PDA

View Full Version : German Regional Y-DNA Distribution



Tomenable
12-06-2018, 06:32 PM
Based on FTDNA Germany Project:

Sample size is 2400 for all regions (including 255 with ancestry from former eastern Germany: not sure if this includes only self-identified ethnic Germans or also other groups in those provinces of Germany like Poles, Kashubians, Lithuanians, Jews, Sorbs, etc.):

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/e2a891ca-7f2b-4785-8dc4-72d904fcc609.png

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/19c705b0-785c-42c0-a24f-ec35d4eb2fe6.png

Centre: Mecklenburg, Vorpommern, West Brandenburg, Province Saxony, Kingdom Saxony, Thuringian States:

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/17fc6a3b-20ed-4568-8ace-6e7cfbb235d4.png

East: Pommern, East Prussia, West Prussia, Silesia, East Brandenburg Posen [sample size 255]:

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/6124f6f3-78d1-46bf-bc71-cd869bb5acec.png

At first glance it can be estimated:

NW - 55% Germanic, 13% Italo-Celtic, 10% Balto-Slavic, 22% other
South - 39% Germanic, 25% Italo-Celtic, 11% Balto-Slavic, 25% other
Centre - 39% Germanic, 24% Balto-Slavic, 16% Italo-Celtic, 21% other
East - 44% Balto-Slavic, 30% Germanic, 12% Italo-Celtic, 15% other

^^^ If we assume, that:

Balto-Slavic: R1a-Z280, R1a-M458, N, I2a
Germanic: R1b-U106, I1, R1a-Z284, I2b
Italo-Celtic: U152, DF27, L21, P312

Other: E, G, J, I2c, T, L, C, Q, R1b-L23, R1a-Z93

Many of the 255 samples from eastern regions are undoubtedly from East Prussia.

Some time ago I collected data about 84 Y-DNA samples with ancestry tracing back to East Prussia from various FTDNA Projects, and there were 19 haplogroup N samples among them (23%) and a lot of R1a as well - but most of East Prussian R1a was Z280, just like in Lithuania.

In my East Prussian sample only 18% of R1a was M458 and 82% was Z280 and other.

Dewsloth
12-06-2018, 07:59 PM
Before RMS strikes you down for using modern data :lol: do you really think this looks more Italo-Celtic than, say, Germanic or Other?

27550

Wing Genealogist
12-06-2018, 08:39 PM
is there a way to get a breakdown of U106 at all? I noted where you must be a member of the project in order to access Y-DNA results.

I would be interested in seeing a breakdown of Z381, Z18, U106 (xZ381 xZ18) and ideally a breakdown of Z381 into L48, L47, Z156 and negative for all these subclades.

Lupriac
12-06-2018, 08:49 PM
Curious as to why are E-M96 and J-M267, higher in the Central and Southern regions respectively, than others.

Also interesting to notice that the more you are closer to France/Netherlands/Belgium, the more you get high frequencies of U106.

GoldenHind
12-07-2018, 06:29 PM
Why is it that in these sort of maps U106 is always shown as a single block, while P312 is always divided into subclades?

Your assumption that all P312 is Italo-Celtic is nonsense. Not only are there are three P312 subclades that appear to be primarily Germanic, but there is no reason to assume there were no elements of P312 involved in the formation of the Germanic people.

Osiris
12-07-2018, 07:08 PM
Very interesting. My line came from Germany to America but in the mid 18th century so we're not sure which region other than a linguistic guess at Kingdom of Saxony. Can you see how L2 looks in your charts?

Tomenable
12-07-2018, 07:42 PM
Why is it that in these sort of maps U106 is always shown as a single block, while P312 is always divided into subclades?

Your assumption that all P312 is Italo-Celtic is nonsense. Not only are there are three P312 subclades that appear to be primarily Germanic, but there is no reason to assume there were no elements of P312 involved in the formation of the Germanic people.

I know about these 3 clades, but as you can see they are relatively minor in all regions of Germany (for example all 3 of them are no more than 2% of lineages in North-West Germany, according to the first chart). Calling U106 Germanic and P312 Italo-Celtic is a generalization, but it is just as likely that some U106 subclades were involved in the formation of primarily P312 Italo-Celtic peoples, as the other way around. Remember that one of the oldest U106 samples known to date is from Czech Republic (Unetice culture, sample I7196) which is much closer to Celtic Urheimat than to Germanic Urheimat. Another case of potentially Celtic U106 is from Roman era York, although those could just as well be some early Germanic migrants.

