World Families Forums

General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse. => R1b General => Topic started by: EthiopianSon on March 28, 2013, 09:54:14 AM



Title: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 28, 2013, 09:54:14 AM
It has been said that the I Haplogroup was carried in great numbers in the Dark Age "invasions" of Britain and that, as it is also thought that the newcomers heavily settled the east of Britain, but had a much smaller effect upon the west, that the ratio of I/R1b is highest in the east and lowest in the west. I believe this picture has been supported by Y-DNA testing.

Of course it is just a finger in the air estimate, but is this really the best simple indicator to use? Isn't R1b-U106 also thought to have arrived in Britain largely during the Dark Ages? If this is the case then the ratio I/R must be rather polluted by the U106s.

Wouldn't it be better to look at the ratio of R1b-U106 to R1b-P312? Has anyone done this and are there any stats/maps showing this ratio?



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 28, 2013, 10:58:17 AM
It has been said that the I Haplogroup was carried in great numbers in the Dark Age "invasions" of Britain and that, as it is also thought that the newcomers heavily settled the east of Britain, but had a much smaller effect upon the west, that the ratio of I/R1b is highest in the east and lowest in the west. I believe this picture has been supported by Y-DNA testing.

Of course it is just a finger in the air estimate, but is this really the best simple indicator to use? Isn't R1b-U106 also thought to have arrived in Britain largely during the Dark Ages? If this is the case then the ratio I/R must be rather polluted by the U106s.

Wouldn't it be better to look at the ratio of R1b-U106 to R1b-P312? Has anyone done this and are there any stats/maps showing this ratio?



The best estimates is around 40-45% U106 and 55-55% P312 in England proper of the 70% R1b-M269.  This is based on percentages provided by the Busby and Myres studies.  So, if R1b-M269 represents about 70% of the male lineages in England proper and then of that 70% U106 is around 40-45% and P312 is 55-60% you would have to figure out what those percentages are in relation to 70% to figure out the exact relation of U106 to the whole, which would include the 70% R1b and 30% other, which inludes all the various haplogroups, R1a, I, G, E and so on.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
You're talking about the overall % though not the difference in the U106/P312 ratio between different regions. As an example, what is the U106/P312 ratio in Suffolk compared to in Powys (ignoring all other HGs)?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 28, 2013, 10:19:34 PM
You're talking about the overall % though not the difference in the U106/P312 ratio between different regions. As an example, what is the U106/P312 ratio in Suffolk compared to in Powys (ignoring all other HGs)?

Someone posted the percentages by region on another forum.  I will attempt to copy and paste them here.  Don't hold your breath.  You'll probably pass out from lack of oxygen before I find them, let alone figure out how to copy and paste.  The only issue they are only broken down into north east, south east, north west, south west England.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 29, 2013, 03:34:54 AM
Thanks Webb.

north east, south east, north west, south west is better than nothing although comparing the mid-west to east anglia would probably be the best regions to look at. If the respective I/R ratios were also posted it would be interesting to see them alongside the U106/P312 values for comparison.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 29, 2013, 06:21:11 AM
Thanks Webb.

north east, south east, north west, south west is better than nothing although comparing the mid-west to east anglia would probably be the best regions to look at. If the respective I/R ratios were also posted it would be interesting to see them alongside the U106/P312 values for comparison.

You might find this interesting.  Webb is an occupational surname of pre-Norman origin as far as entomology.  There are 31 lineages on the Webb surname DNA project.  14 are confirmed P312, 8 confirmed U106, several are confirmed as various other haplogroups a few are just M269.  The lineages are from all four corners of England proper.  I have a theory that the lower classes, meaning the serfs or working class celts were left largely intact by the incoming Anglo-Saxon invaders.  I think that it was like a wave, the point of impact, or the east of England had the largest impact genetically, and as you leave the point of impact, the genetic impact becomes less.  I would love to have enough time to investigate English occupational names and see the ratio of P312 to U106.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 29, 2013, 09:16:49 AM
You might find this interesting.  Webb is an occupational surname of pre-Norman origin as far as entomology. The lineages are from all four corners of England proper.

When the name was first used and when the majority of people adopted it (or were assigned it by the then tax collectors;-)) are two different things.

Studies of medieval documents generally point to the peasant majority only adopting permanent surnames in the late 1300s so the distribution of an occupational surname like Webb is more likely to be linked to where there was demand for said occupation. In the case of weavers perhaps this was near sheep producing areas, or perhaps near market towns or perhaps at ports where yarn was imported.

I have a theory that the lower classes, meaning the serfs or working class celts were left largely intact by the incoming Anglo-Saxon invaders.  I think that it was like a wave, the point of impact, or the east of England had the largest impact genetically, and as you leave the point of impact, the genetic impact becomes less.  I would love to have enough time to investigate English occupational names and see the ratio of P312 to U106.

My understanding is that there was quite a difference between the Angles and Saxons, i.e., the Saxons immigrated gradually from Roman times and slowly spread their influence by further immigration and taking out rival leaders and their supporters, whereas the Angles arrived en masse and slaughtered anyone in what is now East Anglia then sailed up to Scotland and moved south down the NE edge of England again slaughtering anyone in their way. Once they had secured themselves in their initial kingdoms they throttled back the slaughter and just took out the remaining elite to take control of the remaining Britains who were now concentrated in the western half of the England plus Wales.

Just as the Roman empire was built on slavery, I would hazard a guess and say that the only way the Angles could have rampaged around the remainder of England, without becoming over-extended, and at the same time been producing enough food to support their families, was by enslaving the captured Britains.

From the point of view of who was likely to have survived amongst the ancient Brits those with the least chances of survival were perhaps:-

 1) anyone that lived in the east
 2) tribal leaders and their families
 3) strong peasants who were conscripted to fight for their leaders

i.e. if you lived in the western half of England/Wales, were of an undistinguished physical build, and kept your head down harvesting turnips, your family stood a fair chance of pulling through the dark ages intact. If you were a heroic warrior type, you could forget it!


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 29, 2013, 09:43:20 AM
You might find this interesting.  Webb is an occupational surname of pre-Norman origin as far as entomology. The lineages are from all four corners of England proper.

When the name was first used and when the majority of people adopted it (or were assigned it by the then tax collectors;-)) are two different things.

Studies of medieval documents generally point to the peasant majority only adopting permanent surnames in the late 1300s so the distribution of an occupational surname like Webb is more likely to be linked to where there was demand for said occupation. In the case of weavers perhaps this was near sheep producing areas, or perhaps near market towns or perhaps at ports where yarn was imported.

I have a theory that the lower classes, meaning the serfs or working class celts were left largely intact by the incoming Anglo-Saxon invaders.  I think that it was like a wave, the point of impact, or the east of England had the largest impact genetically, and as you leave the point of impact, the genetic impact becomes less.  I would love to have enough time to investigate English occupational names and see the ratio of P312 to U106.

My understanding is that there was quite a difference between the Angles and Saxons, i.e., the Saxons immigrated gradually from Roman times and slowly spread their influence by further immigration and taking out rival leaders and their supporters, whereas the Angles arrived en masse and slaughtered anyone in what is now East Anglia then sailed up to Scotland and moved south down the NE edge of England again slaughtering anyone in their way. Once they had secured themselves in their initial kingdoms they throttled back the slaughter and just took out the remaining elite to take control of the remaining Britains who were now concentrated in the western half of the England plus Wales.

Just as the Roman empire was built on slavery, I would hazard a guess and say that the only way the Angles could have rampaged around the remainder of England, without becoming over-extended, and at the same time been producing enough food to support their families, was by enslaving the captured Britains.

From the point of view of who was likely to have survived amongst the ancient Brits those with the least chances of survival were perhaps:-

 1) anyone that lived in the east
 2) tribal leaders and their families
 3) strong peasants who were conscripted to fight for their leaders

i.e. if you lived in the western half of England/Wales, were of an undistinguished physical build, and kept your head down harvesting turnips, your family stood a fair chance of pulling through the dark ages intact. If you were a heroic warrior type, you could forget it!

My thoughts exactly.  If you kept your head down, and were able to produce items that the incoming invaders deemed valuable, or at least better than what they were able to produce, then I would imagine you would have survived.  Examples would be weaving, maybe goldsmiths, blacksmiths, and other trades people.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 29, 2013, 09:57:23 AM
England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%


England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%


Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%


East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%


England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

This is info from the Busby paper on "The Peopling of Europe" and was provided by a poster on another forum.  The P312* category was published before the discovery of DF27, so it is assumed that the majority of this P312* is made up by the DF27 clades SRY2627 and mine, Z220.  There could also be some L238 in there which is a Scandanavian oriented clade under P312.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Degredado on March 29, 2013, 06:05:34 PM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 29, 2013, 07:38:18 PM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

You have noticed the same thing I did.  U106 is very stable, it has roughly the same percentage in all four areas.  U152 is the same, except in the southeast.  However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on March 29, 2013, 10:03:46 PM
I'm not sure we'll be able to say much about a paragroup like P312*. I wouldn't assume that all of it is DF27. It could be a mix of things with different affiliations and histories.

It is interesting to compare the Busby data from England with the Busby data from Ireland.

East Ireland (N = 149)
L21 = 71.1%
U106 = 6.7%
U152 = 4%
P312xL21, U152 = 7.4%

North Ireland (N = 72)
L21 = 79.2%
U106 = 4.2%
U152 = 1.4%
P312xL21, U152 = 4.2%

South Ireland (N = 89)
L21 = 74.2%
U106 = 3.4%
U152 = 1.1%
P312xL21, U152 = 7.9%

West Ireland (N = 67)
L21 = 73.1%
U106 = 4.5%
U152 = 1.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 7.5%

I didn't use any of the Myres data listed on Busby's spreadsheet. The sample sizes were smaller. Myres has P312xL21, U152 at 22.7% in Ireland Southwest, but with a sample size of just 22. That seems an odd result, given Busby's figures with bigger sample sizes.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 30, 2013, 08:28:53 AM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

Bear in mind that there has been a stream of immigrants flowing into England in every century that you can think of. Probably a large % of these newer immigrants entered where the channel was narrowest, i.e. Kent, London, Essex & Suffolk which is exactly the area P312* appears to be elevated.

When you look at the surnames of places like Kent and Suffolk since as recently as the 1500s they still have a lot of names like "Dutch", "Spain", "German", and other non-English names that have since become anglicised. The Kentish ports were full of merchants/sailors, many of whom were of foreign origin and ended up settling in England. And then London of course was re-populated by the Normans after 1066 and has seen a steady influx of immigrants ever since.

In other words it can be argued that if any haplogroup is highest in the southeast corner, it says more about the most recent immigrants rather than the older ones.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 30, 2013, 08:34:52 AM
England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%

England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%

Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%

East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%

England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

Thanks. What exactly is the definition of Central England and were there figures for Wales?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 30, 2013, 09:02:07 AM
England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%

England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%

Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%

East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%

England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

Thanks. What exactly is the definition of Central England and were there figures for Wales?

I'm going to guess the Midlands, maybe.  And why yes, I can post the results for Scotland and Wales.  Please note, that if the majority of P312*, which I would suspect it is, not every drop, but the majority, then the invasion/migration pattern will be more muddled.  As there are at least four varieties of DF27 found in the isles and could represent that many different waves.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: GoldenHind on March 30, 2013, 02:38:06 PM
I'm not sure we'll be able to say much about a paragroup like P312*. I wouldn't assume that all of it is DF27. It could be a mix of things with different affiliations and histories.


I agree. While recent testing indicates that somewhere around 80% of P312* (XL21,U152) is DF27+, this is undoubtedly skewed by the fact that virtually 100% of P312* in Iberia is DF27. So the percentage of  P312* which is DF27 in the British Isles is somewhat lower.

Busby's P312* would also include a smaller portion of DF19, which appears to be confined to northern Europe.

As for the P312** (XL21,U152,DF27,DF19,L238), the numbers have grown considerably in the past few months from a handful to 31. A close study suggests this is a heterogenous group, and probably consists of two or three smaller subclades with different distributions, although overwhelmingly northern.

So it might be fair to assume that nearly all P312* in Iberia is DF27, but that certainly wouldn't be accurate for P312* in Britain.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on March 30, 2013, 07:26:25 PM
Here are the Busby data for Scotland and Wales.

Scotland

Northeast Scotland (N = 67)

L21 = 52.2%
U106 = 19.4%
U152 = 4.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 6.0%

Northwest Scotland (N = 80)

L21 = 48.8%
U106 = 6.3%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 8%

West Scotland (N = 21)

L21 = 66.7%
U106 = 9.5%
U152 = 4.8%
P312xL21, U152 = 0%

Wales

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

I think when you look at the Busby data for the British Isles, you see a predominantly L21+ zone running from SW England, at about 38% L21+, through Wales, at about 50% L21+, up into northwest England, at about 40% L21+, and Scotland, at about 50-60% L21+. As one moves east into and through England (Angle Land), he begins to see L21 fade (but never below about 13% at its ebb in East England).

