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 23, 2014, 03:31:49 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)
| | |-+  Bretagne (Brittany) and R-L21
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Bretagne (Brittany) and R-L21  (Read 6992 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« on: April 10, 2010, 08:17:13 AM »

Thus far there are five members of the R-L21 Plus Project with y-dna origins in Bretagne (Brittany) in northwestern France. As many of you know, we have sponsored some French L21 testing. What you may not know is that we have purposely avoided sponsoring men of Breton ancestry, not because we don't like or don't want them, but because of the argument posed almost immediately after the first commercial test results for L21 became known, i.e., that L21 was entirely or almost entirely British and originated in the British Isles (a bogus and ill-founded argument, in my opinion).

It's sad, because I would really like to find out just how extensive L21 is in Bretagne. I suspect it's by far the most frequent R1b1b2 clade there, but we're not likely to find out soon because of the use to which some would put Breton L21+ results.

So, how many L21+ results do we need in France outside of Bretagne before it is safe to start venturing into Bretagne?

Personally, although I do believe the exodus of Britons to Armorica in the 5th and 6th centuries was probably significant, I don't think it did anything even remotely like replacing the native male population with newcomers from Britain. Instead, I think the y-dna profile of Northern France was already very much like that in Celtic Britain, that the two regions were part of a single ethnic zone, speaking mutually-intelligible languages and practicing a common religion and culture. That is what made Armorica a natural place for the Britons to go in the first place.

Comments?

I didn't want to make this first post a recap of all of Breton history. We can do that in subsequent posts.
Logged

jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2010, 10:00:53 AM »

Nobody really knows was the size of emigration of breton in Brittany in the 5th century.

If we rely on the implantation of the Breton language over the centuries, The west of Britanny seems to have received the most expatriates.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/8199/32094070xd0.png

Originally, the dioceses of Rennes and part of Nantes  were not in Britanny. They were annexed by Nominoë at the end of the ninth century.
 
Finally, another map that shows the frequency of the place called "the Bretonnière" which means: a place inhabited by the Bretons.
It is quite normal to be not found in the west of Brittany. There is no place names called Ireland in Ireland, isnt'it?

http://www.cijoint.fr/cj200904/cij31ilfzr.png
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 10:09:48 AM by jerome72 » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2010, 10:07:58 AM »

.... What you may not know is that we have purposely avoided sponsoring men of Breton ancestry, not because we don't like or don't want them, but because of the argument posed almost immediately after the first commercial test results for L21 became known, i.e., that L21 was entirely or almost entirely British and originated in the British Isles (a bogus and ill-founded argument, in my opinion).
.....
So, how many L21+ results do we need in France outside of Bretagne before it is safe to start venturing into Bretagne?
....
As far as investigating L21+ in Bretagne, I think that is fine.  I wouldn't worry about people who would use the data to try to push a "Britain L21 origin" theory.  The data is what it is.  The figures don't lie, but liars will always figure.  There is no stopping that.  The truth eventually will triumph.

As far as does it make sense to invest money into Bretagne, that is a different question.   I think the vote that counts is a donor money vote.

From a deep ancestral/tribal perspective, my own area of curiousity is more south and east, or at least south.  Did L21 arise along the Upper Rhine, the Danube or further west closer to the Pyrenees?

I already am pretty sure there is a ton of L21 in Bretagne.  My greater interest there would not be so deep/ancient.  The interesting reason to look at Bretagne for me would be if I could look at 67 length haplotypes to assess the possibility of clusters that cross the Isles/Bretagne.
Logged

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

Posts: 5023


« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2010, 10:19:09 AM »

Nobody really knows was the size of emigration of breton in Brittany in the 5th century.

If we rely on the implantation of the Breton language over the centuries, The west of Britanny seems to have received the most expatriates.


Originally, the dioceses of Rennes and part of Nantes  were not in Britanny. They were annexed by Nominoë at the end of the ninth century.
 
Finally, another map that shows the frequency of the place called "the Bretonnière" which means: a place inhabited by the Bretons.
It is quite normal to be not found in the west of Brittany. There is no place names called Ireland in Ireland, isnt'it?


Can you post links to those maps? I can't open or enlarge them enough to really view them.

