PDA

View Full Version : L21 in the Rhineland



JRW
09-22-2014, 09:11 PM
I would like to start a discussion on this forum about L21 in the Rhineland. And, there is no better way to get that initiated than with the presentation of new and (hopefully) thought-provoking information…

The observation as seen on the attached map is either an extraordinary coincidence or a clue to the geographic origin of one of the “sons” of DF13, which in turn, may provide insights into the geographic origin of DF13 and L21. That SNP would be FGC5494, which Mark Jost estimates to date from about 1600 BCE. The attached map overlays the ancestral locations of the seven known and suspected (based on 67 STR marker haplotypes) FGC5494 “continental” members onto a map from Barry Cunliffe’s Ancient Celts. Cunliffe’s map shows the locations of La Tène pottery findings as black dots. For the mapping of FGC5494 ancestral locations, I plotted the districts having the highest surname density (all the surnames had clearly identifiable hotspots), except for a member who documents his MDKA back to 1636, for which I used the town of his MDKA. The FGC5494 surname locations are shown as either dark red or light/dark orange dots. Remarkably, four of the FGC5494 members cluster within 30+/- miles of one another in area just west of the Rhine in the Landkreis (districts) near Bad Dürkheim. The four represent two of the known downstream “subclades” of FGC5494: FGC5496 and Z16502. Three of the four are NGS SNP tested and a third has the same STR “varietal” signature on Mike Walsh’s L21 Group as a fourth NGS SNP tester. Based on the SNP and STR differences among the four, it is highly improbable any of the four could share a common patrilineal ancestor during the historic period and clearly the two subclade sets date to pre-Iron Age. These are distant genetic relationships sharing a very small geographic area in common.

In addition to Bell Beaker and Corded Ware archaeological findings, the area around Bad Dürkheim is home to a concentration of Celtic archaeological sites, including one of the largest oppida, Donnersberg, which location has been in use from the late Bronze Age through the Iron Age. Additional oppida in the area include Heidenmauer, Kastel and Otzenhausen. Among well-known Celtic artifacts from the area is the Schwarzenbach cup, which Simon James dates to 475 – 450 BCE. According to a German archaeological website, this area was at the crossroads of the north-south trade route along the Rhine and the east-west trade route through the Isenach-Kaiserlauterner Valley to the Marne and Seine basin during the Halstatt and La Tène periods (note that one of the French surnames hotspots to the Marne district). Manuel Fernández-Götz in Identity and Power, the Transformation of Iron Age Societies in Northeast Gaul, (a recently published book -- originally a doctoral dissertation -- that I highly recommend reading) asserts that the archeological and pollen records indicate the region experienced “…a real and sharp fall in population…” commencing around 400 BCE and ending around 150 BCE. Thus, evidence suggesting the region where the so-called “Celtic migrations” originated.

STR phylogenetic tree (fluxus) analyses Mark Jost conducted for SNPs downstream of FGC5496 (which resides below FGC5494) are consistent with migration from the middle Rhine. The downstream continental members’ SNPs and downstream Isles members’ SNPs are estimated to have branched off from one another either before or during the La Tène period. Interestingly, the Irish members of these downstream SNPs (e.g., CTS2457, whose “father” SNP, S1088, comprises two of the four “Bad Dürkheim” members and Jost dates to 650 – 150 BCE) have a concentrated distribution in the northern half of Ireland. These include the counties of Armagh, Roscommon, Tyrone and Meath – all locales where La Tène archaeological sites exist. The only surname under CTS2457 not from the northern half of Ireland is from Oxfordshire, home to the earliest La Tène art findings in eastern England. Although he generally dismisses migration with La Tène adoption in the Isles, Simon James states in The World of the Celts: “La Tène metalwork does appear by 250 BC… These may have been inspired by imports such as the Clonmacnois torc (c. 300 BC) [found in Knock, Co. Roscommon], which, if not actually made in the Rhineland, shows strong stylistic influence from this region.”

