World Families Forums - R1b1b2 in Sweden

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 27, 2014, 04:12:45 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)
| | |-+  R1b1b2 in Sweden
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R1b1b2 in Sweden  (Read 12153 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2010, 09:51:16 PM »



I think this is the problem though. We already assume that U106 is Germanic in those areas. U106 could have been in the Netherlands and Denmark as Beaker Folk, with P312 bringing in Proto-Germanic. It depends on how long these clades were in those areas.

For some reason, P312 is beating out U106 in Scandinavia. I think P312 leans more towards Proto-Norse populations, while U106 has a more Frisian distribution. Northern Norway shows P312/L21, and this is illustrative of Old Norse settlement on the coasts.

Just a thought.

No, we don't assume that U106 is Germanic in those areas. U106 is HUGE in the old Germanic areas.

Take a gander around at the various projects, including the R-U106 Project, which, sadly, has some oddball geographic categories that tend to confuse rather than enlighten.

I never assumed anything about any y haplogroups or their subclades. I have watched the S21/U106 story unfold since the days when it was the big story, one of only a few known subclades of R1b1b2. Believe me, I have no reason to want U106 to be Germanic or P312 to be Celtic.

Obviously, a great deal of P312 is neither Celtic nor Germanic. A couple of its clades are found predominantly distributed in old, non-Indo-European, Iberian or Basque regions. In fact, R-P312* abounds in such regions, appearing there in greater numbers than it does in Germanic lands.

Some U106 is likewise found among people who are neither Celtic nor Germanic.

But generalizations are based upon general trends, the overall distribution of the haplgroups, and not upon the exceptions.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2010, 09:54:43 PM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2010, 10:40:09 PM »

But that's the thing, Rich.

U106 could be huge, massive, or ubiquitous in Germanic areas - wait, it is only huge in certain Germanic areas - but it could have been there before proto-Germanic arrived on the scene.

I remember that someone posted an interesting thought on this forum (Vince V.?) it was a bit odd that U106 was confined to "hotspots" like the Netherlands and Austria, whereas P312 was more successful through out Europe - even in Scandinavia.
Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2010, 02:55:53 PM »

... I concede that some U106 subclades appear to have been predominantly Germanic, and some P312 subclades appear to have been predominantly Celtic, but I think that is as much as the current evidence will support, and I think it is a mistake to try to take it beyond that.
....
I'm in total agreement.  P312's and U106's MRCA each were not that far from each other time-wise so probably not geographically as well.  I'd be surprised if a little bit of P312* folks and L21* folks (etc.) didn't go with the U106 base along time ago, and vice versa.

However, as noted, P312 et al may be the prevailing Hg in old Celtic areas whereas U106 may be in old Germanic areas although P312 is not at all out of the picture.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2010, 03:05:28 PM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 5023


« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2010, 06:37:06 PM »

But that's the thing, Rich.

U106 could be huge, massive, or ubiquitous in Germanic areas - wait, it is only huge in certain Germanic areas - but it could have been there before proto-Germanic arrived on the scene.

I remember that someone posted an interesting thought on this forum (Vince V.?) it was a bit odd that U106 was confined to "hotspots" like the Netherlands and Austria, whereas P312 was more successful through out Europe - even in Scandinavia.


I don't want to keep going on and on and 'round and 'round about this, because, frankly, U106 is not really my thing, but U106 is pretty big in all the old Germanic areas. Norway may be the lone exception, but I doubt even that. I think U106 is big there, too, and time will tell.

It's not confined to hotspots like the Netherlands and Austria. I don't know where you heard that. Germany is lousy with it, as are Switzerland, Denmark and Sweden.

Could it have been there before Proto-Germanic arrived on the scene? Sure, if Proto-Germanic arrived with R1a or I1. But that seems counter-intuitive to me. According to Mallory, linguists attribute early Germanic to the Harpstedt and Jastorf cultures, and they were located precisely where U106 is most common today.