I know there was a British king or military leader in the 5th century named Riothamus (although that might have been a title rather than a name) who led an expeditionary force to NW Gaul to fight Saxon pirates on the Loire. At that time, the Britons were experiencing considerable success pacifying the Germans who had invaded Britain and felt confident enough to send military aid to Gaul to do the same thing. Riothamus fell afoul of Roman intrigue, however, and was defeated by the Visigoths at the instigation of the Roman Prefect of Gaul (all this can be found in Jordanes' History of the Goths and in the letters of Sidonius Apollinaris, a Gallo-Roman nobleman).

Some, like Geoffrey Ashe, think Riothamus was the historical King Arthur.

I have read that Riothamus' force numbered 12,000 men, but that number is likely to have been inflated.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2010, 10:39:22 AM »


As far as investigating L21+ in Bretagne, I think that is fine.  I wouldn't worry about people who would use the data to try to push a "Britain L21 origin" theory.  The data is what it is.  The figures don't lie, but liars will always figure.  There is no stopping that.  The truth eventually will triumph.

As far as does it make sense to invest money into Bretagne, that is a different question.   I think the vote that counts is a donor money vote.

From a deep ancestral/tribal perspective, my own area of curiousity is more south and east, or at least south.  Did L21 arise along the Upper Rhine, the Danube or further west closer to the Pyrenees?

I already am pretty sure there is a ton of L21 in Bretagne.  My greater interest there would not be so deep/ancient.  The interesting reason to look at Bretagne for me would be if I could look at 67 length haplotypes to assess the possibility of clusters that cross the Isles/Bretagne.


We haven't gone to sponsoring Breton L21 tests yet. I have contacted a number of Bretons, however, and asked them to consider ordering the Deep Clade-R.

The problem right now with recruiting men of French descent is that most French Canadians and Louisianans seem to have origins in NW France anyway. It's hard to find men with ancestry in other parts of France to test.

That's why it would really be nice if the authors of that recent French y-dna study out of the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain would test their samples for L21 and P312. Since, in six out of the seven regions they tested, what they called "R1b1b2*" was the most frequent group, it would be extremely interesting to know just how much of that is L21+ and how it is distributed.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 10:40:22 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2010, 11:00:23 AM »

Nobody really knows was the size of emigration of breton in Brittany in the 5th century.

If we rely on the implantation of the Breton language over the centuries, The west of Britanny seems to have received the most expatriates.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/8199/32094070xd0.png

Originally, the dioceses of Rennes and part of Nantes  were not in Britanny. They were annexed by Nominoë at the end of the ninth century.
 
Finally, another map that shows the frequency of the place called "the Bretonnière" which means: a place inhabited by the Bretons.
It is quite normal to be not found in the west of Brittany. There is no place names called Ireland in Ireland, isnt'it?

http://www.cijoint.fr/cj200904/cij31ilfzr.png

Thanks for those links.

I have some questions regarding the second map. What is the significance of the various shades? Are you saying there are towns or villages called Bretonnière in all of those shaded areas? That seems a little fantastic to me. What or who is the source of that second map? I went to the root of that address and, although my French is weak, found it to be an internet depot for images. Usually, when one Googles a city or town or village name with a very common element, lots of results pop up all over the place.

I was able to find only one town with Bretonnière as an element of its name:  La Bretonnière-la-Claye (population: 620), on the west coast of France between Nantes and La Rochelle.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 11:13:44 AM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2010, 11:10:37 AM »

Nobody really knows was the size of emigration of breton in Brittany in the 5th century.

If we rely on the implantation of the Breton language over the centuries, The west of Britanny seems to have received the most expatriates.


Originally, the dioceses of Rennes and part of Nantes  were not in Britanny. They were annexed by Nominoë at the end of the ninth century.
 
Finally, another map that shows the frequency of the place called "the Bretonnière" which means: a place inhabited by the Bretons.
It is quite normal to be not found in the west of Brittany. There is no place names called Ireland in Ireland, isnt'it?


Can you post links to those maps? I can't open or enlarge them enough to really view them.