My point in this entry is not to start a debate about whether the post mid-twentieth century fashion among scholars regarding the movement of continental Celts to the Isles is misguided (although the genetic evidence associated with SNP5494 and its downstream SNPs suggest strong support making that argument), but to focus attention on the Rhineland as either the geographic home or an early settlement area for L21. Given the ancient DNA findings at the Bell-Beaker site in Kromsdorf (i.e., two remains were R1b, but not U106) and the indication of the middle Rhine being home to a very old SNP under L21, the evidence suggest that is a strong possibility.

Net Down G5L
09-23-2014, 05:50 PM
Hi fellow FGC 5494,
Interesting thought provoking post. The distribution of the FGC 5494 sub-clade is widespread and interesting - though it is early days to know the frequency and full distribution in the current population (just look at the developments in the last week!).
Have you considered an alternative hypothesis - that FGC5494 people could have been mariners/passengers during the Atlantic Bronze Age and travelled up the Rhine from the Atlantic, carrying metals and possibly livestock? Their origin/home could equally be Brittany, England, Ireland etc?
Bob

Webb
09-23-2014, 08:48 PM
I would like to start a discussion on this forum about L21 in the Rhineland. And, there is no better way to get that initiated than with the presentation of new and (hopefully) thought-provoking information…

The observation as seen on the attached map is either an extraordinary coincidence or a clue to the geographic origin of one of the “sons” of DF13, which in turn, may provide insights into the geographic origin of DF13 and L21. That SNP would be FGC5494, which Mark Jost estimates to date from about 1600 BCE. The attached map overlays the ancestral locations of the seven known and suspected (based on 67 STR marker haplotypes) FGC5494 “continental” members onto a map from Barry Cunliffe’s Ancient Celts. Cunliffe’s map shows the locations of La Tène pottery findings as black dots. For the mapping of FGC5494 ancestral locations, I plotted the districts having the highest surname density (all the surnames had clearly identifiable hotspots), except for a member who documents his MDKA back to 1636, for which I used the town of his MDKA. The FGC5494 surname locations are shown as either dark red or light/dark orange dots. Remarkably, four of the FGC5494 members cluster within 30+/- miles of one another in area just west of the Rhine in the Landkreis (districts) near Bad Dürkheim. The four represent two of the known downstream “subclades” of FGC5494: FGC5496 and Z16502. Three of the four are NGS SNP tested and a third has the same STR “varietal” signature on Mike Walsh’s L21 Group as a fourth NGS SNP tester. Based on the SNP and STR differences among the four, it is highly improbable any of the four could share a common patrilineal ancestor during the historic period and clearly the two subclade sets date to pre-Iron Age. These are distant genetic relationships sharing a very small geographic area in common.

In addition to Bell Beaker and Corded Ware archaeological findings, the area around Bad Dürkheim is home to a concentration of Celtic archaeological sites, including one of the largest oppida, Donnersberg, which location has been in use from the late Bronze Age through the Iron Age. Additional oppida in the area include Heidenmauer, Kastel and Otzenhausen. Among well-known Celtic artifacts from the area is the Schwarzenbach cup, which Simon James dates to 475 – 450 BCE. According to a German archaeological website, this area was at the crossroads of the north-south trade route along the Rhine and the east-west trade route through the Isenach-Kaiserlauterner Valley to the Marne and Seine basin during the Halstatt and La Tène periods (note that one of the French surnames hotspots to the Marne district). Manuel Fernández-Götz in Identity and Power, the Transformation of Iron Age Societies in Northeast Gaul, (a recently published book -- originally a doctoral dissertation -- that I highly recommend reading) asserts that the archeological and pollen records indicate the region experienced “…a real and sharp fall in population…” commencing around 400 BCE and ending around 150 BCE. Thus, evidence suggesting the region where the so-called “Celtic migrations” originated.