I'm not saying Germanics were all U106 without exception. But I do think it is fair to characterize U106 as fitting the Germanic pattern pretty well.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2010, 06:38:09 PM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2010, 07:00:00 PM »

GoldenHind posted the numbers that showed P312 outnumbering U106 in Scandinavia.

U106 is not my forte either, but the numbers above speak volumes. At any rate, it is a plausible argument that some P312* in Great Britain could be Germanic in origin.
Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2010, 08:12:42 PM »

GoldenHind posted the numbers that showed P312 outnumbering U106 in Scandinavia.

U106 is not my forte either, but the numbers above speak volumes. At any rate, it is a plausible argument that some P312* in Great Britain could be Germanic in origin.

I would be more than a little surprised if there were no Germanic P312* or downstream SNPs in the Isles.
Logged

Y-DNA R-DF49*
MtDNA J1c2e
Kit No. 117897
Ysearch 3BMC9

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2010, 09:36:40 PM »

GoldenHind posted the numbers that showed P312 outnumbering U106 in Scandinavia.

U106 is not my forte either, but the numbers above speak volumes. At any rate, it is a plausible argument that some P312* in Great Britain could be Germanic in origin.

The difference between the amount of P312+ and U106+ in Scandinavia is not that significant. The point you miss is the overall distribution of the P312+ clades versus that of the U106+ clades. It seems to me there is a greater continuity in the U106 zone between Scandinavia and the neighboring continental Germanic lands than there is with Scandinavian P312 and the neighboring continental Germanic lands.

The zones of highest U152 frequency are not really contiguous with the bit of U152 found in Scandinavia, for example. The same could be said of L21 and P312*. U106, on the other hand, is very frequent in Northern Germany and the Netherlands. It doesn't seem to have the geographic gap that the P312 clades seem to have between the continent and Scandinavia.

I don't doubt that some of the R-P312* in Britain is Germanic in origin. Some of the R-L21 there might be, as well.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2010, 09:59:38 PM by rms2 » Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2010, 03:32:59 PM »


No, we don't assume that U106 is Germanic in those areas. U106 is HUGE in the old Germanic areas.

Take a gander around at the various projects, including the R-U106 Project, which, sadly, has some oddball geographic categories that tend to confuse rather than enlighten.


But generalizations are based upon general trends, the overall distribution of the haplgroups, and not upon the exceptions.

This generalization simply doesn't hold up on anaysis. What does appear valid is that some U106 subclades are "huge" in some of the old Germanic areas. The identity of U106 as Germanic is based on looking at it as monolithic. For some reason nearly everyone (and I am guilty of this myself) tends to analyze R1b in Europe by comparing U106, P312*, L21 , U152, SRY2627, M222, etc. You do precisely this when you look at U106 in northern Germany and then compare it to U152, L21 and P312*. If one is going to lump all of U106 together, an accurate comparison requires doing the same with all of P312. As I said, we all have a tendency to do this. One reason is that there seems to have been little analysis of U106 by subclades. I think this is at least partly due to the fact that the U106 project does not divide or map their members by subclade. They also exclude from their project U106 subclades U198/S29 (they have a separate project) and L1/S26 (who don't appear to even have a project), and apparently also P107 (who also don't seem to have a project). P107 is regarded, rightly or wrongly, as a "pre-Anglo-Saxon marker" in England, and some seem to apply the same label to L1, but none dare call them British, because that would make them Celtic and upset the equation.