I know there was a British king or military leader in the 5th century named Riothamus (although that might have been a title rather than a name) who led an expeditionary force to NW Gaul to fight Saxon pirates on the Loire. At that time, the Britons were experiencing considerable success pacifying the Germans who had invaded Britain and felt confident enough to send military aid to Gaul to do the same thing. Riothamus fell afoul of Roman intrigue, however, and was defeated by the Visigoths at the instigation of the Roman Prefect of Gaul (all this can be found in Jordanes' History of the Goths and in the letters of Sidonius Apollinaris, a Gallo-Roman nobleman).

Some, like Geoffrey Ashe, think Riothamus was the historical King Arthur.

I have read that Riothamus' force numbered 12,000 men, but that number is likely to have been inflated.

I read about this Riothamus character. He was actually betrayed by another Roman general, I think, who told the Goths to attack the Breton camp preemptively.

He sounds pretty tough though, up against an "innumerable" Gothic army.
Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2010, 11:18:50 AM »



I read about this Riothamus character. He was actually betrayed by another Roman general, I think, who told the Goths to attack the Breton camp preemptively.

He sounds pretty tough though, up against an "innumerable" Gothic army.

Yes, and since his force was pretty well wiped out, and its few survivors likely returned to Britain, is doesn't seem probable that too many modern Frenchmen are descended from Riothamus' British troopers.

Riothamus' expedition was ultimately responsible for weakening the Britons at home in Britain and enabling the Anglo-Saxons to recoup their losses. Had he not gone to Gaul, the history of Britain might have been quite different, and we all might be speaking Brythonic today.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2010, 11:26:56 AM »

. . .
I was able to find only one town with Bretonnière as an element of its name:  La Bretonnière-la-Claye (population: 620), on the west coast of France between Nantes and La Rochelle.

Interesting that the mayor of La Bretonnière-la-Claye is Hubert Martineau. I have a student with the surname Martineau.
Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2010, 11:35:38 AM »



I read about this Riothamus character. He was actually betrayed by another Roman general, I think, who told the Goths to attack the Breton camp preemptively.

He sounds pretty tough though, up against an "innumerable" Gothic army.

Yes, and since his force was pretty well wiped out, and its few survivors likely returned to Britain, is doesn't seem probable that too many modern Frenchmen are descended from Riothamus' British troopers.

Riothamus' expedition was ultimately responsible for weakening the Britons at home in Britain and enabling the Anglo-Saxons to recoup their losses. Had he not gone to Gaul, the history of Britain might have been quite different, and we all might be speaking Brythonic today.

So the British sent a large contingent to Gaul during the Saxon invasions? I know that after the Battle of Mount Badon, the British halted the Saxon advance for awhile.

I mean, why would these folks send troops overseas, unless the conditions at home were peaceful enough to allow that?

Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2010, 11:41:57 AM »

So the British sent a large contingent to Gaul during the Saxon invasions? I know that after the Battle of Mount Badon, the British halted the Saxon advance for awhile.

I mean, why would these folks send troops overseas, unless the conditions at home were peaceful enough to allow that?


That's just it. The Britons had dealt the Saxons some crippling blows, and, instead of running them completely out of the country and attending to the coastal defenses as he should have done, Riothamus decided to answer a plea for help from Gaul.

The rest is, as they say, history.

The real question is, was Riothamus King Arthur?

He is supposed to have fled to the friendly Burgundians with some of his followers, to a place with a name much like Avalon . . .
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 11:43:07 AM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2010, 11:51:24 AM »

The real question is, was Riothamus King Arthur?
He is supposed to have fled to the friendly Burgundians with some of his followers, to a place with a name much like Avalon . . .
Yes, yes.  I have one folklore story in our clan that says we descend from the "Lords of Glamorgan", which actually makes some sense.  The progenitor is cited as "Walynus" and unfortunately the story goes off the deep end at this point and has his ancestors from Camelot.  I guess everyone from Britain wants to be related to King Arthur or Sir Lancelot.

We want to think we look like King Arthur... or Clive Owen.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/mediaindex

If you look through the photo gallery you'll see the Saxons are the ugly, low hygiene guys.  Hey, don't blame me.  I don't how or why these writers decide to color their stories.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 11:55:52 AM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 930


« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2010, 11:57:39 AM »

I think there may be a connection between Riothamus and a historical Arthur. The other candidate I think would be a British king from Strathclyde/Rheged who killed an Anglian king and his two sons. I don't know his name though.

