World Families Forums - R1b1b2 in Sweden

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 24, 2014, 09:15:04 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] 5 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R1b1b2 in Sweden  (Read 11470 times)
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #75 on: July 28, 2010, 08:16:11 PM »

Well, it has been found in Southern Germany, but some paternal issues are surfacing with that.

Other than that, I have surfed French, Iberian, and Dutch projects and have not found the haplotype.

I'd say the greatest proportion of L159 is coming out of the Scottish-English Borders and Yorkshire. At first, I thought this was due to the Celtic Brigantes, but then multiple folks with ties to Clan Donald were matching the L159 signature or coming back L159+. Then I found samples from the Hebrides (Matheson, MacSween, McQueen) who matched it.

I'm telling you, the samples from Ireland are based on the east coast, and the ones in Northern Ireland have names like McCabe or MacLachlan, and have gallowglass connections.
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 #76 on: July 28, 2010, 08:17:57 PM »

Another example of what I consider to be the pernicious influence of the "equation" (if I may use that shorthand term for what I am complaining about), is that only P312 are suspected to be the result of the Viking slave trade when found in Scandinavia. Did the Vikings only take slaves from Celtic lands? Were no U106 taken as slaves from Anglo-Saxon England? They certainly raided Anglo-Saxon England as much as they did in Scotland and Ireland, if not more so. Yet in all my years of perusing these forums, I have never heard anyone suggest that any U106 in Scandinavia could possibly have been the result of the slave trade, or the result of later migration to the area.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #77 on: July 28, 2010, 08:23:44 PM »

The best evidence comes from the % of various haplogroups in Scandinavia, rather than Germany. But even that is tricky, because modern populations are not safe proxies for ancient ones.  

  

Agreed. If you didn't see it, please see my post #45 on page 2 of this thread for the result of the Myres' study in Denmark.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #78 on: July 28, 2010, 09:11:04 PM »

Another example of what I consider to be the pernicious influence of the "equation" (if I may use that shorthand term for what I am complaining about), is that only P312 are suspected to be the result of the Viking slave trade when found in Scandinavia. Did the Vikings only take slaves from Celtic lands? Were no U106 taken as slaves from Anglo-Saxon England? They certainly raided Anglo-Saxon England as much as they did in Scotland and Ireland, if not more so. Yet in all my years of perusing these forums, I have never heard anyone suggest that any U106 in Scandinavia could possibly have been the result of the slave trade, or the result of later migration to the area.

Well, you missed my arguments with Faux on that subject from a few years ago then, before we even knew P312 existed. He was arguing then that most of the old R1b1c* (R1b1b2 now) in Scandinavia got there in the bodies of thralls. I replied with essentially what you are saying. I emphasized the fact that the Vikings were especially strong in eastern England, where there is plenty of U106 (known as S21 back then), I1 (I1a back then), and U152 (old S28). I said they were all as likely as any R1b1c* to have been transported to Scandinavia in the bodies of thralls, and that, given his reasoning, any haplogroup found in England and in Scandinavia could be thrall or viking or a combination of the two and there is no way to know which individual's ancestor was which. (Actually, that is essentially correct.)

However, I do think L159 is a different subject. It looks to be almost strictly a British Isles clade and probably too young to have originated on the continent. I could be wrong about that, but I'm just expressing my honest opinion. I think it's a lot like M222: when it shows up in Scandinavia it's an import.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 09:13:42 PM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #79 on: July 28, 2010, 09:32:24 PM »

Another example of what I consider to be the pernicious influence of the "equation" (if I may use that shorthand term for what I am complaining about), is that only P312 are suspected to be the result of the Viking slave trade when found in Scandinavia. Did the Vikings only take slaves from Celtic lands? Were no U106 taken as slaves from Anglo-Saxon England? They certainly raided Anglo-Saxon England as much as they did in Scotland and Ireland, if not more so. Yet in all my years of perusing these forums, I have never heard anyone suggest that any U106 in Scandinavia could possibly have been the result of the slave trade, or the result of later migration to the area.

Well, you missed my arguments with Faux on that subject from a few years ago then, before we even knew P312 existed. He was arguing then that most of the old R1b1c* (R1b1b2 now) in Scandinavia got there in the bodies of thralls. I replied with essentially what you are saying. I emphasized the fact that the Vikings were especially strong in eastern England, where there is plenty of U106 (known as S21 back then), I1 (I1a back then), and U152 (old S28). I said they were all as likely as any R1b1c* to have been transported to Scandinavia in the bodies of thralls, and that, given his reasoning, any haplogroup found in England and in Scandinavia could be thrall or viking or a combination of the two and there is no way to know which individual's ancestor was which. (Actually, that is essentially correct.)