STR phylogenetic tree (fluxus) analyses Mark Jost conducted for SNPs downstream of FGC5496 (which resides below FGC5494) are consistent with migration from the middle Rhine. The downstream continental members’ SNPs and downstream Isles members’ SNPs are estimated to have branched off from one another either before or during the La Tène period. Interestingly, the Irish members of these downstream SNPs (e.g., CTS2457, whose “father” SNP, S1088, comprises two of the four “Bad Dürkheim” members and Jost dates to 650 – 150 BCE) have a concentrated distribution in the northern half of Ireland. These include the counties of Armagh, Roscommon, Tyrone and Meath – all locales where La Tène archaeological sites exist. The only surname under CTS2457 not from the northern half of Ireland is from Oxfordshire, home to the earliest La Tène art findings in eastern England. Although he generally dismisses migration with La Tène adoption in the Isles, Simon James states in The World of the Celts: “La Tène metalwork does appear by 250 BC… These may have been inspired by imports such as the Clonmacnois torc (c. 300 BC) [found in Knock, Co. Roscommon], which, if not actually made in the Rhineland, shows strong stylistic influence from this region.”

My point in this entry is not to start a debate about whether the post mid-twentieth century fashion among scholars regarding the movement of continental Celts to the Isles is misguided (although the genetic evidence associated with SNP5494 and its downstream SNPs suggest strong support making that argument), but to focus attention on the Rhineland as either the geographic home or an early settlement area for L21. Given the ancient DNA findings at the Bell-Beaker site in Kromsdorf (i.e., two remains were R1b, but not U106) and the indication of the middle Rhine being home to a very old SNP under L21, the evidence suggest that is a strong possibility.

I am not very up to date with L21. Is M222 part of the DF13 grouping? The reason I ask is in the Schlegel/Slagle DNA Surname project, three of the 10 lineages are predicted M222 by FTDNA. I consider this pretty high for a German origin surname. Most trace their lineages to the town of Schlegel in Thuringia. Being that Schlegel is a place name it is not surprising for there to be multiple lineages for this surname. Your thoughts?

JRW
09-24-2014, 03:05 AM
Hi Bob,

Good question.

Yes, I considered alternatives, including migrations up the Rhine or across land from the Bronze Age through the Völkerwanderung. We either do not have evidence at this time to suggest an alternative, or the alternative is too improbable.

In my own view, given its age, I am actually somewhat surprised FGC5494 members are not more widely distributed. Other than Isles members, we have four members who cluster around Bad Dürkheim, one to the east in Schweinfurt, one to the west in the Marne district, and one in Dieppe. That’s it. Look at the distribution of DF13, which isn't much older. However, given how well FGC5496 correlates with La Tène period sites, I do expect eventually to see FGC5494 in northern Italy and Bohemia.

Best,

Jim

Dubhthach
09-24-2014, 08:30 AM
I am not very up to date with L21. Is M222 part of the DF13 grouping? The reason I ask is in the Schlegel/Slagle DNA Surname project, three of the 10 lineages are predicted M222 by FTDNA. I consider this pretty high for a German origin surname. Most trace their lineages to the town of Schlegel in Thuringia. Being that Schlegel is a place name it is not surprising for there to be multiple lineages for this surname. Your thoughts?

M222 is good bit downstream of DF13. Here's the snp trail to it:

L21 -> DF13 -> DF49 -> Z2983 -> DF23 -> Z2961 -> M222 (and over 30 equivalents!)

Under M222 there is a snp called S7073, only one M222+/S7073- has been founded supposed by Chromo2, every other M222+ tested is S7073+

As regards to L21 see Alex Williamson's excellent "BigY"/NGS tree here, the structure has really broaden out now that we have NGS testing (use "ctrl-F" in your browser to open search box and search for specific SNP)

It would be very interesting to get one of these Schlegel's to do some further testing under M222, as the structure under it has really spilt out in last 6months:

http://www.kennedydna.com/M222_tree.png

-Paul

Dubhthach
09-24-2014, 08:32 AM
Sorry bout the jump to M222 there, back to FGC5494 which is looking like a very interesting SNP that's for sure, if you look at Alex's chart it doesn't have any "equivalent SNP's" it's basically just one step below DF13 (which only has one equivalent). This points to a very old SNP, the spread is also very interesting.

-Paul

JRW
09-24-2014, 11:38 AM
I am not very up to date with L21. Is M222 part of the DF13 grouping? The reason I ask is in the Schlegel/Slagle DNA Surname project, three of the 10 lineages are predicted M222 by FTDNA. I consider this pretty high for a German origin surname. Most trace their lineages to the town of Schlegel in Thuringia. Being that Schlegel is a place name it is not surprising for there to be multiple lineages for this surname. Your thoughts?