In England, U106 seems to run a fairly consistent rate of 20-25%. U152 and P312xL21,U152 pick up in the east, and I suspect some of the slack left by the decrease in L21 is also taken up by I1, although that doesn't show up in Busby. The pretty obvious conclusion, despite relatively recent continental input into SE England, is that these data reflect the Germanic heritage of the English, especially in the east and southeast, versus the predominantly Celtic heritage further west and north, in southwest England, Wales, northwest England, and Scotland.




Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Degredado on March 30, 2013, 11:25:15 PM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

You have noticed the same thing I did.  U106 is very stable, it has roughly the same percentage in all four areas.  U152 is the same, except in the southeast.  However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

I'm surprised at how stable U106 is, throughout all regions. I would expect a considerably higher presence in the east/southeast regions. Judging by that data, one could even be misled to think P312*/DF27 was the dominant subclade among the angles and saxons.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on March 31, 2013, 07:32:53 AM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

You have noticed the same thing I did.  U106 is very stable, it has roughly the same percentage in all four areas.  U152 is the same, except in the southeast.  However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

I'm surprised at how stable U106 is, throughout all regions. I would expect a considerably higher presence in the east/southeast regions. Judging by that data, one could even be misled to think P312*/DF27 was the dominant subclade among the angles and saxons.


U106 is noticeably higher in the south and east of England than it is in the north and west. When one crosses the border into Wales and again into Scotland, it drops like a rock. In Ireland, it dwindles even further.

The odd U106 high point in Busby's NE Scotland sample probably reflects the settlement of Northumbrians (Angles) there by King David I in the 12th century.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on March 31, 2013, 08:35:07 AM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

You have noticed the same thing I did.  U106 is very stable, it has roughly the same percentage in all four areas.  U152 is the same, except in the southeast.  However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

I'm surprised at how stable U106 is, throughout all regions. I would expect a considerably higher presence in the east/southeast regions. Judging by that data, one could even be misled to think P312*/DF27 was the dominant subclade among the angles and saxons.


U106 is noticeably higher in the south and east of England than it is in the north and west. When one crosses the border into Wales and again into Scotland, it drops like a rock. In Ireland, it dwindles even further.

The odd U106 high point in Busby's NE Scotland sample probably reflects the settlement of Northumbrians (Angles) there by King David I in the 12th century.

Also note that U152 is highest in southeast England.  I think Degredado brings up a good point.  Either the Anglo-Saxon invasions left a much stronger linguistic and cultural impact then a genetic one, or some subclades of U152 and DF27 were brought into Britain with the Anglo-Saxons.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 31, 2013, 09:16:42 AM

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

Thanks rms2

Is the difference in U106/U152 ratio between north and south due to the small sample size or is this a genuine difference? Is there any other data to verify this?

2 things that might have made a difference bwteen north and south are the normans overrunning the top of Wales but striking alliances with inidigenous princes in the south and, I think, perhaps the greater effect would be an influx of english in the 17 & 1800s seeking employment in the coal mines and steel works around Cardiff/Swansea. Did Busby filter these out (is it possible even?)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on March 31, 2013, 09:34:47 AM
Just to point out something that always gets overlooked (or perhaps people don't understand its significance?) is that the Haplogroup % breakdown by region is only one way of looking at things but can skew things if looked at just on its own.

If you look at the approx % results above we have:-

   South East L21 % = 15
   Wales L21 (av) % = 50

but when you take into consideration the absolute populations of the two areas which are approx:-

   South East = 20 to 30,000,000
   Wales = 3,000,000

the L21 population of each area can be projected to be:-

   South East = 3,000,000 to 4,500,000
   Wales = 1,500,000

i.e. the % figure implies there are more L21s in Wales than in the South East, but in real life it is the complete opposite and there are twice as many L21s in the South East than in Wales.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on March 31, 2013, 02:10:07 PM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

You have noticed the same thing I did.  U106 is very stable, it has roughly the same percentage in all four areas.  U152 is the same, except in the southeast.  However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

I'm surprised at how stable U106 is, throughout all regions. I would expect a considerably higher presence in the east/southeast regions. Judging by that data, one could even be misled to think P312*/DF27 was the dominant subclade among the angles and saxons.


U106 is noticeably higher in the south and east of England than it is in the north and west. When one crosses the border into Wales and again into Scotland, it drops like a rock. In Ireland, it dwindles even further.

The odd U106 high point in Busby's NE Scotland sample probably reflects the settlement of Northumbrians (Angles) there by King David I in the 12th century.

Also note that U152 is highest in southeast England.  I think Degredado brings up a good point.  Either the Anglo-Saxon invasions left a much stronger linguistic and cultural impact then a genetic one, or some subclades of U152 and DF27 were brought into Britain with the Anglo-Saxons.

I don't know about DF27, because we don't know how much of that P312xL21,U152 in SE England is DF27+, but I tend to think some of that U152 came with the Anglo-Saxons. Some of it may have already been there as a result of the arrival of the Belgae within living memory of Caesar's excursions into Britain 55 and 54 BC. That may account for some of the P312xL21,U152, as well.

It seems to me the Anglo-Saxons made a very significant genetic impact, if one attributes to them most if not all of the U106 in England, and probably the I1 there, as well.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on March 31, 2013, 02:13:25 PM
Just to point out something that always gets overlooked (or perhaps people don't understand its significance?) is that the Haplogroup % breakdown by region is only one way of looking at things but can skew things if looked at just on its own.

If you look at the approx % results above we have:-

   South East L21 % = 15
   Wales L21 (av) % = 50

but when you take into consideration the absolute populations of the two areas which are approx:-

   South East = 20 to 30,000,000
   Wales = 3,000,000

the L21 population of each area can be projected to be:-

   South East = 3,000,000 to 4,500,000
   Wales = 1,500,000

i.e. the % figure implies there are more L21s in Wales than in the South East, but in real life it is the complete opposite and there are twice as many L21s in the South East than in Wales.

While that is true, proportions tell an important story of population history, more important than shear numbers, in my view.

No doubt the USA has more L21 than anywhere else, in terms of numbers.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 01, 2013, 04:02:07 AM
No doubt the USA has more L21 than anywhere else, in terms of numbers.

Out of love for trivia I wonder what the figures really are? On the one hand the US has 5 times the population of the UK, but on the other, it has much greater proportions of hispanic, african, asian and (strangely enough!) native american.

I would guess there may be more L21s in the US than the UK, but it can't be by that much can it?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 01, 2013, 04:40:45 AM
While that is true, proportions tell an important story of population history, more important than shear numbers, in my view.

Based on what hard evidence?

My gist is that there can be two main scenarios that could have given us the current East England I bias.

1) the oft repeated Anglo-Saxon eradication of the Britains from the East and taking their places, followed by gradual migration of the remaining Britains in the west back towards London plus newcomers like norman, huguenots, etc. In other words L21s were virtually wiped out from the East in the Dark Ages and ones that are found there nowadays, either came from west or from the continent more recently.

2) the almost never mentioned theory that the Anglo-Saxons didn't come anywhere near wiping out the Britains from the east, just killing the leaders etc and enslaving the rest to grow their crops (a la roman slavery/expansion model) while they rampaged around the rest of the country. In other words L21s have maintained their place in the East and ones found there nowadays could be either original eastern england stock or newcomers from the west/continent.

Although the current eastern bias of I does suggest it came in large numbers with the Danes/Angles/Saxons there isn't a similar convincing bias of L21s or U106s. The perception that L21s are most frequently found in the west is misleading and in actuality they are all over the place, they have quite simply been joined by a lot of Is in the population-heavy east skewing HG percentages in the process.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 01, 2013, 06:26:25 AM
I would guess there may be more L21s in the US than the UK, but it can't be by that much can it?

Ah, according to wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_American) the % of Americans with origins described in 2000 as British/Irish was:-

  English 8.7%
  Irish 10.8%
  Scottish 1.7%
  Welsh 0.6%

so about 20% of 300 million = 60 million so almost the same as the UK and the Republic of Irelands populations combined. When you allow for French/Dutch/German American L21s it might well tip the balance in the US's favour but it is going to be in the same ballpark.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Dubhthach on April 01, 2013, 07:23:49 AM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.

Of course with regards to L21 we know that one of major subclades of L21 was first discovered in an American of "Hispanic" origin. This specifically been Z253. Given that L21 is present in modern Spain and Portugal it's hardly surprising that it should also show up in the former colonial empires of both countries.

As for Census, i could be wrong but I do think the biggest single "origin" group that was listed was "American", lots of people don't associate there origin specifically to one single ethnic group.

-Paul
(DF41+)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 01, 2013, 10:02:18 AM
While that is true, proportions tell an important story of population history, more important than shear numbers, in my view.

Based on what hard evidence?

My gist is that there can be two main scenarios that could have given us the current East England I bias.

1) the oft repeated Anglo-Saxon eradication of the Britains from the East and taking their places, followed by gradual migration of the remaining Britains in the west back towards London plus newcomers like norman, huguenots, etc. In other words L21s were virtually wiped out from the East in the Dark Ages and ones that are found there nowadays, either came from west or from the continent more recently.

2) the almost never mentioned theory that the Anglo-Saxons didn't come anywhere near wiping out the Britains from the east, just killing the leaders etc and enslaving the rest to grow their crops (a la roman slavery/expansion model) while they rampaged around the rest of the country. In other words L21s have maintained their place in the East and ones found there nowadays could be either original eastern england stock or newcomers from the west/continent.

Although the current eastern bias of I does suggest it came in large numbers with the Danes/Angles/Saxons there isn't a similar convincing bias of L21s or U106s. The perception that L21s are most frequently found in the west is misleading and in actuality they are all over the place, they have quite simply been joined by a lot of Is in the population-heavy east skewing HG percentages in the process.

To put this in perspective, there is a soon to be released paper by Kylosov and Conroy accounting for M222 as having migrated from Britain to Ireland, and linking this clade with the Fir Domnann in Ireland and the Domnonii and Damnonii in England.  Many of the M222 people in England have English surnames.  So I think you would have to examine the clades of the L21 people in England and then examine their personal genealogy to determine if they could be anglicized Celts or more recent immigrants.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 01, 2013, 10:13:05 AM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.

Of course with regards to L21 we know that one of major subclades of L21 was first discovered in an American of "Hispanic" origin. This specifically been Z253. Given that L21 is present in modern Spain and Portugal it's hardly surprising that it should also show up in the former colonial empires of both countries.

As for Census, i could be wrong but I do think the biggest single "origin" group that was listed was "American", lots of people don't associate there origin specifically to one single ethnic group.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I know I put American on the census records.  You are very limited on what you can choose for background, and I am mixed isles and german, it is easier and I feel more accurate to list American.  After around 300 hundred years of most of my ancestors living here, I consider myself American.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 01, 2013, 02:17:56 PM
No doubt the USA has more L21 than anywhere else, in terms of numbers.

Out of love for trivia I wonder what the figures really are? On the one hand the US has 5 times the population of the UK, but on the other, it has much greater proportions of hispanic, african, asian and (strangely enough!) native american.

I would guess there may be more L21s in the US than the UK, but it can't be by that much can it?

I think there are far more L21s here than in the UK and Ireland in terms of sheer numbers. I don't know what the exact figures are, but I believe the Irish-American diaspora is bigger than the entire population of Ireland, and there are many y-dna descendants of Scots, Welsh, and English here.

I don't think sheer numbers give you that much of the story. Relative haplogroup frequencies are more informative.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 02, 2013, 04:09:18 AM
I don't think sheer numbers give you that much of the story. Relative haplogroup frequencies are more informative.

If you think about it men have migrated out of Africa into various corners of the world over time. Many haplogroups have formed, many of which can be found near the origin. As you look at the far flung corners you tend to find only a few Haplogroups are present. If you compare the relative frequencies of these HGs they are likely to appear to be higher in the corners than they are near the origin, which will have high HG diversity.

On a smaller scale the peopling of Europe will be similarly skewed, i.e., there will be highest Hg diversity closest to our African origin than in the farthest corners, Ireland, Iceland, etc. Germany will have been peopled by many different HGs arriving at many diffferent times whereas somewhere less accessible like Britain and Ireland will have seen fewer successful waves of immigration (although doubtless many drowned trying!).

Even looking at Britain/Ireland there is likely to be a difference. Stone/Bronze/Iron age immigrants would have found the journey over the channel risky so it follows that most of the successful crossings would have been in the SE where the channel is narrowest and you can see across on a clear day. Over the centuries/millenia the population would spread out from the SE to claim land throughout the Isles. After the sudden arrival of Danes/Angles/Saxons and then the Normans, again mostly in the SE, another change occurred. Almost all of the population was involved in farming but the process of industrialisation picked up pace which saw the rise of market towns/cities. The peasant population slowly moved from the country to towns and London became the gravitational centre of the country. In effect this would have meant the relative recent arrivals in the SE (Danes, Angles, etc) didn't have time to spread out throughout the Isles and remained in the SE where they are still found to this very day.

The new arrivals were an addition to the existing inhabitants in the SE not a replacement..