The Myres study of a few years back, which attempted to analyze what percentage of R1b in various countries was composed of U106, found it to be "huge" in only two countries: Netherlands and Austria. The U106 percentage of R1b in Denmark was 51.3%. If that is accurate, it suggests the P312 percentage of R1b in Denmark to be 48.7%, unless of course a surprising amount of ht 15 turns up there. I wouldn't call that a huge disparity. It estimated the U106 percentage of R1b in Switzerland as as only 23%, and Germany as 47.56%, indicating P312 outnumbers U106 in both those countries. Sweden wasn't included in the study, but as I pointed out previously, the FTDNA projects indicate an equal division there between U106 and P312, despite the fact testing for U106 has about a five year advantage. I don't think there is any evidence to indicate that U106 vastly outnumbers P312 in Scandinavia as a whole. It looks to me like a 50/50 split is more likely.

What I call the "equation" may be only a generalization, but a number of people consider it axiomatic. In any case, I think it has the tendency to be misleading and is generally unhelpful to analyzing R1b in Europe.


« Last Edit: July 17, 2010, 03:40:14 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2010, 06:39:12 PM »

No, I am considering them both as monoliths: P312 as a whole versus U106 as a whole.

There is plenty of P312 in Germanic lands and plenty of U106 in Germanic lands. But the Germanic lands seem to be the center of gravity for U106, while P312's center of gravity is farther west. Another thing to consider, which I pointed out, is that P312 is just more populous overall than U106.

So, yeah, some P312 might be considered Germanic (although I think a lot of it in Germany may have originally been Celtic, like the stuff in SW Germany), but the overall best fit for P312 is Celtic. But that does not mean P312 is always Celtic everywhere! A big chunk of P312 is non-Celtic, non-Germanic Iberian. Some of it is Basque. Bits of it are even Slavic, Italic, and Jewish.

Some U106 is likewise not Germanic, but the overall best fit for U106 is Germanic. That likewise does not mean that all U106 everywhere is always and without exception Germanic.

It's like this. P312 sits farther west and more centrally over the old Celtic homelands than does U106, but P312 is so populous its spillover into Germanic lands causes it to rival all comers there. U106 sits father east than P312, is centered on the old Germanic lands, but is slightly less numerous than P312. Even so, U106 is better represented in northern Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark than P312, which gives it a more even geographic continuity into Scandinavia than that of P312, which seems to be strong in SW and middle Germany but then to experience something of a decline or break before reaching Scandinavia. I have not crunched all the numbers, but that is my impression anyway. It's an odd thing, but it may mean that P312 expanded by sea into Scandinavia rather than advancing up the European Plain. U106 may have entered Scandinavia farther east and by land. That might explain the relative dispositions of P312 and U106 in Scandinavia, as well.

So, perhaps it is best to avoid labeling either closely-related P310+ haplogroup, but I still think what I am observing is fairly obvious, which is why many people tend to associate U106, rightly or wrongly, with the ancient Germans.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #34 on: July 17, 2010, 09:06:37 PM »

GoldenHind posted the numbers that showed P312 outnumbering U106 in Scandinavia.

U106 is not my forte either, but the numbers above speak volumes. At any rate, it is a plausible argument that some P312* in Great Britain could be Germanic in origin.

I would be more than a little surprised if there were no Germanic P312* or downstream SNPs in the Isles.

Although it is a little preliminary, we may already have a Germanic P312 subclade in S182.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #35 on: July 17, 2010, 09:22:53 PM »



Even so, U106 is better represented in northern Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark than P312, which gives it a more even geographic continuity into Scandinavia than that of P312, which seems to be strong in SW and middle Germany but then to experience something of a decline or break before reaching Scandinavia. I have not crunched all the numbers, but that is my impression anyway. It's an odd thing, but it may mean that P312 expanded by sea into Scandinavia rather than advancing up the European Plain. U106 may have entered Scandinavia farther east and by land. That might explain the relative dispositions of P312 and U106 in Scandinavia, as well.


If you do crunch the northern Germany numbers, a word of caution. According to a U106 person on another forum who is even more vociferous in his criticism of the U106=Germanic equation than I am, a number of people with ancestry from southwest Germany are inexplicably listed as being from northern Germany in the U106 project. I haven't checked this myself.