However, I do think L159 is a different subject. It looks to be almost strictly a British Isles clade and probably too young to have originated on the continent. I could be wrong about that, but I'm just expressing my honest opinion. I think it's a lot like M222: when it shows up in Scandinavia it's an import.

Earl Beatty with the 464X Project said the TMRCA for the CCGG/L159 mutation could be somewhere in the Early Middle Ages, right around the time Norway held possessions along Western Scotland, the Hebrides, and the Isle of Man. Of course, Norwegian longphorts were in Leinster as well.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 09:32:45 PM 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 #80 on: July 29, 2010, 07:24:42 AM »

Earl Beatty with the 464X Project said the TMRCA for the CCGG/L159 mutation could be somewhere in the Early Middle Ages, right around the time Norway held possessions along Western Scotland, the Hebrides, and the Isle of Man. Of course, Norwegian longphorts were in Leinster as well.

So, unless it starts showing up on the Continent in great numbers, it seems there are only two possibilities: 1) L159 originated in Ireland or someplace else in the British Isles and pops up here and there in Scandinavia as an import, or 2) it originated in Scandinavia and was brought to the British Isles by Vikings.

Personally, and I mean no offense, I think possibility #2 is a real longshot and very unlikely.

But who knows?

Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2010, 07:35:49 AM »

I tried asking a couple of questions on Rootsweb on the subject of whether or not U106 is uniquely Germanic. Here are the two most significant responses thus far.

Quote from: Tom Gull
Personal opinion: we were encouraged to believe that U106 is uniquely
Germanic because (a) years ago it was labelled "Frisian" from one piece of
deductive analysis and there was thought to be a measured peak in the
Netherlands and (b) this dovetailed nicely with a strongly-stated hypothesis
where it was very convenient for it to be labelled "Germanic" while another
major haplogroup was "Celtic". With enough buzz around it, this
dual-assignment label for the two haplogroups became so firmly entrenched
that it was easy to either ignore contradictory evidence or to move
geographic boundaries around to support it. There's a strong desire for
people to want to belong to a specific group and I think that was in play
here.

As to which haplogroup (if any) deserves to be labelled Germanic because of
a clear point of origin or a narrow geographic spread, I am neutral in the
sense that I don't remember clear evidence for any haplogroup having that
title. Nor do I think these widely spread haplogroups "owned" large areas of
Europe, blocking out other haplogroups.

To me, the Rhine and the Danube seem to factor heavily into the growth of
U106. There are three or four large haplogroups that overlap into those same
areas. Why one would be "proven" Germanic and another Celtic escapes me as a
piece of straightforward logic.

Quote from: Ken Nordtvedt (Replying to Tom Gull's post above)
I think you increasingly mythologize the history of this broad subject each
time you comment on it.

U106 aka S21 was discovered some time AFTER the first evidence of a cline
concerning DYS 390/391 = 23/11 R1b.... was found in western Europe which
peaked in the general Netherlands, NW Germany, Denmark region ("Greater
Frisia" to give it the irritating nickname, although I see some vintage 2004
messages I sent out on this subject using the name "AngloSaxony" as well.)
The frequency cline for this variety of western R1b... was calibrated
relative to the 24/11 and 24/10 frequencies of R1b....... As far as I know,
the increased data of today does not change much these frequency shares as
we move from region to region in western europe. I have the original
frequencies obtained by geographically clustering the yhrd haplotypes. Then
additional STRs were found which correlated with the 23/11 motif, so we got
bonified clades. It was only after that that the snp U106/S21 was
discovered and found to correlate with the 23/11 cline. The snp had nothing
to do with the original observation of the cline which was geographical in
nature. Talking in terms of the frequencies of this tri-partition of
R1b..., the middle Rhine looks like a mixing zone for the 24/11 and 23/11
types of R1b.....

A decent case can be made, I believe, that the same peoples that spread
I1-AS (or at least some of the major clades of I1-AS) in Europe also spread
U106/S21. What language they spoke is difficult to say; the initial spread
may have begun before the IE languages came to that part of Europe ---
although we know the peoples of this region of Europe were on the move even
in Roman times. When the Celtic language went extinct in the upper Danube
region I don't know. What's the conventional wisdom on that?