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: samIsaack on April 02, 2013, 05:50:36 AM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.
Of course with regards to L21 we know that one of major subclades of L21 was first discovered in an American of "Hispanic" origin. This specifically been Z253. Given that L21 is present in modern Spain and Portugal it's hardly surprising that it should also show up in the former colonial empires of both countries.

As for Census, i could be wrong but I do think the biggest single "origin" group that was listed was "American", lots of people don't associate there origin specifically to one single ethnic group.

-Paul
(DF41+)

That my friend is the answer to your question. A good deal of the people I've spoken to don't realize that Spain is a country in Europe!

Sadly, albeit funny, this map is how a disturbing number of Americans view Europe!

http://tinyurl.com/d7hoe66


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 02, 2013, 06:27:41 AM
England Northwest -- 47 samples
L21 = 40.4%
U106 = 21.3%
U152 = 6.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 10.6%

England Southwest -- 48 samples
L21 = 37.5%
U106 = 25.0%
U152 = 8.3%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 6.3%

Central England -- 165 samples
L21 = 16.4%
U106 = 18.2%
U152 = 9.7%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 15.2%

East England -- 172 samples
L21 = 12.8%
U106 = 25.6%
U152 = 8.1%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 17.4%

England Southeast -- 52 samples
L21 = 15.4%
U106 = 26.9%
U152 = 15.4%
P312 (non L21/ non U152) = 21.2%

Thanks. What exactly is the definition of Central England and were there figures for Wales?

I would be wary of relying too much on the Busby data.

Looking at the supp data for Busby, some of the sampling is poor and geographically  incorrect - the regions used are quite vague for the purposes of this discussion.

For example, the sample location for SE England is Gravesend in Kent which may not be that representative of the whole of the SE. Central England was sampled at Ashbourne, Southwell, Lutterworth and Bourne. East England was Peterborough, Fakenham and North Walsham. SW England was sampled at Exeter, Devon.

Busby put Leeds in to its NW England sample which is actually wrong as Cumbria and Lancashire are accurate locations for NW England.

The problems I see with Busby are that the sampling is good in Eastern England and inadequate elsewhere.

Northern England is not that well sampled. Cornwall is not sampled at all and the West Midlands of England are not well sampled. Wales is also poorly sampled. The sample of 9 for South Wales is from Haverfordwest which has had a strong English influence for centuries. The North Wales samples were Abergele and Anglesey so much of Wales is not sampled in this study and the locations that are sampled are not necessarily representative of the native Welsh.





Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 02, 2013, 07:00:00 AM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.

Of course with regards to L21 we know that one of major subclades of L21 was first discovered in an American of "Hispanic" origin. This specifically been Z253. Given that L21 is present in modern Spain and Portugal it's hardly surprising that it should also show up in the former colonial empires of both countries.

As for Census, i could be wrong but I do think the biggest single "origin" group that was listed was "American", lots of people don't associate there origin specifically to one single ethnic group.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I know I put American on the census records.  You are very limited on what you can choose for background, and I am mixed isles and german, it is easier and I feel more accurate to list American.  After around 300 hundred years of most of my ancestors living here, I consider myself American.

According to wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestry_of_the_people_of_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestry_of_the_people_of_the_United_States) 42 million Americans described themselves as having German ancestry, this was the largest group at the 2000 census.

20 million said they were "American" and I suspect many of these are folks who are long settled in the US, descending in part from the early English settlers of the 1600/1700s.





Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 02, 2013, 07:15:14 AM
So in the east and southeast of England, DF27 is actually prevalent over L21 (or it can be assumed so, anyway). Interesting

However, L21 and P312* seem to have a relationship.  Where one is higher, the other is lower and vice versa.  It makes me wonder if that is a result of a pre-Anglo-Saxon interaction.

Bear in mind that there has been a stream of immigrants flowing into England in every century that you can think of. Probably a large % of these newer immigrants entered where the channel was narrowest, i.e. Kent, London, Essex & Suffolk which is exactly the area P312* appears to be elevated.

When you look at the surnames of places like Kent and Suffolk since as recently as the 1500s they still have a lot of names like "Dutch", "Spain", "German", and other non-English names that have since become anglicised. The Kentish ports were full of merchants/sailors, many of whom were of foreign origin and ended up settling in England. And then London of course was re-populated by the Normans after 1066 and has seen a steady influx of immigrants ever since.

In other words it can be argued that if any haplogroup is highest in the southeast corner, it says more about the most recent immigrants rather than the older ones.


I think you make a good point here. People of Isles ancestry often refer to the Celts, Saxons, Normans and Vikings but we tend to forget about more recent immigrants, particularly to London and the South East since the Medieval period.

Romany gypsies have been established in England for 500 years and we have also had Huguenots and Sephardic Jews since the 1700s as well as more recent Jewish immigrants to London in the 19th century. You are right about Kent/Essex/Suffolk by the way which have had close links with Belgium and Holland for a long time, so we shouldn't just assume that everyone is simply a Celt, Saxon or Norman.





Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Dubhthach on April 02, 2013, 07:39:01 AM
With regard to recent immigration to England/UK. Well there are at least 6 million people in the UK who have at least one Irish grandparent, thus entitled to Irish citzenship.

If you factor in immigration since the 19th century the figure for British citizens with some Irish ancestry jumps to about 14 million!


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 02, 2013, 02:40:34 PM
I agree there are problems with Busby et al's sampling, which we discussed when that report first came out. As mentioned, in England, the places where U106 is likely to be most frequent were sampled more extensively than the places where L21 is likely to prevail. Thus you get an inflated view of U106 in England, I think, but only better sampling will tell whether I am right or wrong.

Still, Busby's nearly all we've got, and its results do seem to reflect what we know from history.

Certainly relatively recent immigration has had an impact, but has it been extensive enough to sway the haplogroup profile more than a couple of percent one way or the other?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 02, 2013, 04:07:07 PM
I agree there are problems with Busby et al's sampling, which we discussed when that report first came out. As mentioned, in England, the places where U106 is likely to be most frequent were sampled more extensively than the places where L21 is likely to prevail. Thus you get an inflated view of U106 in England, I think, but only better sampling will tell whether I am right or wrong.

Still, Busby's nearly all we've got, and its results do seem to reflect what we know from history.

Certainly relatively recent immigration has had an impact, but has it been extensive enough to sway the haplogroup profile more than a couple of percent one way or the other?

I have recently read that many current historians are starting to question the number of Germanics that arrived in Britain during the Anglo-Saxon invasion.  Many are suggesting that the numbers may have only been 10,000 to 20,000 instead of the previous estimates of 100,000 to 200,000.  Even if it is the higher of the two estimates, how many people were living in Britain when the invasions happened, and is the idea of driving out or killing that many people realistic.  Also, it has been suggested by many historians that Mercia was originally a kingdom that though ruled by an Angle elite was very evenly mixed as far as Britions and Germanics as attested by the lack of Anglo-Saxon style burials well into a period when they should have been the norm.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 03, 2013, 04:58:38 AM
With regard to recent immigration to England/UK. Well there are at least 6 million people in the UK who have at least one Irish grandparent, thus entitled to Irish citzenship.

If you factor in immigration since the 19th century the figure for British citizens with some Irish ancestry jumps to about 14 million!

Very true and we should probably factor this is when we consider the DNA of modern English people with Irish ancestry.

The main destinations for Irish immigrants to Britain were Liverpool, Glasgow, Manchester and London but their descendants are likely spread around England now as are the Welsh and Scottish who have moved to England in modern times.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 03, 2013, 05:10:25 AM
I agree there are problems with Busby et al's sampling, which we discussed when that report first came out. As mentioned, in England, the places where U106 is likely to be most frequent were sampled more extensively than the places where L21 is likely to prevail. Thus you get an inflated view of U106 in England, I think, but only better sampling will tell whether I am right or wrong.

Still, Busby's nearly all we've got, and its results do seem to reflect what we know from history.

Certainly relatively recent immigration has had an impact, but has it been extensive enough to sway the haplogroup profile more than a couple of percent one way or the other?

I agree that despite its sampling flaws the Busby data is still useful. The People of British Isles project has done some comprehensive rural sampling in every county of England but they have yet to release any useful Y-DNA data - only a prelim report and an autosomal map.

I am not sure about the impact of immigration within last few hundred years, it is probably only a swing of a few percent but I remain open minded.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: chris1 on April 03, 2013, 06:08:52 AM
With regard to recent immigration to England/UK. Well there are at least 6 million people in the UK who have at least one Irish grandparent, thus entitled to Irish citzenship.

If you factor in immigration since the 19th century the figure for British citizens with some Irish ancestry jumps to about 14 million!

Very true and we should probably factor this is when we consider the DNA of modern English people with Irish ancestry.

The main destinations for Irish immigrants to Britain were Liverpool, Glasgow, Manchester and London but their descendants are likely spread around England now as are the Welsh and Scottish who have moved to England in modern times.


Yes, an example I know well is Middlesbrough, once a Victorian 'Infant Hercules' on the north east coast of England. It was little more than a farm in 1830 but by 1871, with the boom in industry, the population was 40,000. It was said to be second to Liverpool for the numbers of Irish immigrants. In 1871 3,200 inhabitants were Irish born, 1,531 Welsh, 1,368 Scots, 1,169 West Midlanders, 600 from overseas. East Anglians and Cornishmen migrated there too. (Figures from 'Northern Roots' by David Simpson, 2005). The population of Middlesbrough today is 138,400.

Article by a Teessider on his roots here: http://www.communigate.co.uk/ne/teesspeak/page23.phtml


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 03, 2013, 11:02:55 AM
So, returning to my original question, the U106/L21 ratio is irrelevant as they are both widespread.

Do people think the following gross oversimplification is about the sum of current understanding of U106/L21/R1b^/I?

R1b spread thoughout mainland Europe as the iceage receded. About 4-5000 yrs ago the L21 subgroup evolved in the centre near the Rhine/Swiss/French/German border amongst R1b* folks and the U106 subgroup evolved in north Poland/Germany/Holland amongst R1b*s, R1as and Is. The L21s spread north up the Rhine and mixed with U106s towards the mouth of the Rhine (Hollandish).

Traders, travellers and refugees from both north and south Europe progressively settled in Britain and established isolated communities throughout the Isles. Early settlers came from throughout Europe (a la Amesbury Archer) and were probably R1b*s. As time went by the population in mainland Europe increased and saw increased numbers of people moving to Britain. Judging by pottery finds Britain was mostly settled by people from the mouth of the Rhine (ie U106s, L21s & R1b*s) whereas Ireland was also settled by Iberians. Roman campaigns just before 0AD saw an influx of tribes from south of the Rhine estuary.

End Result = by the time of the Roman invasion there was a spread of R1b*s, U106s and L21s all over Britain.

Dark Ages brought influx of U106s, R1b*s, R1as and Is from the north Coast of Europe which mainly settled east England (whether they completely wiped out the previous inhabitants of East England not known) and didn't move inland much, leaving a large splodge of Is up the east coast.

Norman age saw influx of mixture of Is, R1b*s, U106s, L21s as did subsequent immigrations of hugeunots, merchants., etc, but mainly to the south east.

Leaving current messy picture of R1b*s, L21s, U106s everywhere, Is up the east coast and people needing to find SNPs below U106, etc., which provide more geographically specific info than the higher level ones..

N.B. by R1b* I mean R1b excluding U106 and L21, not real R1b*s..


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 03, 2013, 11:38:23 AM
I have very little time right now, but I disagree with some of the things you wrote.

First, I do not think the U106/L21 ratio is irrelevant at all. There is definitely a pattern in their relative distributions, with L21 prevailing in the north and west and U106 in the south and east.

Second, I do not think "R1b" spread throughout mainland Europe as the ice receded. I think R1b entered Europe as R-M269 or possibly R-L23 much more recently than that, perhaps during the Neolithic Period or even the Bronze Age.

I have more to say, but I'm out of time for now.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Mitchell-since-1893 on April 03, 2013, 12:53:32 PM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.
  You might be on to something.  Many hispanics in the US originated in Mexico.  I found this on wikipedia, which quotes the American Society of Human Genetics
Quote
According to a paper presented by the American Society of Human Genetics Mexicans were found to be 58.96% European, 36.05% Asian (Amerindian), and 5.03% African. Sonora shows the highest European contribution (70.63%) and Guerrero the lowest (51.98%). In Guerrero one also observes the highest Asian (Amerindian) contribution (37.17%). African contribution ranges from 2.8% in Sonora to 11.13% in Veracruz.[30] Sixty percent of the Mexican population was classed as mestizo (Amerindian-Spanish), 30% as mainly Amerindian ancestry and 10% as white.[31]



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 03, 2013, 01:40:08 PM
Ethiopianson,

Quote
End Result = by the time of the Roman invasion there was a spread of R1b*s, U106s and L21s all over Britain.

I know you are speculating but until we get some ancient DNA tested from the pre-Roman inhabitants of Britain then we can't know what the haplogroup frequencies were in AD43. As I said earlier, modern DNA may be very useful to us but in the case of Busby we are lacking data for large parts of Britain.