You may well be right about P312 and U106 taking different routes to Scandinavia. What is really needed is a study such as the Swedish one which actually differentiates between R1b subclades. But I'm not holding my breath. Even the extremely ambitious on-going Brabant Ydna study is only SNP testing for three R1b subclades: all of U106, U152 and then the rest of P312.

I think one of the unfortunate aspects of the "equation" is that it causes us to think that all of U106 and all of P312 took completely different routes in entering Europe. That may or may not be the case.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2010, 09:27:31 PM »

Another simple observation is that U106 is rare in the old Celtic world except on it's eastern fringes were Germanic movement was strong enough to lead to language shift. Where Celtic or it's Latin successors were not replaced it seems R1b1b2 is overwhelmingly S116 and rarely U106.  

Although the division is not absolute by any means  it seems that S116 both as a percentage of R1b1b2 and as a percentage of all males has a sharp fall at the old Celtic Germanic boundary. Combined I thnk that likely means a sharp fall in actual numbers
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #37 on: July 18, 2010, 02:57:28 PM »

Another simple observation is that U106 is rare in the old Celtic world except on it's eastern fringes were Germanic movement was strong enough to lead to language shift. Where Celtic or it's Latin successors were not replaced it seems R1b1b2 is overwhelmingly S116 and rarely U106.  

Although the division is not absolute by any means  it seems that S116 both as a percentage of R1b1b2 and as a percentage of all males has a sharp fall at the old Celtic Germanic boundary. Combined I thnk that likely means a sharp fall in actual numbers

That is what I see, too. In the case of Germany, for example, it could easily be argued that much of the P312+ there is Celtic in origin. According to David Faux's U152 database (http://www.davidkfaux.org/R1b1c10_Data.htm), none of the U152 in Germany is found in the North. By far most of the L21 and R-P312* in Germany are likewise found in southern or middle Germany and skewed to the west, i.e., in the ancient Celtic homelands, where the old Celtic hillforts and burial mounds are found.

Though there are a few North Germans who are P312+ (a handful of R-L21s and a couple of R-P312*s), there is basically a break or gap before P312 picks up again in Scandinavia. I don't think there is any such break in U106 between northern Germany and Scandinavia.

That is one of the reasons I think P312 may have expanded up the coast of northern Europe into Scandinavia, while U106 may have taken a land route from farther east and north.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 03:03:32 PM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #38 on: July 18, 2010, 08:21:01 PM »

Another simple observation is that U106 is rare in the old Celtic world except on it's eastern fringes were Germanic movement was strong enough to lead to language shift. Where Celtic or it's Latin successors were not replaced it seems R1b1b2 is overwhelmingly S116 and rarely U106.  

Although the division is not absolute by any means  it seems that S116 both as a percentage of R1b1b2 and as a percentage of all males has a sharp fall at the old Celtic Germanic boundary. Combined I thnk that likely means a sharp fall in actual numbers

That is what I see, too. In the case of Germany, for example, it could easily be argued that much of the P312+ there is Celtic in origin. According to David Faux's U152 database (http://www.davidkfaux.org/R1b1c10_Data.htm), none of the U152 in Germany is found in the North. By far most of the L21 and R-P312* in Germany are likewise found in southern or middle Germany and skewed to the west, i.e., in the ancient Celtic homelands, where the old Celtic hillforts and burial mounds are found.

Though there are a few North Germans who are P312+ (a handful of R-L21s and a couple of R-P312*s), there is basically a break or gap before P312 picks up again in Scandinavia. I don't think there is any such break in U106 between northern Germany and Scandinavia.

That is one of the reasons I think P312 may have expanded up the coast of northern Europe into Scandinavia, while U106 may have taken a land route from farther east and north.

I think P312/L21 was all-encompassing when entering Scandinavia. It could have entered via sea, but no doubt it also got there via Jutland. Like GoldenHind said with the Myres study some time ago, if you take into consideration the percentages of U106 in Denmark then it changes things a bit. I remember Vince discussing U106 as ubiquitous in hotspots, where P312 is defined by its continuity. And, what about those L48- U106?