I made a quick comparison of the three with the STR GDs to the kits in Mike Walsh's L21 spreadsheet. I agree with the comment that additional testing would be useful, especially for the kit that only has tested out to 37 STR markers. However, the two that have tested-out to 67 markers have several surnames, all Irish, with whom they share a GD of 6 or less (I use a GD of 6 at 67 markers as a ballpark estimate of relatedness since the adoption of surnames), and one surname is shared at GDs of 4 or less. This suggest that at least the two, if not the three, descend from a migrant from Ireland to Germany since the adoption of surnames.

Best,

Jim

MJost
09-24-2014, 01:17 PM
As we are understanding, DF13 with over 20 branches has had a massive number of sons and their sons. It appears to have continued into the branch FGC5494>FGC5561 with seven branches with two of these beginning to expand early in area just west of the Rhine in the Landkreis (districts) near Bad Durkheim as Jim has pointed out. FGC54594's 67 marker modal is only six GD from L21 which props up the Jim's theory.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNWER6TjBDMXB4T1k/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5494>FGC5561's subclades, having such a quick expansion, could have been heavily involved in both land and seafaring trade arising from its point of cross-roads origin before or during the La Tène period. Early on, this tribe created Irish Sea routes and establishing trading colonies on the Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and Manx Coasts, well before 475 – 450 BCE, giving these various FGC5561 branches foot holds into the colonies across north half of Europe west of the Rhine and into the Isles as shown via historical evidence which has survived across the Isles and on the continent as per work by Norman Mongan.

MJost

Net Down G5L
09-24-2014, 02:58 PM
Thanks Mark,
I would love to think I was connected to the Menapii seafarers. I have speculated that the Kenyon's may have arrived in England from Normandy/Brittany during the Norman conquest and that would fit with some of Norman Mongan's thoughts. (By the way - any e-versions of The Menapii quest available - $135 for a second hand copy is beyond my means). I even want to relate to his St Patrick musings. There is nothing more beautiful than sitting on Croagh Patrick looking over the drumlin fields in Clew Bay - truely spectacular.

The evidence.
Mongan's suggestion that Monahans were descendants of the Menapii does not seem to help us as they seem to be DF21 and M222 - unless you have further info of his suggested surnames- and some are FGC5494.
From your Fluxus diagram and from Alex's tree I only see one early Rhine based line for sure. I can not see that the other lines have a longer genetic distance from L21 and they could possibly be France or Isles based from the earliest times?
So is it not just a 1 (or 2) in 7 chance (on current data) that the earliest geographical location for FGC5494 was in the Bad Durkheim.
Forgive me if my observations are inaccurate or if I am missing/ignoring key evidence - I am a newbie to this type of analysis and would appreciate being pointed in the right direction.

rms2
09-24-2014, 06:27 PM
The French archaeologist Henri Hubert believed the Beaker Folk who went to Britain came mainly from Nordrhein-Westfalen and that they left nearly lock, stock, and barrel.

In the early days of the R L21 and Subclades Project (called the R-L21 Plus Project back then), we got a spate of new members with ancestry in the Rhineland. Most were Americans of German descent. I began to think the Rhineland was a real L21 hotspot. Then, as suddenly as it had begun to flow, the Rhine dried up for us. Since then, new members of German ancestry have been scarce.

In 2011 the Busby paper came out and showed surprisingly low frequencies of L21 in Germany. Frankly, I was flabbergasted. I really thought the frequency of L21 would be higher there.

So, anyway, maybe Hubert was right: lock, stock, and barrel.

JRW
09-25-2014, 01:14 PM
The French archaeologist Henri Hubert believed the Beaker Folk who went to Britain came mainly from Nordrhein-Westfalen and that they left nearly lock, stock, and barrel.

In the early days of the R L21 and Subclades Project (called the R-L21 Plus Project back then), we got a spate of new members with ancestry in the Rhineland. Most were Americans of German descent. I began to think the Rhineland was a real L21 hotspot. Then, as suddenly as it had begun to flow, the Rhine dried up for us. Since then, new members of German ancestry have been scarce.