Quote
Dark Ages brought influx of U106s, R1b*s, R1as and Is from the north Coast of Europe which mainly settled east England (whether they completely wiped out the previous inhabitants of East England not known) and didn't move inland much, leaving a large splodge of Is up the east coast.

Actually, if we look at the place name evidence then the Anglo-Saxons settled much further west than that. The kingdom of Wessex stretched as far as Devon and Anglo-Saxon Mercia encroached on the Welsh border at Offa's Dyke. We see Anglo-Saxon or Danish place names all over England as recorded in the Domesday Book 1086, even as far as Eastern Cornwall.

From a linguistic and place name viewpoint the Anglo-Saxons and Danes had completely swamped the whole of England by 1000AD. To what extent the native Britons survived this, we need more data, but obviously it could vary region by region, county by county - something we don't have data for yet!





Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 03, 2013, 03:00:19 PM
The Anglo-Saxons did eventually settle all over what is now England, but it took them a considerable amount of time to do that, and probably only after a considerable amount of assimilation of the native population. The 5th century Anglo-Saxons in the core A-S foothold regions in the south and east were probably a more directly continental population than the "Anglo-Saxons" who later spread to the west and north. I think you see this reflected in the relative proportions of U106 and L21 in the south and east versus the north and west.

While it is true that U106 seems to be spread everywhere in England, it does reach its maximums in the south and east. Again, Busby failed to sample purely northwestern and southwestern locations that are likely to be lower in U106. One also has to look at the frequency of L21 in the various sample locations in England. Even with Busby's obvious limitations, its "England Northwest" and "England Southwest" locations were still overwhelmingly L21+: 40% and about 38% respectively. Nowhere in Britain that we know of does U106 achieve that kind of preponderance, and even those numbers are weak compared with the frequencies of L21 in the "Celtic Fringe" countries.

U106 drops like a rock in Wales and Scotland and dwindles to negligible status in Ireland. I think that is an indication that U106 was either not present at all in the Isles prior to arrival of the Anglo-Saxons (my position) or that it had only a vestigial presence before then.

In the south and east of England, where U106, U152, and P312xL21,U152 are strongest, L21 reaches its ebb. I believe if you look at papers by Capelli and Rootsi (if I recall correctly), I1 (old I1a) reaches its English maximums in the south and east, as well, precisely where U106 is strongest. Since I1 is also commonest in the old homelands of the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, this is telling.

So, the pattern, I think, is readily apparent: U106 et al radiating out from the south and east of England where the Anglo-Saxons and, later, the Vikings were strongest, and declining as one moves north and west; and L21 strongest where the old Celts held sway, declining as one moves south and east. This pattern reflects the historical reality of the immediate post Roman Period, the advent of the Anglo-Saxons, and through the medieval Viking settlement period.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: ArmandoR1b on April 03, 2013, 05:36:06 PM
I always find this american division of "Hispanic" from other Europeans as strange. Here in Europe someone from Spain is just as European as someone from Sweden.

I'm assuming the concept in America's is due to possibility of "native" admixture into Central/South American populations.

Of course with regards to L21 we know that one of major subclades of L21 was first discovered in an American of "Hispanic" origin. This specifically been Z253. Given that L21 is present in modern Spain and Portugal it's hardly surprising that it should also show up in the former colonial empires of both countries.

As for Census, i could be wrong but I do think the biggest single "origin" group that was listed was "American", lots of people don't associate there origin specifically to one single ethnic group.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I am not sure if you realize this, but Mexico is in North America and not in Central America or South America and a majority of Hispanics in the U.S. are originally from Mexico.

But yes, many people don't understand that Mexicans are mostly mestizos, a mix of Spanish and Amerindian, and that Spaniards are our European relatives without the native admixture.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 04, 2013, 03:11:27 AM
if we look at the place name evidence then the Anglo-Saxons settled much further west than that. The kingdom of Wessex stretched as far as Devon and Anglo-Saxon Mercia encroached on the Welsh border at Offa's Dyke. We see Anglo-Saxon or Danish place names all over England as recorded in the Domesday Book 1086, even as far as Eastern Cornwall.

Bear in mind that the Anglo-Saxon-Danish "invasion" wasn't really a one off event; it occurred in spits and spats over several hundred years. Although there must have been large battles somewhen, most of this time could have been filled with gradual expansion and assimilation, i.e. making alliances with locals via intermarriage, etc.

If largescale settlement took place on the east coast, control of the rest of the country could have been gained via an anglo-saxon elite leading merged forces of Angles-Saxons and native Britains (e.g. the Mercians). Once control was gained names were imposed on some settlements (quite likely by the angle-saxon tax inspector!) and only a minimum number of the allied forces (shire-reeves & reeves?) would be needed to maintain a presence in each conquered area. If any trouble flared up the anglo-saxon elite could mobilise their forces and deal with it.

Just because a village in the west fell under anglo-saxon control doesn't mean that it was filled with blood thirsty Angles and bawdy Saxons. Why would they want to spread dung on fields and pick turnips when they could get the locals to do it?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 04, 2013, 03:32:49 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Central_Europe_5th_Century.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Central_Europe_5th_Century.jpg)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 04, 2013, 03:39:29 AM
With regard to recent immigration to England/UK. Well there are at least 6 million people in the UK who have at least one Irish grandparent, thus entitled to Irish citzenship.

If you factor in immigration since the 19th century the figure for British citizens with some Irish ancestry jumps to about 14 million!

Very true and we should probably factor this is when we consider the DNA of modern English people with Irish ancestry.

The main destinations for Irish immigrants to Britain were Liverpool, Glasgow, Manchester and London but their descendants are likely spread around England now as are the Welsh and Scottish who have moved to England in modern times.


Yes, an example I know well is Middlesbrough, once a Victorian 'Infant Hercules' on the north east coast of England. It was little more than a farm in 1830 but by 1871, with the boom in industry, the population was 40,000. It was said to be second to Liverpool for the numbers of Irish immigrants. In 1871 3,200 inhabitants were Irish born, 1,531 Welsh, 1,368 Scots, 1,169 West Midlanders, 600 from overseas. East Anglians and Cornishmen migrated there too. (Figures from 'Northern Roots' by David Simpson, 2005). The population of Middlesbrough today is 138,400.

Article by a Teessider on his roots here: http://www.communigate.co.uk/ne/teesspeak/page23.phtml


Interesting, I didn't know about the Irish in Middlesbrough. So, in 1871 roughly 6,000 of the town's 40,000 inhabitants were recent Celtic arrivals. I suppose their descendants are spread all over today.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 04, 2013, 03:45:11 AM
The Anglo-Saxons did eventually settle all over what is now England, but it took them a considerable amount of time to do that, and probably only after a considerable amount of assimilation of the native population. The 5th century Anglo-Saxons in the core A-S foothold regions in the south and east were probably a more directly continental population than the "Anglo-Saxons" who later spread to the west and north. I think you see this reflected in the relative proportions of U106 and L21 in the south and east versus the north and west.

I think your assessment here is probably true, it's just I'd like more data to confirm it. Particularly for Western England which was poorly sampled by Busby et al 2011.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 04, 2013, 04:26:10 AM
if we look at the place name evidence then the Anglo-Saxons settled much further west than that. The kingdom of Wessex stretched as far as Devon and Anglo-Saxon Mercia encroached on the Welsh border at Offa's Dyke. We see Anglo-Saxon or Danish place names all over England as recorded in the Domesday Book 1086, even as far as Eastern Cornwall.

Bear in mind that the Anglo-Saxon-Danish "invasion" wasn't really a one off event; it occurred in spits and spats over several hundred years. Although there must have been large battles somewhen, most of this time could have been filled with gradual expansion and assimilation, i.e. making alliances with locals via intermarriage, etc.

If largescale settlement took place on the east coast, control of the rest of the country could have been gained via an anglo-saxon elite leading merged forces of Angles-Saxons and native Britains (e.g. the Mercians). Once control was gained names were imposed on some settlements

True, the Anglo-Saxon period lasted from the 5th century to 1066AD so we must consider the varying degrees of Native Briton survival in each part of England during this time. The story could have been different depending on whether we are in Wessex, Merica or Northumbria. For instance, I recall that the midlands area of Leicestershire/ Southern Derbyshire was lightly settled by the Romano-Britons so the Angles that pushed into this area did so without much resistance.

We should also consider the impact of the Danes 400 years after the first Anglo-Saxons arrived. The Danelaw was mostly restricted to the north of England so patterns of Native Briton assimilation might vary here compared to Wessex.

I do agree that Western England is likely to have seen a higher survival of L21/Ancient British but then maybe the frequencies for Lancashire are different to that of Devon or Somerset? It's important to consider the precise history of each county/region.













Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 04, 2013, 09:10:46 AM
if we look at the place name evidence then the Anglo-Saxons settled much further west than that. The kingdom of Wessex stretched as far as Devon and Anglo-Saxon Mercia encroached on the Welsh border at Offa's Dyke. We see Anglo-Saxon or Danish place names all over England as recorded in the Domesday Book 1086, even as far as Eastern Cornwall.

Bear in mind that the Anglo-Saxon-Danish "invasion" wasn't really a one off event; it occurred in spits and spats over several hundred years. Although there must have been large battles somewhen, most of this time could have been filled with gradual expansion and assimilation, i.e. making alliances with locals via intermarriage, etc.

If largescale settlement took place on the east coast, control of the rest of the country could have been gained via an anglo-saxon elite leading merged forces of Angles-Saxons and native Britains (e.g. the Mercians). Once control was gained names were imposed on some settlements

True, the Anglo-Saxon period lasted from the 5th century to 1066AD so we must consider the varying degrees of Native Briton survival in each part of England during this time. The story could have been different depending on whether we are in Wessex, Merica or Northumbria. For instance, I recall that the midlands area of Leicestershire/ Southern Derbyshire was lightly settled by the Romano-Britons so the Angles that pushed into this area did so without much resistance.

We should also consider the impact of the Danes 400 years after the first Anglo-Saxons arrived. The Danelaw was mostly restricted to the north of England so patterns of Native Briton assimilation might vary here compared to Wessex.

I do agree that Western England is likely to have seen a higher survival of L21/Ancient British but then maybe the frequencies for Lancashire are different to that of Devon or Somerset? It's important to consider the precise history of each county/region.













I know that Mercia was indeed a mixed kingdom.  www.historyfiles.co.uk is a very good website.  It has quite a few maps that show the many different kingdoms set up in Britain from just after Roman occupation until well after the Anglo-Saxon invasions.  Evidently, there were a number of incoming Germans that though, they weren't christians, were exposed to Christianity on the continent and in the case Hwicce possibly left the religious establishment intact.

"603
 The first meeting takes place between the Roman Church in the form of St Augustine of Canterbury, and the British/Celtic Church (the descendant of the former British Church of the Roman period). It is arranged when Æthelbert of the Cantware uses the Hwicce as intermediaries, as they possess a church organisation which seems to have survived intact from prior to the Saxon takeover of the region (and probably a ruling elite, although this is not mentioned and no records survive of the names of any rulers from this period). The meeting occurs at a place Bede names at St Augustine's Oak, on the border between the Hwicce territory and that of the West Seaxe (somewhere on the eastern slopes of the Cotswolds, perhaps near Wychwood in Oxfordshire, which means the 'Hwiccas' wood'). The meeting goes favourably for Augustine.

A second meeting is quickly arranged, although perhaps not in the same year. This takes place at Abberley in Worcestershire, probably close to the border between the Hwicce and Pengwern. It is attended by seven bishops of the Celtic Church, along with many learned monks, mainly from Bangor-is-Coed (in Pengwern). The Britons are not impressed with Augustine's imperious manner and the meeting ends in disappointment for the Roman envoy, with no agreements of cooperation or unity being reached between the two churches."
Courtesy of www.historyfiles.co.uk
 


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 05, 2013, 09:58:18 AM
U106 drops like a rock in Wales and Scotland and dwindles to negligible status in Ireland. I think that is an indication that U106 was either not present at all in the Isles prior to arrival of the Anglo-Saxons (my position) or that it had only a vestigial presence before then.

Have people looked at the U106 distribution on smeagle's site recently?

http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/all-snp-maps/ (http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/all-snp-maps/)

It seems to me U106 only drops where there are a lot of mountains, e.g. mid/west Wales and north Scotland. Otherwise it is pretty much everywhere, even Ireland.

When you consider that out of the UK's 75 million inhabitants about 25 million of them live in just the small south east corner the number of U106s showing in the SE is not that high really.

With regard to mainland Europe, it could easily be argued that U106's centre was SW Germany, i.e. same as L21, as opposed to the Holland/N.Germany/Poland theory.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 05, 2013, 10:10:20 AM
Here is a map showing the current population density per km2:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bi-density.png

n.b. London has a density of going on 5000 per km2


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 05, 2013, 11:32:28 AM
if we look at the place name evidence then the Anglo-Saxons settled much further west than that. The kingdom of Wessex stretched as far as Devon and Anglo-Saxon Mercia encroached on the Welsh border at Offa's Dyke. We see Anglo-Saxon or Danish place names all over England as recorded in the Domesday Book 1086, even as far as Eastern Cornwall.