P312* and L21 further west can surely be attributed to Celtic ancestry (not all of it, of course), but it's dominance in Norway and presence in Sweden indicates the spread of Germanic culture during the Nordic Bronze Age. U106 was included, but why were the iron-making Norse in Norway more P312/L21 than U106?

GoldenHind also pointed out a newly defining SNP below P312* that could be attributed to Germanic ancestry. This is also the situation with Clan MacLeod. Clan history holds they descend from a Norse chieftain in the Outer Hebrides, yet folks would not believe it because the largest related group of MacLeods are R1b. Yet a downstream SNP (S68) connected this related group with lineages in Scandinavia.

We just have to wait for another P312* SNP that connects these two populations.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 08:24:39 PM by NealtheRed » Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2010, 08:46:23 PM »

I'm afraid neither of you (referring to Rich and Alan) are addressing my point. All that you point out merely  demonstrates that with which I agree: there is a strong correlation between some U106 subclades and some Germanics, and a strong correlation between some P312 subclades and some Celts. What I object to is taking it beyond that and making a general connection between all Germanics and all U106 and all Celts and all P312. In logic this is known as the fallacy of composition: if something is true of a part of a entity, then it must also be true of the entire entity.

Assuming the apparent predominance of U106 over P312 in northern Germany is actual rather than illusory, do all U106 subclades have a strong presence there, or just some of them? If they are all or nearly all L48, does it establish that U198, P107 and L1 must necessarily also be Germanic, even if they have no or very little presence there? Once again this compares U106 as single entitiy against P312 divided into parts.

If no part of U106 can be Celtic because they don't have a strong presence in the western fringes of Europe, why doesn't the same logic apply to U152? I don't believe U106 is rarer in Ireland and Spain than U152. Must all Celtic tribes necessarily have populated the western fringes of Europe?

I don't think either of you are defending the proposition that U106=Germanic and P312=Celtic. Part of my opposition to it, even as a generalization, as a logical fallacy, is that that it treats both P312 and U106 as homogenous entities. I think we can be reasonably certain that P312 isn't monolithic, and I strongly suspect the same is true with U106.

But my chief objection is the generalization effects the way we view the evidence and the conclusions we draw from it. Thus if U106 is more common in Germany than P312, it demonstrates the strong presence of U106 in the old Germanic homelands. If P312 is more numerous there, it establishes the strong Celtic admixture there. If U106 has a strong presence in Austria, it reflects the Germanic invasions there. If U152 has the same presence, it would reflect a fossil from Hallstatt.

Since the conclusions are pre-ordained, the facts become essentially irrelevant.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 08:48:17 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #40 on: July 19, 2010, 08:07:05 AM »

Well, I am not committing the fallacy of composition, because I am not arguing that all U106 is Germanic and all P312 is Celtic. What I am saying is that, generally speaking, as a rule of thumb, P312=Celtic and U106=Germanic. Probably a better way to state that would be to say that P312 is usually or mostly Celtic, and U106 is is usually or mostly Germanic.

I think you see that from their relative distributions, even within Germany. In Germany we know where the old Celts lived, and we know where the Germanics lived and how they worked their way south and west. Alan wasn't just talking about Ireland and Spain. He was talking about the relative dispositions of U106 and P312 in Germany, as well. U106 tends to stack up farther north and east in Germany than P312, and P312 tends to be thickest in the old Celtic region. I didn't just assume that or decide that's how I would see things regardless of the facts. That is the way things are.

U106 tends to decline as one moves into the old Celtic lands. It gets really thin on the ground as one moves west into France, and even thinner in Spain and Portugal. It's pretty big in England, but in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland its presence drops. A telltale sign is its connection with English/Protestant surnames in Ireland.