And who DOESN'T want to be Lancelot? He had his stake in Gwen... No pun intended.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 11:59:03 AM by NealtheRed » Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2010, 12:01:27 PM »

I think there may be a connection between Riothamus and a historical Arthur, The other candidate I think would be a British King from Strathclyde/Rheged who killed an Anglian king and his two sons. I don't know his name though.

And who DOESN'T what to be Lancelot? He had his stake in Gwen... No pun intended.

I think there is a fair case that Riothamus may have been the basis for the legendary King Arthur.

Geoffrey Ashe wrote a pretty good book on the subject, which I still have, though it's been awhile since I read it.

The Discovery of King Arthur
Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2010, 01:43:22 PM »

I think there is a fair case that Riothamus may have been the basis for the legendary King Arthur.

Geoffrey Ashe wrote a pretty good book on the subject, which I still have, though it's been awhile since I read it.

The Discovery of King Arthur
So instead of being the savior of the Romano-Brits, King Arther was the dunderhead who left the homeland weakened as he went off to help allies or expand?

Please note, a slap at King Arthur, may be self depreciating, depending on what folklore I believe.
Logged

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

Posts: 5023


« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2010, 03:44:15 PM »

I think there is a fair case that Riothamus may have been the basis for the legendary King Arthur.

Geoffrey Ashe wrote a pretty good book on the subject, which I still have, though it's been awhile since I read it.

The Discovery of King Arthur
So instead of being the savior of the Romano-Brits, King Arther was the dunderhead who left the homeland weakened as he went off to help allies or expand?

Please note, a slap at King Arthur, may be self depreciating, depending on what folklore I believe.

I think there is a good chance he was hoping to harry the Saxon pirates camped along the Loire. Perhaps they were a source of trouble for Britain. Riothamus and his men fell victim to the intrigues of the Roman leadership in Gaul, who set them up to be ambushed by a large host of Visigoths.

So, he got in over his head with enough men to weaken the homefront but not enough to take on the too-numerous Visigoths.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2010, 04:39:29 PM »

Back to the subject of Bretagne itself and the British exodus, here are some relevant passages from Koch's An Atlas for Celtic Studies.

Quote
Before embarking on this well-trodden path to the subject of the Dark Age origins of Brittany, we might pause briefly to consider whether the great transformation - or some important aspects of it, at least - might be more apparent than real.
    For example, one of the key issues in the enigma of Armorica becoming Brittany is what became of Gaulish there. Did it contribute significantly to the formation of the Breton language (as argued by Falc'hun 1977)? Or was it altogether dead before settlers from Britain arrived? Were the west and north of the peninsula largely depopulated before the Britons arrived? We have no certain answers to any of these questions. To judge from the distribution of Armorican coins and what Caesar wrote about the influence of the Veneti (the leading tribe of Armorica) in Britain, one thing that Britain and Armorican Gaulish had been used for in the Iron Age was cross-Channel communication. Would that necessarily have changed when Gaul and Britain became Roman provinces? The stone from Plumergad in Morbihan bears a late Gaulish inscription on one side and an Old Breton name on another, but apart from this precious example, there is little evidence to reveal whether the Gaulish of Roman Armorica continued to function as a language shared with Britain.(pp. 37-38)

Here is what Koch says of Riothamus:

Quote
According to the Gothic History of Jordanes (written c. 551), the Emperor Anthemius in 468 requested the aid of the 'King of the Britons' with the Brittonic name or title Riotimus (= British Rigotamos 'supreme king') who crossed the ocean with 12,000 men and unsuccessfully fought the Visigoths in civitas Biturigum in central Gaul. This is presumably where he still was when Sidonius Apollinaris wrote a year or two later petitioning deferentially to 'King Riothamus' in the midst of his company of boisterous armed men. While it is not unlikely that Riothamus or some of his men subsequently settled in Brittany, that is merely an inference. Writing in the mid-6th century the Byzantine historian Procopius lists the Brittones as one of three peoples inhabiting the island of Brittia (which is interestingly the first attestation of the Celtic name which gives Breton Breizh 'Brittany'), who were so numerous that many had to emigrate. (p. 38)
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 04:51:25 PM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2010, 05:40:20 PM »

...
Please note, a slap at King Arthur, may be self depreciating, depending on what folklore I believe.