If you look at the ydna makeup of northern Germany versus southern Germany
today, significant differences exist. I suspect that goes along with an
expansion of the peoples of the territory today called northern Germany into
the territory of today's southern Germany, but diluted in the latter region
by the indigenous peoples who were not eliminated but simply mixed with the
newcomers.

You can read the whole thread here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2010-07/1280143673
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 07:36:45 AM by rms2 » Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #82 on: July 29, 2010, 07:54:10 AM »



Rich,

I think there is some connection with the Irish Sea Modal and Scandinavia. It has to be more than coincidental that most of the Irish L159+ are from the counties of Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, and Kildare - and right across the sea we can find L159 in Northern England-Scottish Borders.

L159 is also in the Hebrides, and I was really surprised when I found the Norwegians and other Scandinavians matching the signature. I am not coming to conclusions, but it almost looks like the dispersal could be due to Norse-Gaels. It's just a theory, but everyone has their own opinions of R1b1b2 in Scandinavia.

I just don't think L21 there is attributed to slaves.

Neal,

L159 is young relative to L21 and virtually limited to Ireland, with perhaps some British additions. I think you are going to have a real uphill battle to convince anyone (even me, and I want to believe) that it was brought to Ireland from Scandinavia and not vice versa.

You would have to find enough L159 in Scandinavia to show its haplotypes are older there than in Ireland and the rest of the British Isles. I do wish you the best of success with that, but I doubt it can be done . . . ever.

I think the default setting on L159 in Scandinavia is the dreaded Viking Era slave trade. To a certain extent that may even be an element of L21 in Scandinavia as a whole.

But when you have a clade like L159 that shows up almost nowhere but Ireland and also pops up in a very few Scandinavians, what else can one reasonably conclude?

Folks - what is this L159? In the ISOGG SNP index L159 = I2a1.
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #83 on: July 29, 2010, 08:01:31 AM »

Earl Beatty with the 464X Project said the TMRCA for the CCGG/L159 mutation could be somewhere in the Early Middle Ages, right around the time Norway held possessions along Western Scotland, the Hebrides, and the Isle of Man. Of course, Norwegian longphorts were in Leinster as well.

So, unless it starts showing up on the Continent in great numbers, it seems there are only two possibilities: 1) L159 originated in Ireland or someplace else in the British Isles and pops up here and there in Scandinavia as an import, or 2) it originated in Scandinavia and was brought to the British Isles by Vikings.

Personally, and I mean no offense, I think possibility #2 is a real longshot and very unlikely.

But who knows?



Why would I be offended?

Rich, I still think of the possibility that L159 originated in Ireland/Britain, and that is what the 464X admins. are trying to calculate with the TMRCA. However, if these Scandinavian matches are legitimate, they have more variance than the Irish and British Isles folks. That is the interesting part.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:07:16 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 #84 on: July 29, 2010, 08:03:56 AM »

Folks - what is this L159? In the ISOGG SNP index L159 = I2a1.

That's one of the problems with it. It is called "L159.2" within L21 because it was found first within I2a, but it's the same mutation in both groups. Because of some questions about its stability, ISOGG has not yet added it to the R Tree.

I seem to recall that it is not, strictly speaking, an SNP but acts kind of like one, but I might be mistaken on that and don't recall the details. It was discovered in the course of the WTY among some L21+ men, mostly Irish. Subsequently, other men have tested positive for it, almost all of them either of British Isles descent or with British Isles surnames.

There is an L159 Project:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-L159.2/default.aspx

Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #85 on: July 29, 2010, 08:07:27 AM »



Why would I be offended?

Rich, I still think of the possibility that L159 originated in Ireland/Britain, and that is what the 464X admins. are trying to calculate with the TMRCA. However, if these Scandinavian matches are legitimate, they have more variance than the Irish and British Isles folks. That is interesting part.


Has someone actually calculated that variance?

Are you talking about variance among Scandinavians who have actually been tested and found to be L159+?
Logged

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #86 on: July 29, 2010, 08:16:05 AM »

Folks - what is this L159? In the ISOGG SNP index L159 = I2a1.