P312 tends to decline as one moves into the old Germanic homelands in Germany and the Netherlands. It picks up again in Scandinavia. That is what makes me think that P312 moved by boat up the coast into Scandinavia.

Since P312 and U106 are both probably older than the distinctions between Celtic and Germanic, these kinds of classifications will remain inexact. There will be considerable blurring across the boundaries, and exceptions will exist. We know that. But we can see the general pattern, and it makes generalizing both possible and valuable, at least in my opinion.

Take the case of Austria, which you mentioned in your last post. If we look at Austria in isolation, we might not be able to say much of anything about the haplogroups and subclades found there. But with the help of the big picture, i.e., the overall distribution of the haplogroups and subclades that are present there, we might be able to say a lot. If the overall U106 pattern in the rest of Europe associates it with Germanic-speaking peoples, and there is a goodly amount of U106 in Austria, then it is not unreasonable to conclude that Austria probably acquired its Germanic speech largely from its U106 component. If the overall P312 pattern in the rest of Europe is Celtic, then it may not be unreasonable to attribute the P312 in Austria to its ancient Celtic inhabitants.

R1a and I2a are both very common in Slavic-speaking lands, so why would we not conclude that Slavs are probably responsible for most of the R1a and I2a in Austria? Given Austria's proximity to Slavic-speaking R1a and I2a populations, what is the logical conclusion?
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 07:37:56 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #41 on: July 19, 2010, 08:58:36 AM »

I did want to add that I think the distribution of R-P312* in Britain is very similar to that of U106 and even I1. So, since I tend to generalize and conclude that both U106 and I1 are mostly Germanic, I have to conclude that the distribution of R-P312* in Britain is mostly Germanic (with perhaps some Belgic), as well, right down to the association of R-P312* with English/Protestant surnames in Ireland (just like U106).

In saying that, I am treating R-P312* as a single thing, when I know it is at minimum at least two things in Britain, since there is a fair-sized R1b North-South component there.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2010, 08:59:22 AM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #42 on: July 19, 2010, 10:10:53 AM »

.... According to David Faux's U152 database (http://www.davidkfaux.org/R1b1c10_Data.htm) ....
Is Faux's database a superset of the R-U152 FTDNA project? 
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=yresults

Which would be better to include in a P312 all-inclusive database?  I don't see where Faux includes the FTDNA kit numbers which makes it a little more difficult to reconcile with the project since FTDNA screens don't include Ysearch ID's.
Logged

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

Posts: 5023


« Reply #43 on: July 20, 2010, 07:36:08 AM »

.... According to David Faux's U152 database (http://www.davidkfaux.org/R1b1c10_Data.htm) ....
Is Faux's database a superset of the R-U152 FTDNA project? 
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=yresults

Which would be better to include in a P312 all-inclusive database?  I don't see where Faux includes the FTDNA kit numbers which makes it a little more difficult to reconcile with the project since FTDNA screens don't include Ysearch ID's.

Faux's database is independent of the the FTDNA R1b-U152 Project. I would say Faux's database is more accurate when it comes to geographic origin than the Y-DNA Results page of the R1b-U152 Project. That is David's main interest, so he is very careful and exacting when it comes to that. He also includes people who have tested with companies other than FTDNA, so some of those he lists may not be in the R1b-U152 Project.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #44 on: July 22, 2010, 08:18:54 PM »

Having looked at the distribution of U106 subclades a little closer, a possible scenario comes to mind. I seem to remember Vince V. once suggesting that U106 arrived in Europe first, and then was largely swamped by later arriving P312, leaving U106 strongholds in the Netherlands and Austria. Could U106 have entered Europe along the Danube, and from there proceeded up the Rhine to the north sea coast? The later arrival of P312 could have left U106 with concentrations along the upper Danube and lower Rhine. From the lower Rhine part of U106 could have gone northwest to England and Scotland, while another part went easterly along the north German plain to the Baltic, partly branching off into Scandinavia, but never establishing a very strong presence in Norway.