Bear in mind that the Anglo-Saxon-Danish "invasion" wasn't really a one off event; it occurred in spits and spats over several hundred years. Although there must have been large battles somewhen, most of this time could have been filled with gradual expansion and assimilation, i.e. making alliances with locals via intermarriage, etc.

If largescale settlement took place on the east coast, control of the rest of the country could have been gained via an anglo-saxon elite leading merged forces of Angles-Saxons and native Britains (e.g. the Mercians). Once control was gained names were imposed on some settlements (quite likely by the angle-saxon tax inspector!) and only a minimum number of the allied forces (shire-reeves & reeves?) would be needed to maintain a presence in each conquered area. If any trouble flared up the anglo-saxon elite could mobilise their forces and deal with it.

Just because a village in the west fell under anglo-saxon control doesn't mean that it was filled with blood thirsty Angles and bawdy Saxons. Why would they want to spread dung on fields and pick turnips when they could get the locals to do it?

That's basically right, and I think ethnic mingling was pretty extensive. The Germanic institution of the gefolge (posse comitatus), the warband of young warriors organized around the gift-giving chief, was pretty flexible. Its membership was based on merit, not ethnicity. Just look at how Germanic warriors were assimilated into Hunnic warbands on the Continent in the 4th and 5th centuries for examples. It seems likely to me British warriors took service in the warbands of Anglo-Saxon chiefs. The warband or gefolge was an old Indo-European tradition that the native British Celts knew and understood very well.

Some scholars believe the 6th century "Anglo-Saxon" King of Wessex, Cerdic, was a Briton, the son of the Romano-British chief Elasius. Some of his descendants certainly had British names: Cealwin, Cedda, and Caedwalla.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 05, 2013, 03:29:38 PM
U106 drops like a rock in Wales and Scotland and dwindles to negligible status in Ireland. I think that is an indication that U106 was either not present at all in the Isles prior to arrival of the Anglo-Saxons (my position) or that it had only a vestigial presence before then.

Have people looked at the U106 distribution on smeagle's site recently?

http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/all-snp-maps/ (http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/all-snp-maps/)

It seems to me U106 only drops where there are a lot of mountains, e.g. mid/west Wales and north Scotland. Otherwise it is pretty much everywhere, even Ireland.

When you consider that out of the UK's 75 million inhabitants about 25 million of them live in just the small south east corner the number of U106s showing in the SE is not that high really.

With regard to mainland Europe, it could easily be argued that U106's centre was SW Germany, i.e. same as L21, as opposed to the Holland/N.Germany/Poland theory.


Is this the map you mean? http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/maps/198/ (http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/maps/198/)

Bear in mind that the U106 so far collected and displayed on this map is not a representative sample of Britain or any NW European nation. By that I mean that Ireland is more tested than anywhere else in Europe so we would expect some U106 there. But it could be that there is a lot of U106 in Northern Germany/Denmark that hasn't been tested yet. I understand the most tested area of Germany is the western side along the Rhine.

With respect to U106 in Ireland, many of the surnames on the map are actually English so it is likely that U106 arrived in Ireland with English and Lowland Scots plantation settlers in 16/17th centuries.

I think the low incidence of U106 in Wales and Highland Scotland indicates to me that this is an Anglo-Saxon marker.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 05, 2013, 09:34:13 PM


Is this the map you mean? http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/maps/198/ (http://www.semargl.me/en/dna/ydna/haplotypes/maps/198/)

Bear in mind that the U106 so far collected and displayed on this map is not a representative sample of Britain or any NW European nation. By that I mean that Ireland is more tested than anywhere else in Europe so we would expect some U106 there. But it could be that there is a lot of U106 in Northern Germany/Denmark that hasn't been tested yet. I understand the most tested area of Germany is the western side along the Rhine.

With respect to U106 in Ireland, many of the surnames on the map are actually English so it is likely that U106 arrived in Ireland with English and Lowland Scots plantation settlers in 16/17th centuries.

I think the low incidence of U106 in Wales and Highland Scotland indicates to me that this is an Anglo-Saxon marker.



I agree.

The level of U106 in Ireland and Wales is very low. It is low everywhere in Scotland except at Busby's Northeast Scotland sample location, where the level is oddly high (about 19%, versus L21's 52%). It just so happens that King David I settled a bunch of Northumbrians (Angles) there in the 12th century, so that odd result makes perfect sense and only reinforces the connection between U106 and the Anglo-Saxons.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 07, 2013, 03:29:47 AM

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

Thanks rms2

Is the difference in U106/U152 ratio between north and south due to the small sample size or is this a genuine difference? Is there any other data to verify this?

2 things that might have made a difference bwteen north and south are the normans overrunning the top of Wales but striking alliances with inidigenous princes in the south and, I think, perhaps the greater effect would be an influx of english in the 17 & 1800s seeking employment in the coal mines and steel works around Cardiff/Swansea. Did Busby filter these out (is it possible even?)


Busby's South Wales sample of 9 was taken from Haverfordwest in SW Wales. Southern Pembrokeshire was for a long time referred to as "Little England Beyond Wales" because Henry I planted a colony of Flemish/English there in the 12th century to subjugate the native Welsh. This area has been English speaking for centuries.

The North Wales samples were from Anglesey and Abergele. Given the history of the North Wales coast we might expect a small trace of Viking input from the 10th century settlement on Anglesey and some further English input following the Edwardian conquest 1282. And then again, more English have settled along the North Wales coast in modern times.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 07, 2013, 07:54:13 AM

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

Thanks rms2

Is the difference in U106/U152 ratio between north and south due to the small sample size or is this a genuine difference? Is there any other data to verify this?

2 things that might have made a difference bwteen north and south are the normans overrunning the top of Wales but striking alliances with inidigenous princes in the south and, I think, perhaps the greater effect would be an influx of english in the 17 & 1800s seeking employment in the coal mines and steel works around Cardiff/Swansea. Did Busby filter these out (is it possible even?)


Busby's South Wales sample of 9 was taken from Haverfordwest in SW Wales. Southern Pembrokeshire was for a long time referred to as "Little England Beyond Wales" because Henry I planted a colony of Flemish/English there in the 12th century to subjugate the native Welsh. This area has been English speaking for centuries.

The North Wales samples were from Anglesey and Abergele. Given the history of the North Wales coast we might expect a small trace of Viking input from the 10th century settlement on Anglesey and some further English input following the Edwardian conquest 1282. And then again, more English have settled along the North Wales coast in modern times.

Yes, and I really think a sample of only 9 is just too small and should probably be disregarded or at least taken with a huge grain of salt.

Abergele was an old Roman trading town and has an exceptionally high level of E1b1b to show for it. The Roman presence there may also account for the relatively elevated level of U152 in the North Wales sample. The P312xL21,U152 is also exceptionally high there when compared with its frequency in other western locations. Were the Romans some kind of contributing factor in that regard, as well?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 08, 2013, 06:22:39 AM

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

Thanks rms2

Is the difference in U106/U152 ratio between north and south due to the small sample size or is this a genuine difference? Is there any other data to verify this?

2 things that might have made a difference bwteen north and south are the normans overrunning the top of Wales but striking alliances with inidigenous princes in the south and, I think, perhaps the greater effect would be an influx of english in the 17 & 1800s seeking employment in the coal mines and steel works around Cardiff/Swansea. Did Busby filter these out (is it possible even?)


Busby's South Wales sample of 9 was taken from Haverfordwest in SW Wales. Southern Pembrokeshire was for a long time referred to as "Little England Beyond Wales" because Henry I planted a colony of Flemish/English there in the 12th century to subjugate the native Welsh. This area has been English speaking for centuries.

The North Wales samples were from Anglesey and Abergele. Given the history of the North Wales coast we might expect a small trace of Viking input from the 10th century settlement on Anglesey and some further English input following the Edwardian conquest 1282. And then again, more English have settled along the North Wales coast in modern times.

Yes, and I really think a sample of only 9 is just too small and should probably be disregarded or at least taken with a huge grain of salt.

Abergele was an old Roman trading town and has an exceptionally high level of E1b1b to show for it. The Roman presence there may also account for the relatively elevated level of U152 in the North Wales sample. The P312xL21,U152 is also exceptionally high there when compared with its frequency in other western locations. Were the Romans some kind of contributing factor in that regard, as well?

I believe Capelli et al 2003 sampled 59 people in Haverfordwest but in those days it was just plain old R1b so may not be much use to us now.

I don't think we can rule out a Roman input in North Wales but I would expect it to be less than in England. North Wales was one of the least Romanised areas in Southern Britain if we consider Roman towns, villas and farmsteads.

Basically, we need much better DNA sampling for North Wales. Many of the towns along the coast such as Rhyl, Rhuddlan, Abergele, Conwy and Llandudno have been subject to English influence in medieval and in modern times.

Away from the coast in areas such as Bala, Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llanberis the towns and villages are more 'Welsh.'


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 08, 2013, 06:50:51 AM
Away from the coast in areas such as Bala, Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llanberis the towns and villages are more 'Welsh.'

Do you realise what the populations of those places are? To say they are deserted is an exaggeration, but it is not far off..


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 08, 2013, 07:03:20 AM
With respect to U106 in Ireland, many of the surnames on the map are actually English so it is likely that U106 arrived in Ireland with English and Lowland Scots plantation settlers in 16/17th centuries.

Absolutely, but it does not in any way mean that U106 wasn't also amongst the Bronze/Iron Age immigrants. If U106 was present in Central Europe at the time of the earlier migrations it would also have been part of them.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 08, 2013, 10:42:34 AM

North Wales (N = 120)

L21 = 45%
U106 = 9.2%
U152 = 7.5%
P312xL21, U152 = 17.5%

South Wales (N = 9) *Note very small sample size.

L21 = 55.6%
U106 = 22.2%
U152 = 0%
P312xL21, U152 = 11.1%

Thanks rms2

Is the difference in U106/U152 ratio between north and south due to the small sample size or is this a genuine difference? Is there any other data to verify this?

2 things that might have made a difference bwteen north and south are the normans overrunning the top of Wales but striking alliances with inidigenous princes in the south and, I think, perhaps the greater effect would be an influx of english in the 17 & 1800s seeking employment in the coal mines and steel works around Cardiff/Swansea. Did Busby filter these out (is it possible even?)


Busby's South Wales sample of 9 was taken from Haverfordwest in SW Wales. Southern Pembrokeshire was for a long time referred to as "Little England Beyond Wales" because Henry I planted a colony of Flemish/English there in the 12th century to subjugate the native Welsh. This area has been English speaking for centuries.

The North Wales samples were from Anglesey and Abergele. Given the history of the North Wales coast we might expect a small trace of Viking input from the 10th century settlement on Anglesey and some further English input following the Edwardian conquest 1282. And then again, more English have settled along the North Wales coast in modern times.

Yes, and I really think a sample of only 9 is just too small and should probably be disregarded or at least taken with a huge grain of salt.

Abergele was an old Roman trading town and has an exceptionally high level of E1b1b to show for it. The Roman presence there may also account for the relatively elevated level of U152 in the North Wales sample. The P312xL21,U152 is also exceptionally high there when compared with its frequency in other western locations. Were the Romans some kind of contributing factor in that regard, as well?

I believe Capelli et al 2003 sampled 59 people in Haverfordwest but in those days it was just plain old R1b so may not be much use to us now.

I don't think we can rule out a Roman input in North Wales but I would expect it to be less than in England. North Wales was one of the least Romanised areas in Southern Britain if we consider Roman towns, villas and farmsteads.

Basically, we need much better DNA sampling for North Wales. Many of the towns along the coast such as Rhyl, Rhuddlan, Abergele, Conwy and Llandudno have been subject to English influence in medieval and in modern times.

Away from the coast in areas such as Bala, Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llanberis the towns and villages are more 'Welsh.'

I agree we need better sampling from North Wales and from South Wales, too.

The thing about Abergele, and the reason I made the comments I did, is that there was a Roman trading town there, and fairly recent testing came up with the off-the-charts-for-Britain frequency of about 39% E1b1b there. I think E1b1b runs something like 3% and less for the rest of the Isles.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 08, 2013, 10:50:44 AM
With respect to U106 in Ireland, many of the surnames on the map are actually English so it is likely that U106 arrived in Ireland with English and Lowland Scots plantation settlers in 16/17th centuries.

Absolutely, but it does not in any way mean that U106 wasn't also amongst the Bronze/Iron Age immigrants. If U106 was present in Central Europe at the time of the earlier migrations it would also have been part of them.


While that is possible, it doesn't seem likely to me. I could be wrong, and this is just my opinion, but I don't believe U106 made it to Britain until the Iron Age, perhaps first with the Belgae in the 1st century B.C. The big influx of U106 came with the Anglo-Saxons and, subsequently, with the Vikings.

That is why U106 is so relatively infrequent in Ireland: it didn't get there until comparatively recent times, mainly with the English.