GoldenHind
12-07-2018, 10:07 PM
I know about these 3 clades, but as you can see they are relatively minor in all regions of Germany (for example all 3 of them are no more than 2% of lineages in North-West Germany, according to the first chart). Calling U106 Germanic and P312 Italo-Celtic is a generalization, but it is just as likely that some U106 subclades were involved in the formation of primarily P312 Italo-Celtic peoples, as the other way around. Remember that one of the oldest U106 samples known to date is from Czech Republic (Unetice culture, sample I7196) which is much closer to Celtic Urheimat than to Germanic Urheimat. Another case of potentially Celtic U106 is from Roman era York, although those could just as well be some early Germanic migrants.

While the the three P312 subclades in question may be relatively small in Germany, they are extremely rare to non-existant in traditionally Celtic countries, which hardly supports labeling them as Italo-Celtic. While they just aren't that common anywhere, with the possible exception of L238 in Scandinavia, they all appear to be concentrated in Germanic language countries.

My main point is that it is misleading to lump all of U106 together and then compare it to P312 subclades. It is a classic case of comparing apples to oranges. My guess is that if you break down U106 subclades the same way you did with P312, you would find some of them relatively rare in Germany as well

JonikW
12-07-2018, 11:12 PM
Curious as to why are E-M96 and J-M267, higher in the Central and Southern regions respectively, than others.

Also interesting to notice that the more you are closer to France/Netherlands/Belgium, the more you get high frequencies of U106.

And the further north, the more I1. Most informative.

Tomenable
12-15-2018, 08:48 PM
Kingdom of Prussia: ethnic and religious structure in the 1800s:

Georg Hassel has a lot of data about ethnic structure in his book from 1823:

Provinz (Grand Duchy) Posen: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA43

https://i.imgur.com/knr8Rgr.png

West Prussia, Georg Hassel: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA42

https://i.imgur.com/5hcNzeO.png

West Prussia, Karl Andree*: https://books.google.pl/books?id=xgUEAAAAYAAJ&pg=P212

https://i.imgur.com/zebF1QP.png

Pommern: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA31

https://i.imgur.com/jhXJxAk.png

Oppeln Silesia: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA34

https://i.imgur.com/pTO5BFK.png

Breslau Silesia: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA33

https://i.imgur.com/xaIDnag.png

^^^
Other authors give similar numbers of Poles in Breslau Silesia (Kamusella, Ladenberger and Michałkiewicz for year 1840 give 80,000 Poles in Breslau Regency and 566,000 in Oppeln Regency; S. Plater gives 600,000 Poles in all of Silesia in 1824).

Liegnitz Silesia: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA34

https://i.imgur.com/CG6Hmoc.png

Brandenburg: https://books.google.pl/books?id=31DMAJgQV28C&pg=PA30

https://i.imgur.com/QEEP8mA.png

^^^
But according to T. Kamusella, in year 1815 there were still 200,000 Sorbian-speakers in Brandenburg (and 50,000 in Saxony):

https://i.imgur.com/2J6IeQF.png

In the link below August von Haxthausen in his 1839 book has data on East Prussia, by county:

https://books.google.pl/books?id=Gsj1FBg0gvUC&pg=RA1-PA78

County Allenstein (Olsztyn) for example:

https://i.imgur.com/r7tpiZL.png

Karl Andree* gives for East Prussia 480,000 Poles and Lithuanians (total population 1,080,000):

https://books.google.pl/books?id=xgUEAAAAYAAJ&pg=P218

https://i.imgur.com/674Qyb9.png

*Karl Andree, "Polen: in geographischer, geschichtlicher und culturhistorischer Hinsicht", 1831.

Georg Hassel for some reason added East Prussian Poles to East Prussian Lithuanians. However, he also reported 20,000 Curonians and Latvians as well as 2,400 Jews in East Prussia (Andree's data for East Prussia is for year 1824, Hassel's data for year 1819).

=====

Religious structure by Regierungsbezirk, in year 1817:

https://i.imgur.com/gmmC5eQ.png

And early 20th century:

Ethnic map by Ing. Jakob Spett (green: Poles), in 1910:

https://i.imgur.com/MiyxfJh.png