In 2011 the Busby paper came out and showed surprisingly low frequencies of L21 in Germany. Frankly, I was flabbergasted. I really thought the frequency of L21 would be higher there.

So, anyway, maybe Hubert was right: lock, stock, and barrel.

Rich,

Your initial thoughts may have been correct.

The Germany West location in the Busby/Myres dataset is the town of Siegen. This university town resides about 50 miles east (as the crow flies) of Cologne. It is neither west of the Rhine nor in the Palatinate-Saarland.

More problematic for inferring ancient DNA composition using this location, were the population changes for Siegen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegen. The population in 1807 was less than 4000; in 1939, 40,000; at the end of 1945, 28,000; and in 1975, the population was 117,000. About 60,000 of the post-war increase arose from the annexation of adjoining communities in January 1975. However, that leaves a 29,000 change, most likely arising from regional immigration prompted by the founding of Siegen University in the early 70’s. At about the time Busby/Myres drew their sample, the population had declined to 105,000. There has been a significant amount of churning of this town’s population during the 20th century. The probability of a random sample of residents in 2009 being representative of the location’s distant genetic composition appears to be remote.

The best study (but still not what is needed) that I have found for the R1b in the Palatinate is a 2009 doctoral dissertation by a student (M. Wirsching) at the Institute of Forensic Medicine, University of Freiburg see: http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/7512/. Although the paper (in German) is more about forensic testing and DNA sequencing methodologies than population genetics, it is the only academic study I have found drawing a sample from the Palatinate-Saarland. The study’s sample of 130 came from three cities in western Germany: Münster, Mainz, and Freiburg. Of the 130, 108 were R1b and subsequently analyzed for certain downstream SNPs. Unfortunately, the study did not test for L21 and the sample sizes for each city were small (34 for Mainz). About 27% of the Mainz sample population was M269 xU106 xU152 xM222. This “haplogroup” also constituted 45% of M269 in Mainz. Although other M269 downstream SNPs such as L238 and DF19 need to factored, those percentages suggest a significantly higher amount of L21 in the Palatinate-Saarland than observed in the Siegen sample. I have attached pie charts and a legend-key from the study.

Best,

Jim

rms2
09-25-2014, 03:47 PM
I'm not at home and so don't have access to a lot of my stuff, but as I recall L21 did not exceed around 3% in Busby anywhere in Germany, including Freiburg. I recall reading the results for the first time and being shocked. The L21 frequency is much higher west of the Rhine in neighboring France.

I get the impression this reflects both the Beaker Folk exodus during the Bronze Age and the Celtic exodus toward the close of the Roman period.

The way things went with L21 and Germany was a real let down. Among the very first L21+ results back in October of 2008 were Dale Krueger and Thomas Krahn, the first of German ancestry, the second himself German. I thought that was a sign of things to come, and, indeed, at first we got a number of German positives. But then things dried up, and now it's rare to get a new member of German ancestry.

Dubhthach
09-25-2014, 04:06 PM
Germany has a big population though, if you think of it 2% of male population is at least 800,000 men. Of course the sample size in Busby in Germany was 321 in comparison Ireland which has basically 1/18th the population had 327 samples in comparison!

We really need a study that has sample sizes in the thousands to get better idea particulary in the larger population countries such as France, Germany, Italy. The spanish sample for example in Busby was 813!

-Paul

JRW
09-25-2014, 06:30 PM
I'm not at home and so don't have access to a lot of my stuff, but as I recall L21 did not exceed around 3% in Busby anywhere in Germany, including Freiburg. I recall reading the results for the first time and being shocked. The L21 frequency is much higher west of the Rhine in neighboring France.

I get the impression this reflects both the Beaker Folk exodus during the Bronze Age and the Celtic exodus toward the close of the Roman period.

The way things went with L21 and Germany was a real let down. Among the very first L21+ results back in October of 2008 were Dale Krueger and Thomas Krahn, the first of German ancestry, the second himself German. I thought that was a sign of things to come, and, indeed, at first we got a number of German positives. But then things dried up, and now it's rare to get a new member of German ancestry.