Last I heard, U106 has its greatest variance in Eastern Europe, particularly in Poland. If that has changed, I haven't heard about it. Its greatest modern frequency is in the Netherlands. I think U106 was involved in the expansion of the Germanic tribes after about 200 BC and was in Eastern Europe until then. Had it been right across the Channel from Britain all the time, its frequency in the Isles would be higher.

A number of scholars believed and still believe that the Beaker Folk were the original speakers of Celtic languages and perhaps even of Italo-Celtic. Recently, y-dna was obtained from a couple of ancient male Beaker Folk corpses at Kromsdorf, Germany, dated at about 2600 B.C. Both corpses were R1bxU106 (read that as "R1b NOT U106"). Not far from Kromsdorf, at Eulau, corpses from the Corded Ware culture dated to about the same time were found to be R1a. Corded Ware tends to be associated with Germans and Balto-Slavs, while Beaker is associated with Celts. Is that right? I'm not sure, but it is what it is.

Of course, two corpses are not much of a sample, but it is interesting that two Bronze Age Beaker corpses, in the heart of what is now U106-rich Germany, were U106-. Perhaps U106 was part of the Corded Ware culture and still farther east at that time. That's what I think, anyway.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 08, 2013, 03:18:42 PM
Of course, two corpses are not much of a sample, but it is interesting that two Bronze Age Beaker corpses, in the heart of what is now U106-rich Germany, were U106-.

U106 didn't suddenly materialize in a tribe of its own one day. It would have cropped up as a mutant in amongst plain old vanilla R1b*s. As the mutant's offspring multiplied they would have been part of a mixed R1b* & U106 group (+ probably others).

The fact that two beaker corpses have been found to be R1b* means absolutely nothing in relation to U106.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 08, 2013, 03:51:03 PM
Away from the coast in areas such as Bala, Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llanberis the towns and villages are more 'Welsh.'

Do you realise what the populations of those places are? To say they are deserted is an exaggeration, but it is not far off..

As it happens I know North Wales very well.

Blaenau has a population of around 5,000 which is bigger than both Llangefni and Llanidloes, two towns that were sampled by Capelli in 2003. Llanberis and Bala are around the 2,000 mark which is similar to Llanidloes.

Once you get away from the populated North Wales coast much of the interior is made up of small towns, isolated farmsteads and hamlets. That's just the nature of rural, mountainous country and always has been the case for North Wales.






Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 08, 2013, 03:56:06 PM
With respect to U106 in Ireland, many of the surnames on the map are actually English so it is likely that U106 arrived in Ireland with English and Lowland Scots plantation settlers in 16/17th centuries.

Absolutely, but it does not in any way mean that U106 wasn't also amongst the Bronze/Iron Age immigrants. If U106 was present in Central Europe at the time of the earlier migrations it would also have been part of them.


Anyway, getting back on topic. What exactly is the evidence that U106 was present in Britain or Ireland in the Bronze/Iron Age?

If it did arrive in the Isles in the Bronze Age why is so rare in Wales, Ireland and Highland Scotland today?





Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 08, 2013, 07:54:04 PM
Of course, two corpses are not much of a sample, but it is interesting that two Bronze Age Beaker corpses, in the heart of what is now U106-rich Germany, were U106-.

U106 didn't suddenly materialize in a tribe of its own one day. It would have cropped up as a mutant in amongst plain old vanilla R1b*s. As the mutant's offspring multiplied they would have been part of a mixed R1b* & U106 group (+ probably others).

The fact that two beaker corpses have been found to be R1b* means absolutely nothing in relation to U106.



Yeah, U106 arose in an L11 population, but you said it could could have been among the Bronze Age immigrants into Ireland. I don't think that is likely, and I said why.

Just to recap: There isn't much U106 in the Celtic Fringe countries today. The Beaker Folk are thought to have been the earliest speakers of Celtic. The Bronze Age Beaker y-dna that we have - which is, admittedly, not much - is R1bxU106 (NOT U106), and that is from central Germany, an area that today is supposedly loaded with U106. The oldest U106 is from eastern Europe, which may indicate that that is where U106 originated. Had U106 begun to arrive in the Isles as early as the Bronze Age, there should be more of it there now. Instead, it reaches its greatest frequencies in the very places where the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings held sway and drops like a rock in the old homelands of the Celts.

On the other hand, we have known historical events which easily account for what U106 is present in the Isles now. No need to recount those. They are well known.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: EthiopianSon on April 09, 2013, 05:11:23 AM
The Bronze Age Beaker y-dna that we have - which is, admittedly, not much - is R1bxU106 (NOT U106), and that is from central Germany, an area that today is supposedly loaded with U106.

It is also filled with many many other HGs including R1b*.

Had U106 begun to arrive in the Isles as early as the Bronze Age, there should be more of it there now.

Should it? So, using that logic, there should be more of the original wooly mammoth hunters there now too.

You are ignoring the fact that populations decline, even disappear completely, due to famines, disasters or war. It is quite feasible that the early Irish or British or anywhereelseish populations starved or were murdered by newer groups.

Perhaps the late bronze age inhabitants of certain areas were slaughtered by early Iron Age newcomers? Perhaps these early Iron age inhabitants were then slaughtered themselves by late Iron Age newcomers?

Have we much evidence of violence and hardships in prehistory?

Yes.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 09, 2013, 10:03:12 AM
Honestly, I think you are ignoring the elephant in the room, namely, the large influx of Anglo-Saxons during the immediate post-Roman Period from areas rich in U106, followed by a similar influx during the Viking Period, again from areas rich in U106.

The spotty appearance of U106 in the Celtic Fringe countries can also be accounted for by the historical advent mainly of the English but perhaps a bit earlier of the Vikings and the Normans. That is why U106 is most frequent where the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings prevailed in England (Angle Land).

We can agree to disagree, but I don't think there is much reason to believe U106 made it to the Isles before the Iron Age. I'm guessing the earliest U106 in Britain came with the Belgae in the 1st century B.C.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 09, 2013, 11:54:57 AM

The thing about Abergele, and the reason I made the comments I did, is that there was a Roman trading town there, and fairly recent testing came up with the off-the-charts-for-Britain frequency of about 39% E1b1b there. I think E1b1b runs something like 3% and less for the rest of the Isles.

I agree, the Eb1b1 in Abergele is interesting. Only more testing in Wales will show whether or not it is a one off anomaly. I suspect that it is. Hg E was found at 4% in Llangefni, 3% in Haverfordwest and if we look at the FTDNA Wales/Cymru project then Eb1b1 is very rare.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 09, 2013, 12:05:07 PM

You are ignoring the fact that populations decline, even disappear completely, due to famines, disasters or war. It is quite feasible that the early Irish or British or anywhereelseish populations starved or were murdered by newer groups.


Totally agree about the potential effect of famines and war on haplogroups but are you suggesting that such disasters only impacted on the Celtic fringe which is why U106 is low in those areas, but that England was not affected?

Because going by Busby's data (limited in itself) U106 runs at around 18-26% in England so is quite common.

Do you accept that the Anglo-Saxons brought the vast bulk of this U106 to Britain? I am trying to understand your exact position.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Peter M on April 10, 2013, 09:31:41 AM
Two questions if I may:

Yeah, U106 arose in an L11 population, but you said it could could have been among the Bronze Age immigrants into Ireland. I don't think that is likely, and I said why.

1. And P312 arose in that same population. But is there any clear indication that these two groups (U106 and P312) can be considered to have migrated separately and via different routes ever after, as is always silently assumed ? (if you look at a SNP map for both, then the distribution over Europe is not too different between the two.)

2. (unrelated) I think to have once heard in a documentary on the subject there are 9 migrations known from the continent to the British Isles (e.g. Anglo-Saxon, Viking, etc.). Is there a reliable resource on the web that describes what is know from "classic science" about these migrations ? (most people here seem to have studied the subject in depth, so it appears a reasonable question to ask; Google wouldn't give me a reliability score.)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 10, 2013, 11:18:57 AM
Two questions if I may:

Yeah, U106 arose in an L11 population, but you said it could could have been among the Bronze Age immigrants into Ireland. I don't think that is likely, and I said why.

1. And P312 arose in that same population. But is there any clear indication that these two groups (U106 and P312) can be considered to have migrated separately and via different routes ever after, as is always silently assumed ? (if you look at a SNP map for both, then the distribution over Europe is not too different between the two.)

2. (unrelated) I think to have once heard in a documentary on the subject there are 9 migrations known from the continent to the British Isles (e.g. Anglo-Saxon, Viking, etc.). Is there a reliable resource on the web that describes what is know from "classic science" about these migrations ? (most people here seem to have studied the subject in depth, so it appears a reasonable question to ask; Google wouldn't give me a reliability score.)


P312 arose in an L11 population but not necessarily in the same one as or one in close geographic proximity to the one in which U106 arose. Their distributions and centers of gravity became distinct somehow, and I believe the regions in which they achieve their greatest variance differ, as well. I don't think there is any assuming going on: P312 and U106 have distinct distributions, though there is some overlap.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: alan trowel hands. on April 10, 2013, 05:29:19 PM
I'm not sure we'll be able to say much about a paragroup like P312*. I wouldn't assume that all of it is DF27. It could be a mix of things with different affiliations and histories.


I agree. While recent testing indicates that somewhere around 80% of P312* (XL21,U152) is DF27+, this is undoubtedly skewed by the fact that virtually 100% of P312* in Iberia is DF27. So the percentage of  P312* which is DF27 in the British Isles is somewhat lower.

Busby's P312* would also include a smaller portion of DF19, which appears to be confined to northern Europe.

As for the P312** (XL21,U152,DF27,DF19,L238), the numbers have grown considerably in the past few months from a handful to 31. A close study suggests this is a heterogenous group, and probably consists of two or three smaller subclades with different distributions, although overwhelmingly northern.

So it might be fair to assume that nearly all P312* in Iberia is DF27, but that certainly wouldn't be accurate for P312* in Britain.

Interesting.  Do you have any statistics on this?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: alan trowel hands. on April 10, 2013, 05:56:48 PM
The absolutely crucial thing to work out when U106 would have first arrived in the isles in any sort of numbers is WHERE was it on the continent in 2000BC, 1000BC, 500BC etc?  Only coastal groups are going to migrate to prehistoric Britain.  So there is no point in discussing land locked central European cultures like Urnfield etc. Variance as far as I am aware sees U106 as quite low in variance in Scandinavia and Holland and much higher in the east.  That would reduce the chances of U106 in England prior to very late in prehistory at the earliest.

Another factor to take into account is that archaeology from the Neolithic period to the Roman invasion indicates that even southern and eastern England tended to be more connected with the area from Brittany to Holland and not much with the area further east.  There is evidence that in the Belgium U106 really drops at the Dutch-French boundary despite nearly 2000 years of being neighbours.  It should be noted that the likely earliest area of both Germanic and of U106 lay in the northern European Plain and there is very little evidence of movement from that area into Gaul before 200BC.  The area between Holland and Poland was a real backwater for a long time and it is not surprising that very few gene flow west came from that area. 

I think based on current evidence that the odds are that U106 was overwhelmingly spead into Britain and the continent west of the Rhine by Germanic peoples.  The Belgae had some Germanic tribes among them so it cannot be ruled out that a trickle of U106 people may have entered Britain with the Belgae and some more with the Germanic element among the Romans. However, even this does not take away the essential pattern that U106 falls away at the stronger Celtic survival areas in the isles and also at the Germanic-Romance divide on the continent and the link between U106 and Germanic seems very strong indeed. 

 


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: GoldenHind on April 10, 2013, 08:58:16 PM
I'm not sure we'll be able to say much about a paragroup like P312*. I wouldn't assume that all of it is DF27. It could be a mix of things with different affiliations and histories.


I agree. While recent testing indicates that somewhere around 80% of P312* (XL21,U152) is DF27+, this is undoubtedly skewed by the fact that virtually 100% of P312* in Iberia is DF27. So the percentage of  P312* which is DF27 in the British Isles is somewhat lower.

Busby's P312* would also include a smaller portion of DF19, which appears to be confined to northern Europe.

As for the P312** (XL21,U152,DF27,DF19,L238), the numbers have grown considerably in the past few months from a handful to 31. A close study suggests this is a heterogenous group, and probably consists of two or three smaller subclades with different distributions, although overwhelmingly northern.

So it might be fair to assume that nearly all P312* in Iberia is DF27, but that certainly wouldn't be accurate for P312* in Britain.

Interesting.  Do you have any statistics on this?

To which of my statements do you refer? The prevalence of DF27 among Iberian P312* (XU152,L21)? If so, I can tell you that all but one of the numerous P312* (XL21,U152) in the P312 & Subclades Project with Iberian origins who have tested for DF27 have got positive results. The sole exception (now P312**) says his ancestor was a Flemish merchant who settled in Spain in the 17th century.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: SEJJ on April 11, 2013, 08:06:07 AM
I'll post something i posted on another forum (it's visual, i didn't make the map but i made the pie charts). One thing i think is key is the fact that R1b-U106 is higher in Eastern and south-eastern England than in Norway and Denmark (generally), but it is lower than that in the Netherlands and Frisia (where it peaks at around 42% of all lineages). This to me indicates that as well as geneflow from Denmark and northern Germany, there was also geneflow from the Netherlands, this is also supported by place-name evidence, and linguistic evidence (Old English being an Ingvaeonic language and a brother of Frisian). Indeed, after watching a number of videos about Ostfriesland in particular, although their language is different, the manner of their speech is very similar to rural English speech even now.