That's one of the problems with it. It is called "L159.2" within L21 because it was found first within I2a, but it's the same mutation in both groups. Because of some questions about its stability, ISOGG has not yet added it to the R Tree.

I seem to recall that it is not, strictly speaking, an SNP but acts kind of like one, but I might be mistaken on that and don't recall the details. It was discovered in the course of the WTY among some L21+ men, mostly Irish. Subsequently, other men have tested positive for it, almost all of them either of British Isles descent or with British Isles surnames.

There is an L159 Project:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-L159.2/default.aspx

Many thanks!
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #87 on: July 29, 2010, 08:16:44 AM »



Why would I be offended?

Rich, I still think of the possibility that L159 originated in Ireland/Britain, and that is what the 464X admins. are trying to calculate with the TMRCA. However, if these Scandinavian matches are legitimate, they have more variance than the Irish and British Isles folks. That is interesting part.


Has someone actually calculated that variance?

Are you talking about variance among Scandinavians who have actually been tested and found to be L159+?

No, sir. I have only tested one Scandinavian for L159, and he was found to be L159+. But like I said in the previous post, if those other Scandinavians are legitimate matches to the modal (and very much look to be L159+) then the variance between haplotypes in Scandinavia is higher than in Britain or Ireland.

Our Duoos L159+ has a very close match with ancestry from Northern Norway. Both share off-modal values that none of the British and Irish folks have.

I was shocked to find that these Scandinavians matched the modal, but were further away from the Irish and British matches.

And L159 has been found in mostly Irish and British folks because as we all know... the database is flooded with them.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:17:26 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 #88 on: July 29, 2010, 08:22:21 AM »

How unique is the modal you're talking about? Has everyone who has its key markers and who has been tested for L159 been L159+?

The British Isles are just lousy with L21. I doubt anyone would dispute that. R-L159 is a subclade of L21 and apparently much younger than its L21 ancestor. It is thus far, by far, most commonly found among men of British Isles ancestry.

So, you've got an L21+ subclade, found most commonly in the British Isles, in the midst of all that other British and Irish L21.

See how utterly tough it is to argue that the rest of the L21 around it is British but L159 is a relatively recent Norwegian transplant?

It's hard enough to argue that the L21 in Scandinavia isn't a relatively recent import from elsewhere, and L21 is probably 4,000-5,000 years old and found all over Europe.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #89 on: July 29, 2010, 08:26:18 AM »

. . .
And L159 has been found in mostly Irish and British folks because as we all know... the database is flooded with them.

That's a good argument for clades with at least some number of continental results and a little age on them beyond the medieval period.

You're going to have to start really getting some continental results to make it work for L159.
Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #90 on: July 29, 2010, 08:32:16 AM »

How unique is the modal you're talking about? Has everyone who has its key markers and who has been tested for L159 been L159+?

The British Isles are just lousy with L21. I doubt anyone would dispute that. R-L159 is a subclade of L21 and apparently much younger than its L21 ancestor. It is thus far, by far, most commonly found among men of British Isles ancestry.

So, you've got an L21+ subclade, found most commonly in the British Isles, in the midst of all that other British and Irish L21.

See how utterly tough it is to argue that the rest of the L21 around it is British but L159 is a relatively recent Norwegian transplant?

It's hard enough to argue that the L21 in Scandinavia isn't a relatively recent import from elsewhere, and L21 is probably 4,000-5,000 years old and found all over Europe.

The answer to question 1 is a resounding yes. Everyone I have recruited for the L159 Project - and matches the modal - has come back L159+. But the interesting part is that 90% of these guys have ancestry in coastal Leinster or Northern England (now more from Western Scotland are coming back L159+).

Rich, you know I believe L21 in Scandinavia (and Norway especially) was brought there before the distinction of Celtic-Germanic. And even though L21 is, as you say, lousy in Great Britain, L159 is not common at all there. But when it is common, it comes up in certain spots, known to have been frequented by the Norse.

So far all intents and purposes, it is not surprising that an uncommon subclade of L21 is showing up in these places. You know what though? I'd be happy to get an answer either way. I don't consider the hypothesis because I think I'm Magnus.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:33:01 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 #91 on: July 29, 2010, 08:44:20 AM »

Okay, Neal, good luck with that.
Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #92 on: July 29, 2010, 08:53:26 AM »

Okay, Neal, good luck with that.