I think there is a good chance he was hoping to harry the Saxon pirates camped along the Loire. Perhaps they were a source of trouble for Britain. Riothamus and his men fell victim to the intrigues of the Roman leadership in Gaul, who set them up to be ambushed by a large host of Visigoths.

So, he got in over his head with enough men to weaken the homefront but not enough to take on the too-numerous Visigoths.
The Romans do seem to be forerunners to some of our modern institutions.  I won't name them but you know how it goes... "play ball with us and we'll ____ the ____  __  ___  ____."
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 05:41:11 PM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 676


« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2010, 06:56:43 PM »

Brittany was the same as Normandy?


Normandy was a province in the North-West of France under the Ancien Régime. Initially populated by Celtic and Belgian tribes in the East, and Ligures and Iberians in the West....  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Normandy

aaaaaaaaaa

The Ligures (singular Ligus or Ligur; English: Ligurians, Greek: Λίγυες) were an ancient people who gave their name to Liguria, which once stretched from Northern Italy into southern Gaul. According to Plutarch they called themselves Ambrones which means ¨people of the water¨. The Ligures inhabited what now corresponds to Liguria, northern Tuscany, and parts of Piedmont, Emilia-Romagna, Lombardy, Switzerland, Austria, Bavaria, and southern France.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligures

(what do you make of these people?)
« Last Edit: April 10, 2010, 06:58:32 PM by OConnor » Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b4


R-DF13**(L21>DF13)
M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P108+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P305+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, M173+, M269+, M343+, P312+, L21+, DF13+, M207+, P25+, L11+, L138+, L141+, L15+, L150+, L16+, L23+, L51+, L52+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, P69+, P9.1+, P97+, PK1+, SRY10831.1+, L21+, L226-, M37-, M222-, L96-, L193-, L144-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, DF49-, L371-, DF41-, L513-, L555-, L1335-, L1406-, Z251-, L526-, L130-, L144-, L159.2-, L192.1-, L193-, L195-, L96-, DF21-, Z255-, DF23-, DF1-, Z253-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, P66-

12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18


jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2010, 01:04:33 AM »

Nobody really knows was the size of emigration of breton in Brittany in the 5th century.

If we rely on the implantation of the Breton language over the centuries, The west of Britanny seems to have received the most expatriates.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/8199/32094070xd0.png

Originally, the dioceses of Rennes and part of Nantes  were not in Britanny. They were annexed by Nominoë at the end of the ninth century.
 
Finally, another map that shows the frequency of the place called "the Bretonnière" which means: a place inhabited by the Bretons.
It is quite normal to be not found in the west of Brittany. There is no place names called Ireland in Ireland, isnt'it?

http://www.cijoint.fr/cj200904/cij31ilfzr.png

Thanks for those links.

I have some questions regarding the second map. What is the significance of the various shades? Are you saying there are towns or villages called Bretonnière in all of those shaded areas? That seems a little fantastic to me. What or who is the source of that second map? I went to the root of that address and, although my French is weak, found it to be an internet depot for images. Usually, when one Googles a city or town or village name with a very common element, lots of results pop up all over the place.

I was able to find only one town with Bretonnière as an element of its name:  La Bretonnière-la-Claye (population: 620), on the west coast of France between Nantes and La Rochelle.


It's a map that I made myself from this site:
http://www.geoportail.fr/5069711/visu2D/afficher-en-2d.htm

The key of this map:
maroon: more than 30 places
red: 20 to 30
light red: 10 to 20
very light red: less than 10

Most "Bretonniere" are names of farms, now "lieux-dits.
As I said earlier, this may mean: a place inhabited by Bretons.
Another possibility (perhaps the most common):
Most of the names of farms dating from before the twelfth century. Settlers cleared the land and gave their name to the farm.
So most of the names of farms are caused by surname (or name).
However, Lebreton is a very common surname in the north-west: http://www.geopatronyme.com/cgi-bin/carte/nomcarte.cgi?nom=lebreton&image.x=5&image.y=9
Lebreton: the Breton, from Britanny or perhaps more precisely: who spoke Breton.
La Bretonnière: estate occupied by someone calling  "lebreton"


From a standpoint L21, I do not think Britanny is very different from the rest of North-west of France.
It is true that we think armorique before the arrival of Brittons were very unpopulated.
The armorique undergoing a serious economic crisis:
The trade route to Britain no longer passed through Armorica. The coast were not protected by the Roman army and suffered all kinds of attacks.