Anyway:

(http://i628.photobucket.com/albums/uu7/Brodir93/EuropeBusby.jpg)

Also remember that POBI's results at the 2012 summer exhibition showed i think three major things about lowland Britain (covering much of what is now England).

1) They form a major cluster, due to shared ancestry and a lot of geneflow within this group.
2) The Germanic ancestry for this group overall seems to be in the 50-60% region, and is mostly shared in a region that encompasses the Flemish through to the Danish.*
3) The pre-Germanic ancestry in lowland Britain seems to be split almost evenly between Gaulish like DNA and Irish like DNA.**

*This is not taking into account regional variation within this cluster, which is visible in Y-DNA and also in autosomal DNA using admixture programs. I would say it varies somewhat between regions (although not by extreme amounts) although they cluster together because within the context of the British Isles, they are more similar to each other than to other groups included. It is also interesting because the North-Sea coastal region going from the Flemish through to the Danish are autosomally most similar to the English (or at least eastern English).

**This is also visible in the Y-DNA through the higher rates of P312* and U152, the majority of which is probably Celtic, although we cannot rule out a Germanic origin for some of it at least, as it (as well as L21) has a reasonable presence in Scandinavia, although it is likely more common there now than it was 1500 years ago.

I would also include this quote from Alex Woolf in  'Apartheid and Economics in Anglo-Saxon England' (about Ine's law code, but relevant to this entire red cluster potentially). It quite neatly explains how we find varying degrees of genetic heritage of Britons in England, but little linguistic or cultural heritage:

'The long term effects of Britons being valued at about half the wergeld of their English counterparts was that, in the normal course of things, large amounts of property would gradually pass from the British community to the English. If, for example, a hypothetical English and British noblement each owning five hides of land got into a series of disputes with one another and were dealt with fairly by the courts, sometimes giving judgement in favour of the one and sometimes of the other, then all compensations paid by the Briton to the Englishman would be twice the value of those paid to him by his opponent. The end result would be that the property and finally the land would pass to the Englishman.
By giving the Britons protection under the law and by preserving their basic civil rights - indeed, by giving them access to the courts, the Anglo-Saxons were able to reduce the risk of wholesale and persistent resistance which a policy of naked aggression would inevitably have aroused. The likelihood would be that in the short term the system would protect most individual Britons and that the erosion of their economic base would generally be so gradual as to be barely perceived on the basis of individual experience. It is interesting to note that Lex Salica, the Frankish law code drawn p in precisely those territories where the Frankish language, religion and cultural identity replaced Gallo-Roman, utilised a precisely similar mechanism of apartheid. In the long run individual British households would, one by one, become bankrupt and break down, with children being sold into slavery or sent to live with relatives as prospect-less hangers-on. The apartheid of the law codes would also doubtless be compounded by the partial patronage of redistributive chiefdoms. Whilst Britons might be gafolgeldas, it is unlikely that many of them were beneficiaries of royal largesse. In comparison to English districts, British areas would be regions of high production and low consumption, tribute and disproportionate legal costs flowing out and few gifts flowing in. The lack of opportunities for young British males to become retainers or chieftains would, perhaps, have encouraged them to leave for British controlled kingdoms or led to increasing poverty as inherited farms became sub-divided between co-heirs. In this long drawn out process of economic decline, many individual Britons may have found themselves drifting into Anglo-Saxon households, as slaves, hangers-on, brides and so forth, but they would have come into these communities as one among many. Their ability to impact on the cultural or linguistic identity of the community would have been minimal, and such households would have become ethnic sausage machines, recycling stray biological material in such a way that it would not carry its ethnicity with it into the next generation.'



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: SEJJ on April 11, 2013, 08:20:58 AM
Honestly, I think you are ignoring the elephant in the room, namely, the large influx of Anglo-Saxons during the immediate post-Roman Period from areas rich in U106, followed by a similar influx during the Viking Period, again from areas rich in U106.

The spotty appearance of U106 in the Celtic Fringe countries can also be accounted for by the historical advent mainly of the English but perhaps a bit earlier of the Vikings and the Normans. That is why U106 is most frequent where the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings prevailed in England (Angle Land).

We can agree to disagree, but I don't think there is much reason to believe U106 made it to the Isles before the Iron Age. I'm guessing the earliest U106 in Britain came with the Belgae in the 1st century B.C.

This is something that baffles me somewhat as well. Although i admire people investigating all avenues, it should be the argument that is hardest to disprove with current evidence that takes precedence, which is why i am confused about the stance (particular of the media) about these periods in history. People tend to forget that linguistically, the main comparable scenario is the settlement of North America by Europeans, now i might be laughed at today for arguing that modern North Americans are mostly descended from the American Natives.

I know it is not entirely comparable historically, the technology and forms of settlement were somewhat different, but we can at least see that this sort of thing does happen, quite regularly in fact. Even outside the human world, the grey Squirrel has now pushed the red Squirrel to the far reaches of the British Isles in just a couple of centuries, while i don't see much real evidence for pitched battles between grey Squirrels and red Squirrels. (Ok, a joke).

I think Y-DNA is very useful in this regard, because it doesn't necessarily correlate with autosomal ancestry completely, and seems to give a better picture of more recent history in some cases.



Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 11, 2013, 01:46:29 PM
Honestly, I think you are ignoring the elephant in the room, namely, the large influx of Anglo-Saxons during the immediate post-Roman Period from areas rich in U106, followed by a similar influx during the Viking Period, again from areas rich in U106.

The spotty appearance of U106 in the Celtic Fringe countries can also be accounted for by the historical advent mainly of the English but perhaps a bit earlier of the Vikings and the Normans. That is why U106 is most frequent where the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings prevailed in England (Angle Land).

We can agree to disagree, but I don't think there is much reason to believe U106 made it to the Isles before the Iron Age. I'm guessing the earliest U106 in Britain came with the Belgae in the 1st century B.C.

This is something that baffles me somewhat as well. Although i admire people investigating all avenues, it should be the argument that is hardest to disprove with current evidence that takes precedence, which is why i am confused about the stance (particular of the media) about these periods in history. People tend to forget that linguistically, the main comparable scenario is the settlement of North America by Europeans, now i might be laughed at today for arguing that modern North Americans are mostly descended from the American Natives.

I know it is not entirely comparable historically, the technology and forms of settlement were somewhat different, but we can at least see that this sort of thing does happen, quite regularly in fact. Even outside the human world, the grey Squirrel has now pushed the red Squirrel to the far reaches of the British Isles in just a couple of centuries, while i don't see much real evidence for pitched battles between grey Squirrels and red Squirrels. (Ok, a joke).

I think Y-DNA is very useful in this regard, because it doesn't necessarily correlate with autosomal ancestry completely, and seems to give a better picture of more recent history in some cases.



I really like the squirrel analogy.  I personally think you can never have too many pie charts or analogies.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 11, 2013, 03:33:31 PM
The absolutely crucial thing to work out when U106 would have first arrived in the isles in any sort of numbers is WHERE was it on the continent in 2000BC, 1000BC, 500BC etc?  Only coastal groups are going to migrate to prehistoric Britain.  So there is no point in discussing land locked central European cultures like Urnfield etc. Variance as far as I am aware sees U106 as quite low in variance in Scandinavia and Holland and much higher in the east.  That would reduce the chances of U106 in England prior to very late in prehistory at the earliest.

Thanks. As always you give a thorough account of the prehistory and archaeology.

I wonder if any posters could explain the difference between variance and diversity? And how is variance calculated?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 11, 2013, 08:39:48 PM
Honestly, I think you are ignoring the elephant in the room, namely, the large influx of Anglo-Saxons during the immediate post-Roman Period from areas rich in U106, followed by a similar influx during the Viking Period, again from areas rich in U106.

The spotty appearance of U106 in the Celtic Fringe countries can also be accounted for by the historical advent mainly of the English but perhaps a bit earlier of the Vikings and the Normans. That is why U106 is most frequent where the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings prevailed in England (Angle Land).

We can agree to disagree, but I don't think there is much reason to believe U106 made it to the Isles before the Iron Age. I'm guessing the earliest U106 in Britain came with the Belgae in the 1st century B.C.

This is something that baffles me somewhat as well. Although i admire people investigating all avenues, it should be the argument that is hardest to disprove with current evidence that takes precedence, which is why i am confused about the stance (particular of the media) about these periods in history. People tend to forget that linguistically, the main comparable scenario is the settlement of North America by Europeans, now i might be laughed at today for arguing that modern North Americans are mostly descended from the American Natives.

I know it is not entirely comparable historically, the technology and forms of settlement were somewhat different, but we can at least see that this sort of thing does happen, quite regularly in fact. Even outside the human world, the grey Squirrel has now pushed the red Squirrel to the far reaches of the British Isles in just a couple of centuries, while i don't see much real evidence for pitched battles between grey Squirrels and red Squirrels. (Ok, a joke).

I think Y-DNA is very useful in this regard, because it doesn't necessarily correlate with autosomal ancestry completely, and seems to give a better picture of more recent history in some cases.



I really like the squirrel analogy.  I personally think you can never have too many pie charts or analogies.

I like the squirrel analogy, too, especially since red squirrels (standing in for the Celts in this case) are better looking than gray squirrels. ;-)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Dubhthach on April 12, 2013, 07:24:23 AM

I like the squirrel analogy, too, especially since red squirrels (standing in for the Celts in this case) are better looking than gray squirrels. ;-)

American grey squirrels coming in here eating all our nuts, destroying our trees grrr ;-)

As an aside all the grey squirrels in Ireland are descended from 8-12 squirrels presented as a wedding gift at Castleforbes in Longford in 1911. They've proceed to expand to cover more then half the country, the Shannon has helped keep them out of most of the west.

Of course what's been noticed is that areas where Pine Martens exist that the Red Squirrel survives. Seems it's easier for Pine Martens to catch grey's then red's. This has been noticed in Britain as well where the Pine Marten is gradually expanding it's range.

-Paul
(DF41+)


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 13, 2013, 09:08:55 PM

I like the squirrel analogy, too, especially since red squirrels (standing in for the Celts in this case) are better looking than gray squirrels. ;-)

American grey squirrels coming in here eating all our nuts, destroying our trees grrr ;-)

As an aside all the grey squirrels in Ireland are descended from 8-12 squirrels presented as a wedding gift at Castleforbes in Longford in 1911. They've proceed to expand to cover more then half the country, the Shannon has helped keep them out of most of the west.

Of course what's been noticed is that areas where Pine Martens exist that the Red Squirrel survives. Seems it's easier for Pine Martens to catch grey's then red's. This has been noticed in Britain as well where the Pine Marten is gradually expanding it's range.

-Paul
(DF41+)

My wife hates squirrels, or at least the ones that inhabit the row of trees behind our back fence. They raid our fruit trees and our blackberry and blueberry bushes. They absolutely are not afraid of our little miniature Dachshund, Daisy.

I kind of like the squirrels.

There is a variety of solid black "gray" squirrel that one sees from time to time. They are more common at the northern end of their range, which seems odd, but I've seen them here in Virginia, too. I saw a bunch of them up in Ontario last time we were there.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: samIsaack on April 13, 2013, 10:50:18 PM

I like the squirrel analogy, too, especially since red squirrels (standing in for the Celts in this case) are better looking than gray squirrels. ;-)

American grey squirrels coming in here eating all our nuts, destroying our trees grrr ;-)

As an aside all the grey squirrels in Ireland are descended from 8-12 squirrels presented as a wedding gift at Castleforbes in Longford in 1911. They've proceed to expand to cover more then half the country, the Shannon has helped keep them out of most of the west.

Of course what's been noticed is that areas where Pine Martens exist that the Red Squirrel survives. Seems it's easier for Pine Martens to catch grey's then red's. This has been noticed in Britain as well where the Pine Marten is gradually expanding it's range.

-Paul
(DF41+)

My wife hates squirrels, or at least the ones that inhabit the row of trees behind our back fence. They raid our fruit trees and our blackberry and blueberry bushes. They absolutely are not afraid of our little miniature Dachshund, Daisy.

I kind of like the squirrels.

There is a variety of solid black "gray" squirrel that one sees from time to time. They are more common at the northern end of their range, which seems odd, but I've seen them here in Virginia, too. I saw a bunch of them up in Ontario last time we were there.

I've heard of these black squirrels, but I was thinking it was the Fox-Squirrel's that were occasionaly black? I guess it occurs in both.

My German-Shepherd has caught and eaten around ten, maybe more, in the past few months!