This could explain why some U106 subclades are essentially absent from Scandinavia, and are largely confined to England and Scotland. Also, there are some who have studied this who maintain that the concentration of U106 is greater along the Rhine than in north Germany. In any case, such a scenario is much more consistent with the known distribution of U106 and subclades than the notion that they got to Netherlands and Austria in a migration out of Scandinavia during the early Iron Age.

I also think this could have occurred very early on in the Bronze or even Copper Age, long before the division in Europe between the Celts and Germanics. I don't know enough about the archaeology of the period to know if this plausible or not.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2010, 05:10:42 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2010, 03:29:22 PM »

I had occasion recently to revisit the Myres' et al. study of U106 in Denmark. To my knowledge, this is the only study which has looked at R1b subclades anywhere in Scandinavia. In any case, it is the best evidence we have on the issue.

The study only looked at the amounts of R1b-M269, U106 and U106 subclade U198/S29. The sample size was 113. The results were as follows:

M269:                39 (34.5% of the total)
U106 (XU198):  19 (16.8% of the toal)
U198:                  1 (.09% of the total)

This figure is not listed, but is easily calculated:

M269 (XU106,U198): 19 (16.8% of the toal)

Since we know M269 in western Europe is nearly all ht15 (ie positive for either U106 or P312), it is likely that all or nearly all of the latter 19 are P312, nearly dead even with U106 + U198 at 20.

Those who support the U106+ Germanic idea rely in part on the idea that U106 vastly out numbers P312 in Denmark. The best evidence we have to date, the Myres study, doesn't support that contention.

I believe I am also correct in stating that more of the P312 subclade SRY2627, regarded by some as Celtic, has been found in Denmark than the so-called Germanic subclade U198.


« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 08:27:27 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2010, 04:18:52 PM »

I think Goldenhind does seem to have a point that in much of Scandinavia anyway P312 does seem to be as strong as U106.  It seems that P312 was strong almost everywhere in the R1b1b2 world except perhaps in a few limited areas including Holland.  Its the addition of U106 that is the difference in my opinion.   As for the cultural connotations, its clearly more complex than a simply match for the ethnic divisions around the 200BC-400AD period. Personally I think U152 has been linked to the Celts based on very little.  In my opinion its a very poor match for the Celts overall and only seems strong in areas where Germans overlaid the Celts. In fact I think there may be a case that U152 at least partly expanded with the south-west Germanic Suebic and related tribes around SW Germany, Alsace, Switzerland and Italy.  L21 is a far better candidate than U152 as a Celtic clade as it is known in most of the old Celtic world in reasonable numbers. 
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 04:35:56 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2010, 10:17:24 PM »

Hmmm . . .

Interesting. I still don't think that alters the fact that the overall distribution of P312+ (all of it, not just P312*) is a better fit for Celtic than Germanic and that the reverse is true for U106. You still have the problem of the apparent gap between the P312+ regions of Germany (middle and SW Germany) and Scandinavia.

I know there were Beaker settlements in SW Norway that are believed to have come from Jutland. Anyone know any more about that?

I wonder if the U106 in Denmark is pretty near universally L48+.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 10:22:07 PM by rms2 » Logged

MHammers
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #48 on: July 25, 2010, 12:15:11 AM »

I can't remember the paper, but it was about the Beaker settlements in Scandinavia.
It did say that the Beaker period there lasted from 2300 to about 2000BC.   
Logged

Ydna: R1b-Z253**


Mtdna: T

MHammers
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #49 on: July 25, 2010, 12:27:45 AM »

Here it is.  My dates were a little off.

http://www.jungsteinsite.uni-kiel.de/pdf/2005_vandkilde_low.pdf
Logged

Ydna: R1b-Z253**


Mtdna: T

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 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 0.101 seconds with 19 queries.