Meh, I tried I suppose.
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 #93 on: July 29, 2010, 09:40:08 AM »

Although this thread is supposed to be about R1b1b2 in Sweden, I thought it wouldn't be too far off topic to mention that a new Norwegian R-P312* just joined the R-P312 and Subclades Project.

The ancestral surname, Liotaaen, looks Finnish to me, but he was born in Sævareid, just southeast of Bergen. That surname is given as "Ljotaa - Storevik" in Ysearch, so there is a discrepancy between the FTDNA Plot Ancestral Origins entry and the Ysearch entry.

The Ysearch ID is 5T6QZ.
Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #94 on: July 29, 2010, 09:54:14 AM »

Although this thread is supposed to be about R1b1b2 in Sweden, I thought it wouldn't be too far off topic to mention that a new Norwegian R-P312* just joined the R-P312 and Subclades Project.

The ancestral surname, Liotaaen, looks Finnish to me, but he was born in Sævareid, just southeast of Bergen. That surname is given as "Ljotaa - Storevik" in Ysearch, so there is a discrepancy between the FTDNA Plot Ancestral Origins entry and the Ysearch entry.

The Ysearch ID is 5T6QZ.

Excellent, sir.
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 #95 on: July 29, 2010, 10:14:58 AM »


The answer to question 1 is a resounding yes. Everyone I have recruited for the L159 Project - and matches the modal - has come back L159+. But the interesting part is that 90% of these guys have ancestry in coastal Leinster or Northern England (now more from Western Scotland are coming back L159+).
. . .

Sorry to reopen the L159 thing again, but is Ysearch 7UKVB the L159 modal you were referring to?

If so, there are plenty of people who match it exactly whom I know for a fact are L21- (and so L159-), like Blumenthal, Ysearch TDNF7; Ohlhaeuser, Ysearch ASWME; and Desaulniers, Ysearch GN22D. There are also any number of L21- guys who are just one off that L159 modal, including some who are R-L20.

That modal is not going to be much good for finding L159+.

You absolutely cannot count on those who match it in SMGF or Ysearch being L159+.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 10:16:34 AM by rms2 » Logged

NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #96 on: July 29, 2010, 12:17:26 PM »

Actually, that is incorrect.

The L159 Ysearch ID that you mentioned does not abide by those values I gave you earlier.

Again, here they are:

DYS389i and ii: 14-30
DYS437/448: 15-18
DYS442: 11
DYS446:14

One must match the FULL sequence in order to be pursued for recruitment. That is why the SMGF matches do in fact match the modal perfectly. Also, I found that some matches in SMGF have corollaries at FTDNA: the same surname matches in the FTDNA database.
Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #97 on: July 29, 2010, 12:22:17 PM »

Wow, I just looked at Ohlhauser, and that guy misses on ALL of the key markers.

It is not common, I assure you.
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 #98 on: July 29, 2010, 06:06:49 PM »


. . .

Which is more likely, that P312 attained an apparent majority status in Germany solely due to the incorporation of Celts during the Iron Age and later migration, or that P312 had a strong presence amongst the Germanic speaking peoples dating to the Nordic Bronze Age?


I don't know, but I think it is entirely possible that there were enough Celts in Germany to account for the majority of German R1b1b2 lines, yes. I could be wrong, but I believe historically the southern and western parts of Germany have generally always been the most populous, and those were precisely the areas inhabited by Celts.

I used to teach German (but I am really rusty now), and I recall reading that High German (Hochdeutsch) actually shows signs of Celtic influence, whereas English is regarded as not showing much Celtic influence at all, even though we know what is now England was lousy with Celts.

As I recall from reading Gerhard Herm's The Celts, that German author considered the Celtic component to be the biggest part of what went into the German mix. He could have been wrong, I suppose.

Regarding the figures from Myres et al that you cited, I wouldn't disregard the P310- element in Germany, which would probably account for at least some of that xU106 stuff, enough to account for a few percent anyway.

If the large portion of P312 present in Germany today is solely due to the incorporation of Celtic people to the west and south, I would expect to see significant differences in the Myres' results in Denmark. They just aren't that different. The amount of U106 (including U198) in Germany, stated as a percentage of M269, is 47.6%, only increasing to 51.3% in Denmark. The percentage of M269 (XU106,U198) in Germany is 52.4%, only decreasing to 48.7% in Denmark.