The east of Brittany, was more protected and also most probably inhabited.

But as it is very likely that the two peoples on both sides of the Channel are of the same origin, it will be difficult to make a difference with newcomers
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2010, 07:16:21 AM »

It's a map that I made myself from this site:
http://www.geoportail.fr/5069711/visu2D/afficher-en-2d.htm

The key of this map:
maroon: more than 30 places
red: 20 to 30
light red: 10 to 20
very light red: less than 10

Most "Bretonniere" are names of farms, now "lieux-dits.
As I said earlier, this may mean: a place inhabited by Bretons.
Another possibility (perhaps the most common):
Most of the names of farms dating from before the twelfth century. Settlers cleared the land and gave their name to the farm.
So most of the names of farms are caused by surname (or name).
However, Lebreton is a very common surname in the north-west: http://www.geopatronyme.com/cgi-bin/carte/nomcarte.cgi?nom=lebreton&image.x=5&image.y=9
Lebreton: the Breton, from Britanny or perhaps more precisely: who spoke Breton.
La Bretonnière: estate occupied by someone calling  "lebreton"


From a standpoint L21, I do not think Britanny is very different from the rest of North-west of France.
It is true that we think armorique before the arrival of Brittons were very unpopulated.
The armorique undergoing a serious economic crisis:
The trade route to Britain no longer passed through Armorica. The coast were not protected by the Roman army and suffered all kinds of attacks.

The east of Brittany, was more protected and also most probably inhabited.

But as it is very likely that the two peoples on both sides of the Channel are of the same origin, it will be difficult to make a difference with newcomers

So, are you saying all the L21 in France was brought there by British immigrants beginning in the 5th century A.D.?

I understand about the surname LeBreton (there are even a couple of people listed in the French Heritage DNA Project under the surname Breton and one, an E1b1b1b2, with the surname Britton), but where are all the place names with Breton or La Bretonnière as an element? I could only find one, La Bretonnière-la-Claye, and it is, as I said, halfway between Nantes and La Rochelle, hardly a surprising place in which to find a few Bretons.

You seem to be saying that places with Breton or La Bretonnière as an element of their name are all over France, as if British immigrants washed over all of Gaul in a huge wave of settlement.

Nevermind NW France, you have La Bretonnières extending down into the southeast!

I think there is some historical question as to the extent of British settlement in Bretagne itself. Scholars to this day argue about just how much impact they had there. But you seem to be arguing that all of France was simply awash in British settlers.

I am not trying to be rude or offensive, but this is very hard to believe, that is, if you are saying what you seem to be saying.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 07:30:49 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2010, 07:42:10 AM »

. . .
But as it is very likely that the two peoples on both sides of the Channel are of the same origin, it will be difficult to make a difference with newcomers

That I definitely agree with. I think the people on both sides of the Channel had basically the same origin and, as I said earlier, were part of a single ethnic zone.

L21 in France is a special interest of mine (obviously), and, believe me, I check everyone's matches. I cannot think of a single French member of the R-L21 Plus Project who has such close British matches that it is apparent that his ancestor came to France from Britain even as long ago as the 5th century. Even our five Bretons, whom one might expect to have numerous Welshmen or Cornishmen popping up in Ysearch as matches, just don't have them.