Five locations were used for Germany in the Busby/Myres dataset. In clockwise order (and percentage of L21) they were: Hamburg-3.1%; Dessau-2.1%; Aalen-2.2%; Freiburg-1.0%; Siegen-1.0%; and in Germany's geographic center, midway between Cologne and Dresden, Eisenach-5.3%. The Eisenach figure is meaningless: one result of the 19 sampled tested M222!

The doctoral dissertation, however, suggests some meaningful differences in the results for Freiburg between the two studies. For the dissertation, the M269 xU106 xU152 xM222 "haplogroup" result for Freiburg (out of a sample of 61) was 27.9%. For Busby/Myres, the M269 xU106 xU152 xM222 result (out of a sample of 102) was 21.6%. Regardless, the dissertation is the only academic study I know of that has sampled a location west of Rhine in Germany, and more specifically, in the Palatinate-Saarland. I think it would be safe to assume that L21 represents more than 1% of the current population.

That being said, your point about Bronze Age Beaker and Iron Age Celtic movements from this area is, in my opinion, the substantive take-away from this discussion. What we currently see reflected in FGC5494's distribution supports your view.

rms2
09-26-2014, 11:27 AM
Of course, it would be nice to have bigger and more representative samples from Germany and elsewhere on the Continent, and it would be nice if they tested the samples from that dissertation for L21. But after running the R L21 and Subclades Project for nearly six years, I can tell you that new German members do pop up from time to time, but they are rare enough to be a pleasant surprise when they do.

Obviously, there is L21 in Germany, but it is comparatively rare nowadays. But running an FTDNA project is not the same as a scientific study. I would like to see some of those that would include the major L21 subclades and ancient y-dna results that would at least go as far as L21.

Heber
09-26-2014, 02:07 PM
I did an analysis of L21 in Germany last year, based on the L21 projects data.

Here are two of the graphics:

http://www.pinterest.com/pin/32721534766795220/

http://www.pinterest.com/pin/32721534766795218/

What is interesting is they are mainly SNP which are dominant in the Isles, and the numbers are tiny compared to the Isles.
It is probably due to later back migrations.

I will update the data to see if it has changed.

rms2
09-26-2014, 03:37 PM
If by "back migrations" you mean that most of the L21 in Germany came from the Isles, I strongly disagree.

There is a heavy Isles bias in FTDNA's database, which is well known. L21 is certainly at its most frequent in the Isles, but it not originate there.

George Chandler
09-26-2014, 03:56 PM
If by "back migrations" you mean that most of the L21 in Germany came from the Isles, I strongly disagree.

There is a heavy Isles bias in FTDNA's database, which is well known. L21 is certainly at its most frequent in the Isles, but it not originate there.

I agree with you there.

JRW
09-26-2014, 05:15 PM
What is interesting is they are mainly SNP which are dominant in the Isles, and the numbers are tiny compared to the Isles.
It is probably due to later back migrations.

Broad-based pictures of haplogroup distributions are informative and interesting. Given that most academic studies show where certain DNA-marker populations reside today, they are particularly useful for providing insights into the medical applications of DNA testing.

However, I think we all recognize a current distribution map is no substitution for ancient DNA or phylogenetic analysis when constructing a picture of the past. By combining both high-resolution SNP and STR results to construct phylogenetic trees, I think we have a much improved ability to do the latter than we could previously. The FGC5494 picture is an example.

Despite the overwhelming number of Isles FGC5494 members relative to continental (roughly 20:1), an irrefutable fact is that the seven continental surname members have no close genetic relationships to any of them: the genetic distances/phylogenetic relationships are just too large for any to be considered "back migrations." However, back migrations do occur as noted in a post earlier in this thread. The only way to make that determination is on a case-by-case evaluation. It will be interesting to see how many of the L21 continental kits in Mike Walsh's spreadsheet shake-out as back migrations when subclade phylogenetic trees are constructed based on SNPs and STRs.

The FGC5494 subclade suggest relatively few.