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: rms2 on April 14, 2013, 07:28:36 AM

I like the squirrel analogy, too, especially since red squirrels (standing in for the Celts in this case) are better looking than gray squirrels. ;-)

American grey squirrels coming in here eating all our nuts, destroying our trees grrr ;-)

As an aside all the grey squirrels in Ireland are descended from 8-12 squirrels presented as a wedding gift at Castleforbes in Longford in 1911. They've proceed to expand to cover more then half the country, the Shannon has helped keep them out of most of the west.

Of course what's been noticed is that areas where Pine Martens exist that the Red Squirrel survives. Seems it's easier for Pine Martens to catch grey's then red's. This has been noticed in Britain as well where the Pine Marten is gradually expanding it's range.

-Paul
(DF41+)

My wife hates squirrels, or at least the ones that inhabit the row of trees behind our back fence. They raid our fruit trees and our blackberry and blueberry bushes. They absolutely are not afraid of our little miniature Dachshund, Daisy.

I kind of like the squirrels.

There is a variety of solid black "gray" squirrel that one sees from time to time. They are more common at the northern end of their range, which seems odd, but I've seen them here in Virginia, too. I saw a bunch of them up in Ontario last time we were there.

I've heard of these black squirrels, but I was thinking it was the Fox-Squirrel's that were occasionaly black? I guess it occurs in both.

My German-Shepherd has caught and eaten around ten, maybe more, in the past few months!

Your Shepherd is a much better hunter than our little Mini-Dachshund! She chases them, but I don't think she really wants to catch them or would even know what to do if she did.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: alan trowel hands. on April 14, 2013, 05:42:47 PM
Another thing I would throw into the ring is that most of the intense cultural contact between Britain and the continent in the period 2000BC to the 400AD was with the area west of the Rhine.  There was extremely close contact between southern England and the channel opposite as far east as Belgium and southern Holland (the Hilversum culture etc) almost to a degree that extremely similar cultures were developed.  This connection being with the area to the west of the Rhine continued right through to the Belgic era.  I think there is evidence that U106 mainly crosses the Rhine with the Germanic languages when you look at Romance-Germanic border where it has crept over the Rhine in Belgium.  I think there is a very strong case that U106 is overwhelmngly Germanic in origin when found in the isles and west of the Rhine on the continent.  However, that said I am not sure that L21 was dominant in southern Britain and it may be best to look at the NE France, French speaking Belgium areas as a better hint at what pre-Roman SE England looked like in say 100BC.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: razyn on April 14, 2013, 07:27:25 PM
There is a variety of solid black "gray" squirrel that one sees from time to time. They are more common at the northern end of their range, which seems odd, but I've seen them here in Virginia, too. I saw a bunch of them up in Ontario last time we were there.

I've heard of these black squirrels, but I was thinking it was the Fox-Squirrel's that were occasionaly black?

The black squirrels in Northern VA, DC and its MD suburbs descend from a few brought by Canadian Boy Scouts to a Camporee or something, I believe about 80 years ago.  Details are known, but I don't know them.  There was a Smithsonian project to study them.  They are just a melanistic variety of gray squirrel.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 14, 2013, 08:13:35 PM
There is a variety of solid black "gray" squirrel that one sees from time to time. They are more common at the northern end of their range, which seems odd, but I've seen them here in Virginia, too. I saw a bunch of them up in Ontario last time we were there.

I've heard of these black squirrels, but I was thinking it was the Fox-Squirrel's that were occasionaly black?

The black squirrels in Northern VA, DC and its MD suburbs descend from a few brought by Canadian Boy Scouts to a Camporee or something, I believe about 80 years ago.  Details are known, but I don't know them.  There was a Smithsonian project to study them.  They are just a melanistic variety of gray squirrel.

They are edible as well.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: Webb on April 14, 2013, 08:19:45 PM
Another thing I would throw into the ring is that most of the intense cultural contact between Britain and the continent in the period 2000BC to the 400AD was with the area west of the Rhine.  There was extremely close contact between southern England and the channel opposite as far east as Belgium and southern Holland (the Hilversum culture etc) almost to a degree that extremely similar cultures were developed.  This connection being with the area to the west of the Rhine continued right through to the Belgic era.  I think there is evidence that U106 mainly crosses the Rhine with the Germanic languages when you look at Romance-Germanic border where it has crept over the Rhine in Belgium.  I think there is a very strong case that U106 is overwhelmngly Germanic in origin when found in the isles and west of the Rhine on the continent.  However, that said I am not sure that L21 was dominant in southern Britain and it may be best to look at the NE France, French speaking Belgium areas as a better hint at what pre-Roman SE England looked like in say 100BC.

There has been a long history, and I am sure pre-historic, as well, of tribes leaving the Rhine delta due to periodic flooding.  The Cimbrones and Tuetones fled the eastern side of the delta, traveled south east into Europe and then doubled back into Western Europe.  I wonder how many tribes might have fled this area and struck out for Britain?  It's quite possible this is how the Belgae ended up moving down into Belgium.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: SEJJ on April 14, 2013, 08:54:21 PM
Another thing I would throw into the ring is that most of the intense cultural contact between Britain and the continent in the period 2000BC to the 400AD was with the area west of the Rhine.  There was extremely close contact between southern England and the channel opposite as far east as Belgium and southern Holland (the Hilversum culture etc) almost to a degree that extremely similar cultures were developed.  This connection being with the area to the west of the Rhine continued right through to the Belgic era.  I think there is evidence that U106 mainly crosses the Rhine with the Germanic languages when you look at Romance-Germanic border where it has crept over the Rhine in Belgium.  I think there is a very strong case that U106 is overwhelmngly Germanic in origin when found in the isles and west of the Rhine on the continent.  However, that said I am not sure that L21 was dominant in southern Britain and it may be best to look at the NE France, French speaking Belgium areas as a better hint at what pre-Roman SE England looked like in say 100BC.

This is a good point, for example Normandy has known areas of significant Danish settlement, and perhaps sporadic Frankish settlement, yet only has around 8% or so R1b-U106 i think it was, this is why i have to agree here in that while i think there probably was U106 in Britain before any Germanic tribes arrived in force, it was probably only a few percent, i doubt more than 5%. I also agree with your other statement about L21 being lower - Despite the fact that R1b-U106 in south-west and north-west England is not much lower than in the far east and south-east, L21 is much higher in these regions. Although Germanic settlement was likely somewhat weaker in these regions, that eastern England has around 15% or less L21 would suggest to me that L21 was probably not more than 40% in this area, 50% at the absolute maximum - But given that L21 has probably increased in this area in the last few centuries at least, i would think it was more like 40% max (I think L21 in Normandy is somewhat similar to this amount? In Brittany it is 50%+ isn't it?) Especially given the high levels of both U152 and P312. Also POBI showed that in most of England the Celtic proportion was about 50/50 Irish-like and French-like, that to me clearly shows that the Celtic peoples of lowland Britain were somewhere between Gaulish and Brittonic peoples genetically.  Also the people of northern France today are more similar to people from the British Isles and some other areas of NW Europe than they are to some other areas in France, autosomally.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 15, 2013, 01:56:52 PM

Despite the fact that R1b-U106 in south-west and north-west England is not much lower than in the far east and south-east, L21 is much higher in these regions.

Bear in mind that the Busby sample for SW England was Exeter. Busby didn't sample Cornwall so it may be that U106 is lower in Cornwall than in Devon - quite possible given the history. Also, NW England wasn't sampled by Busby either because Leeds was mistakenly put in the NW region (geographic inaccuracy by the Busby researchers). Again I would expect Lancashire and Cumbria to have a greater Celtic survival but unfortunately the Busby data doesn't help us with this.

Quote
Also POBI showed that in most of England the Celtic proportion was about 50/50 Irish-like and French-like, that to me clearly shows that the Celtic peoples of lowland Britain were somewhere between Gaulish and Brittonic peoples genetically

I didn't see that 50/50 Celtic proportion as Irish and French when I looked at the POBI project? Where did you read that, was it based on Y-DNA?


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: SEJJ on April 15, 2013, 02:05:10 PM

Despite the fact that R1b-U106 in south-west and north-west England is not much lower than in the far east and south-east, L21 is much higher in these regions.

Bear in mind that the Busby sample for SW England was Exeter. Busby didn't sample Cornwall so it may be that U106 is lower in Cornwall than in Devon - quite possible given the history. Also, NW England wasn't sampled by Busby either because Leeds was mistakenly put in the NW region (geographic inaccuracy by the Busby researchers). Again I would expect Lancashire and Cumbria to have a greater Celtic survival but unfortunately the Busby data doesn't help us with this.

Quote
Also POBI showed that in most of England the Celtic proportion was about 50/50 Irish-like and French-like, that to me clearly shows that the Celtic peoples of lowland Britain were somewhere between Gaulish and Brittonic peoples genetically

I didn't see that 50/50 Celtic proportion as Irish and French when I looked at the POBI project? Where did you read that, was it based on Y-DNA?


Yes good points about Busby's data, i keep forgetting that. You are most likely correct there.

It was on the actual display they had at the summer exhibition, one colour was representing Ireland, another representing France. Of the Celtic proportion in much of England, it was split about 50/50 between the Irish-like and the French-like. There should be a couple of pictures of it somewhere, although i don't have them myself i might try to find them.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 15, 2013, 02:26:05 PM

Despite the fact that R1b-U106 in south-west and north-west England is not much lower than in the far east and south-east, L21 is much higher in these regions.

Bear in mind that the Busby sample for SW England was Exeter. Busby didn't sample Cornwall so it may be that U106 is lower in Cornwall than in Devon - quite possible given the history. Also, NW England wasn't sampled by Busby either because Leeds was mistakenly put in the NW region (geographic inaccuracy by the Busby researchers). Again I would expect Lancashire and Cumbria to have a greater Celtic survival but unfortunately the Busby data doesn't help us with this.

Quote
Also POBI showed that in most of England the Celtic proportion was about 50/50 Irish-like and French-like, that to me clearly shows that the Celtic peoples of lowland Britain were somewhere between Gaulish and Brittonic peoples genetically

I didn't see that 50/50 Celtic proportion as Irish and French when I looked at the POBI project? Where did you read that, was it based on Y-DNA?


Yes good points about Busby's data, i keep forgetting that. You are most likely correct there.

It was on the actual display they had at the summer exhibition, one colour was representing Ireland, another representing France. Of the Celtic proportion in much of England, it was split about 50/50 between the Irish-like and the French-like. There should be a couple of pictures of it somewhere, although i don't have them myself i might try to find them.

Thanks

I remember reading a comment somewhere that North Wales was genetically close to Ireland but that South Wales and Cornwall were more like France.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: SEJJ on April 15, 2013, 04:00:00 PM

Despite the fact that R1b-U106 in south-west and north-west England is not much lower than in the far east and south-east, L21 is much higher in these regions.

Bear in mind that the Busby sample for SW England was Exeter. Busby didn't sample Cornwall so it may be that U106 is lower in Cornwall than in Devon - quite possible given the history. Also, NW England wasn't sampled by Busby either because Leeds was mistakenly put in the NW region (geographic inaccuracy by the Busby researchers). Again I would expect Lancashire and Cumbria to have a greater Celtic survival but unfortunately the Busby data doesn't help us with this.

Quote
Also POBI showed that in most of England the Celtic proportion was about 50/50 Irish-like and French-like, that to me clearly shows that the Celtic peoples of lowland Britain were somewhere between Gaulish and Brittonic peoples genetically

I didn't see that 50/50 Celtic proportion as Irish and French when I looked at the POBI project? Where did you read that, was it based on Y-DNA?


Yes good points about Busby's data, i keep forgetting that. You are most likely correct there.

It was on the actual display they had at the summer exhibition, one colour was representing Ireland, another representing France. Of the Celtic proportion in much of England, it was split about 50/50 between the Irish-like and the French-like. There should be a couple of pictures of it somewhere, although i don't have them myself i might try to find them.

Thanks

I remember reading a comment somewhere that North Wales was genetically close to Ireland but that South Wales and Cornwall were more like France.

Yes actually the French-like DNA peaks in the Cornish if i remember correctly, according to POBI.


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: alan trowel hands. on April 15, 2013, 06:22:44 PM
Certainly from everything I know about the isles in the copper, bronze and iron ages I would think that in R1b terms (assuming it is correct that it does not date to before the beaker era in western Europe) southern England and SE England should look more like NE France (except the Flemish speaking area) and French speaking Belgium than the west and north of the isles.  I am not so sure that would so strongly stand out in autosomal DNA though because there was not such an east-west distinction in the isles in the early Neolithic or Mesolithic and the input of those two periods (perhaps varying in proportion by geography) probably give a common base to all isles folk that blunts differences to some degree. 


Title: Re: Pre & Post British Dark Age Haplogroup Ratio Difference?
Post by: avalon on April 16, 2013, 12:08:58 PM


Yes actually the French-like DNA peaks in the Cornish if i remember correctly, according to POBI.

Makes sense geographically. Cornwall is closer to Brittany (100 miles across the sea) than it is to Kent or East Anglia.

I have been reading Cunliffe's "Britain Begins" recently and he makes a big thing of the prehistoric links between Western Britain and the Atlantic coast of Europe (France, Iberia).