We have French R-L21 who are close matches to other French R-L21, but we just don't see close matches (beyond 12 markers, that is) between our French members and British.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 07:42:26 AM by rms2 » Logged

jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #22 on: April 11, 2010, 08:49:38 AM »

It's a map that I made myself from this site:
http://www.geoportail.fr/5069711/visu2D/afficher-en-2d.htm

The key of this map:
maroon: more than 30 places
red: 20 to 30
light red: 10 to 20
very light red: less than 10

Most "Bretonniere" are names of farms, now "lieux-dits.
As I said earlier, this may mean: a place inhabited by Bretons.
Another possibility (perhaps the most common):
Most of the names of farms dating from before the twelfth century. Settlers cleared the land and gave their name to the farm.
So most of the names of farms are caused by surname (or name).
However, Lebreton is a very common surname in the north-west: http://www.geopatronyme.com/cgi-bin/carte/nomcarte.cgi?nom=lebreton&image.x=5&image.y=9
Lebreton: the Breton, from Britanny or perhaps more precisely: who spoke Breton.
La Bretonnière: estate occupied by someone calling  "lebreton"


From a standpoint L21, I do not think Britanny is very different from the rest of North-west of France.
It is true that we think armorique before the arrival of Brittons were very unpopulated.
The armorique undergoing a serious economic crisis:
The trade route to Britain no longer passed through Armorica. The coast were not protected by the Roman army and suffered all kinds of attacks.

The east of Brittany, was more protected and also most probably inhabited.

But as it is very likely that the two peoples on both sides of the Channel are of the same origin, it will be difficult to make a difference with newcomers

So, are you saying all the L21 in France was brought there by British immigrants beginning in the 5th century A.D.?

I understand about the surname LeBreton (there are even a couple of people listed in the French Heritage DNA Project under the surname Breton and one, an E1b1b1b2, with the surname Britton), but where are all the place names with Breton or La Bretonnière as an element? I could only find one, La Bretonnière-la-Claye, and it is, as I said, halfway between Nantes and La Rochelle, hardly a surprising place in which to find a few Bretons.

You seem to be saying that places with Breton or La Bretonnière as an element of their name are all over France, as if British immigrants washed over all of Gaul in a huge wave of settlement.

Nevermind NW France, you have La Bretonnières extending down into the southeast!

I think there is some historical question as to the extent of British settlement in Bretagne itself. Scholars to this day argue about just how much impact they had there. But you seem to be arguing that all of France was simply awash in British settlers.

I am not trying to be rude or offensive, but this is very hard to believe, that is, if you are saying what you seem to be saying.

There is a problem of language ...
Because I never said that:
- all the L21 in France was brought there by British immigrants beginning in the 5th century A.D.?
- as if British immigrants washed over all of Gaul in a huge wave of settlement.

To find all "bretonnière" in France:
Go to this website
http://www.geoportail.fr/5069711/visu2D/afficher-en-2d.htm

Click on "mode avancé" (under "adresse complète")
write "Bretonnière", you have 2 communes and 48 lieux
Write "Bretonnières", you have 0 commune ans 46 lieux
You can find the number by region or by departments, by selecting first "Métropole"

Bretons from Britain settled mainly in Britanny, but not only (in Normandy too).
But these are probably not the ones who are responsible for "Bretonnières" in France.
There may be more than five centuries between the two.
These places are probably caused by the Bretons(*) of Brittany, but not of Britain.
We know that many Bretons (of Brittany) immigrated from Britanny to the rest of France during the Normand invasion. Brittany is almost fallen into the hands of Norman

Bretons(*) In this sense, means living in Brittany, whatever the origin of their ancestors
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 08:51:22 AM by jerome72 » Logged
secherbernard
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #23 on: April 11, 2010, 02:23:10 PM »

We know that many Bretons (of Brittany) immigrated from Britanny to the rest of France during the Normand invasion. Brittany is almost fallen into the hands of Norman
I am not sure this is true. The Viking occupied the valley of the Loire and in particular the city of Nantes, but the rest of Brittany has remained free. Brittany loses his latest conquests in Anjou, Maine County and Normandy, but that's all. The rest of Brittany has remained outside of battles.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 02:23:52 PM by secherbernard » 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 #24 on: April 11, 2010, 03:03:13 PM »

There is a problem of language ...
Because I never said that:
- all the L21 in France was brought there by British immigrants beginning in the 5th century A.D.?
- as if British immigrants washed over all of Gaul in a huge wave of settlement.
. . .


Okay, now I get it. Sorry for my misunderstanding. There was nothing wrong with what you wrote, I just misinterpreted it.

Thanks for clearing that up.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 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 0.142 seconds with 19 queries.