Net Down G5L
09-26-2014, 05:26 PM
That being said, your point about Bronze Age Beaker and Iron Age Celtic movements from this area is, in my opinion, the substantive take-away from this discussion. What we currently see reflected in FGC5494's distribution supports your view.

Middle Bronze age 'celtic field systems' and related 'small barrows, are well know and documented in Southern England. They reflect the biggest agricultural revolution and land division. They appear to me to have started in the coastal valleys and moved inland.
Less known is their distribution in Germany, the Netherlands and into Denmark. I think this reflects a major movement of people and a very major growth of population.
There is no current academic literature I know of that addresses the possible movement (or origin) of people related to this - but it is something we should consider in the emerging L21 and DF13 story.

razyn
09-26-2014, 05:48 PM
Unfortunately, the study did not test for L21 and the sample sizes for each city were small (34 for Mainz). About 27% of the Mainz sample population was M269 xU106 xU152 xM222. This “haplogroup” also constituted 45% of M269 in Mainz. Although other M269 downstream SNPs such as L238 and DF19 need to factored, those percentages suggest a significantly higher amount of L21 in the Palatinate-Saarland than observed in the Siegen sample.
I know this is an L21 thread, and all -- but really, these data [M269 xU106 xU152 xM222] are at least as likely to point to DF27 as to L21. In my opinion, a good bit more likely, on that part of the continent. L238 and DF19 are also eligible, as you have mentioned; but I doubt if they are either as old, or as large (in that population, or more generally) as DF27. More specifically, several branches of DF27 that are not (in the modern population), and were not (in the Bronze Age), of Iberian origin. We shall see -- but we shan't see it resolved by studies published before DF27 was discovered. Insufficient data support the premise.

JRW
09-26-2014, 07:57 PM
I know this is an L21 thread, and all -- but really, these data [M269 xU106 xU152 xM222] are at least as likely to point to DF27 as to L21.

No doubt, DF27 would be there too. However, if you assume the Busby/Myres figures of 3-10% for P312 xL21 xU152 (i.e., essentially DF27) are reasonable for Germany, then given the dissertation's 27% for M269 xU106 xU152 xM222, that leaves a lot of room for L21 being larger than Busby's western Germany (Siegen and Freiburg) figures of 1%... probably closer to the L21 ranges we observe in Benelux and eastern France of 5-9% (with respect to the Palatinate-Saarland). However, if you believe the Busby/Myres figures for P312 xL21 xU152 are too low, then the allocation becomes more problematic.

alan
09-26-2014, 09:57 PM
I was more than surprised by the low Rhineland figure for L21 when they came out because that area lit up like a beacon through hobby testing very soon after L21 was found. I realise that this was party due to a history of migration to America from the same area but nonetheless, even allowing for that, it doesnt explain it totally - Rhineland L21 relative to all L11 clades did a lot better in hobby testing than in the academic paper. That is weird. German yDNA in hobby testing does have a strong bias to the Rhineland but that doesnt stop us looking at the yDNA of the Rhineland as an entity in itself. When looking just at Rhineland yDNA there is no obvious reason why the proportion of L21 should be overrepresented there in hobby testing. My suspicion is that L21 is underepresented in the Rhineland in the academic study as it could have a patchy distribution - especially if it is an old clade which only survived in pockets.

Reith
11-14-2014, 02:20 PM
Do a lot of Germans test DNA as a hobby?

I have always read about the bias from the Isles and the USA, which a larger portion is from the Isles anyway, but is FTDNA and 23andMe popular in Germany?

I need to try to get some of my cousins to test over there..

Christian

GoldenHind
11-14-2014, 06:30 PM
Ae few comments:

I believe the lion's share of those of German ancestry in the FTDNA database are Americans, primarily those of "Pennsylvania Dutch" origins. They are said to have primarily come from the Palatine area. So the FTDNA German database appears to be heavily overweighted toward by that area.

I very much doubt there is much L238 in Germany. There is only one identified to date, and his ancestry is from Friesland, along the North Sea coast. L238 is largely confined to Scandinavia.