I don't think a case can be made for the massive incorporation of Celtic people in Denmark. As far as I know, most of the "modern"migration into Denmark has come from northern Germany.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 06:26:25 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #99 on: July 29, 2010, 06:18:14 PM »

I tried asking a couple of questions on Rootsweb on the subject of whether or not U106 is uniquely Germanic. Here are the two most significant responses thus far.

Quote from: Tom Gull
Personal opinion: we were encouraged to believe that U106 is uniquely
Germanic because (a) years ago it was labelled "Frisian" from one piece of
deductive analysis and there was thought to be a measured peak in the
Netherlands and (b) this dovetailed nicely with a strongly-stated hypothesis
where it was very convenient for it to be labelled "Germanic" while another
major haplogroup was "Celtic". With enough buzz around it, this
dual-assignment label for the two haplogroups became so firmly entrenched
that it was easy to either ignore contradictory evidence or to move
geographic boundaries around to support it. There's a strong desire for
people to want to belong to a specific group and I think that was in play
here.

As to which haplogroup (if any) deserves to be labelled Germanic because of
a clear point of origin or a narrow geographic spread, I am neutral in the
sense that I don't remember clear evidence for any haplogroup having that
title. Nor do I think these widely spread haplogroups "owned" large areas of
Europe, blocking out other haplogroups.

To me, the Rhine and the Danube seem to factor heavily into the growth of
U106. There are three or four large haplogroups that overlap into those same
areas. Why one would be "proven" Germanic and another Celtic escapes me as a
piece of straightforward logic.

Quote from: Ken Nordtvedt (Replying to Tom Gull's post above)
I think you increasingly mythologize the history of this broad subject each
time you comment on it.

U106 aka S21 was discovered some time AFTER the first evidence of a cline
concerning DYS 390/391 = 23/11 R1b.... was found in western Europe which
peaked in the general Netherlands, NW Germany, Denmark region ("Greater
Frisia" to give it the irritating nickname, although I see some vintage 2004
messages I sent out on this subject using the name "AngloSaxony" as well.)
The frequency cline for this variety of western R1b... was calibrated
relative to the 24/11 and 24/10 frequencies of R1b....... As far as I know,
the increased data of today does not change much these frequency shares as
we move from region to region in western europe. I have the original
frequencies obtained by geographically clustering the yhrd haplotypes. Then
additional STRs were found which correlated with the 23/11 motif, so we got
bonified clades. It was only after that that the snp U106/S21 was
discovered and found to correlate with the 23/11 cline. The snp had nothing
to do with the original observation of the cline which was geographical in
nature. Talking in terms of the frequencies of this tri-partition of
R1b..., the middle Rhine looks like a mixing zone for the 24/11 and 23/11
types of R1b.....

A decent case can be made, I believe, that the same peoples that spread
I1-AS (or at least some of the major clades of I1-AS) in Europe also spread
U106/S21. What language they spoke is difficult to say; the initial spread
may have begun before the IE languages came to that part of Europe ---
although we know the peoples of this region of Europe were on the move even
in Roman times. When the Celtic language went extinct in the upper Danube
region I don't know. What's the conventional wisdom on that?

If you look at the ydna makeup of northern Germany versus southern Germany
today, significant differences exist. I suspect that goes along with an
expansion of the peoples of the territory today called northern Germany into
the territory of today's southern Germany, but diluted in the latter region
by the indigenous peoples who were not eliminated but simply mixed with the
newcomers.

You can read the whole thread here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2010-07/1280143673


It appears to me that Nordtvedt is speaking of the Frisian modal, which he also calls 23/11. As I said before, according to M. Maddi, this constitutes only a portion of one of the U106 subclades, L48. I have always conceeded that there is a correlation between some subclades of U106 with the Germanics and some subclades of P312 with the Celts. The point which I made earlier is that it is a logical fallacy to assume that something is true of all of an entity just because it is true of part of an entity. Where is the proof that U198  or L1 have an equally strong presence in "Greater Frisia?"

Even if what he says applies to all of U106- I note he is careful to speak of some of the major clades of I1-AS, rather than treating it as necessarily monolithic- I don't think you'll find him contending that there was no P312 in Scandinavia. After all, he is the one who identified the R1b-Norse cluster, which he has said is found throughout Scandinavia and does not appear to be young, and which I believe has now been established as part of P312. I have discussed this with him in emails, and he hasn't expressed any reservation about it.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 06:47:24 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


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

Page created in 0.197 seconds with 19 queries.