There has been however a fair amount of both P312 subclades DF19 and DF99 found in Germany. Most, though not all, of the German DF99 identified to date are of Pennsylvania Dutch origin. However DF99 is a newly discovered subclade, and the data is still very preliminary. I haven't really looked into the DF19 German samples, but my impression is they tend to be more from the north.

EDIT: I checked into the DF19 German samples, and it appears all but one are from the southern half of Germany, so my impression they were more northern in distribution was inaccurate. While I think it is safe to say both DF19 and DF99 are present in Germany outside of the Palatine area, the FTDNA database cannot give us an accurate estimate of the amount.

rms2
11-14-2014, 07:57 PM
One thing I have noticed as a project admin when it comes to Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry - and this is purely anecdotal, not an attempt at any kind of statistics - is Americans who think they are of PA Dutch ancestry, or find PA Dutch ancestry desirable for one reason or another, but who are probably not of PA Dutch ancestry or whose claims are doubtful. I am not permitted to name names.

This sometimes manifests itself in matches that are overwhelmingly of British Isles origin, especially when those matches are very close and occur at 67 or more markers, and sometimes is accompanied by a claim that a surname that appears to be of British or Irish origin has been anglicized.

Here is an example from my own personal experience. Some years ago I hired a professional genealogist who lived in Salt Lake City. Since my y-dna mdka, Auguston Stevens, was born in 1804 in Wheeling, West Virginia (part of Virginia back then), she focused on the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia. She found a possible Stevens suspect in Brooke County, WV, just north of Wheeling, who lived cheek by jowl near a bunch of Snedekers, and Snedeker was the maiden surname of my y-dna mdka's mother. That sounded good. This Stevens suspect was named William, and his name was sometimes given as William Stephens. It turned out he was originally Wilhelm Stephan and had moved to the Northern Panhandle of WV because he had received land along the Ohio River as a reward for his service in the American Revolution. Wilhelm was born in Germany and had come to Lancaster County, PA, with his parents when a young boy.

Needless to say, I got excited by this revelation. He lived in the right place, was a neighbor to the right people, and had the right name change. I found it extra thrilling that he was apparently born a continental European and had experienced a name change. Try as I might, however, I never could find anything to connect him to my mdka beyond what I just listed. I found out who his known children were, and there was nothing to connect them either.

When I ordered my first 37-marker y-dna test from FTDNA, I joined both the Stephens-Stevens Project and the Steffen Project. I was hoping for a match that would prove a connection to the Wilhelm who had been found for me by the professional genealogist in Salt Lake City. Well, that balloon deflated soon after the results came in. My matches all pointed to the British Isles, especially Wales, and eventually I tested L21+, DF13+, and DF41+. Most of the Lancaster County Steffen (and Stephan, etc.) lines are U152+: no matches there.

I was not so enamored with the whole Wilhelm Stephan thing that I couldn't drop it like a hot Kartoffel in favor of the truth, but I have encountered others who will cling to their favorite tall tales long after they should have recognized it was mom who was leaving the quarter under their pillow in the name of the Tooth Fairy and dad dressed up in the red suit on Christmas Eve.

GoldenHind
11-14-2014, 11:40 PM
One thing I have noticed as a project admin when it comes to Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry - and this is purely anecdotal, not an attempt at any kind of statistics - is Americans who think they are of PA Dutch ancestry, or find PA Dutch ancestry desirable for one reason or another, but who are probably not of PA Dutch ancestry or whose claims are doubtful. I am not permitted to name names.



I can't speak for other instances, but I have personally contacted everyone who has tested DF99+ and with one exception, there is no doubt of the German origins of those with ancestry from Pennsylvania. A few have traced their lines back to Germany. Others have EKAs living in Pennsylvania with German names, both first and last, and have 67 marker matches with others who are of German origin. Examples of the first names of the EKAs of their 67 marker matches include Heinrich, Johann, Hans, Friedrich, Matthias and Lorenz.

There is one who is questionable. His surname could either be English or an anglicized German one. He tells me the Pennsylvania county where his ancestor lived was largely populated by Germans and Ulster Scots. However he also said he has confirmed his ancestor was a member of a German language church there, which tips the scale in my opinion. I didn't notice any desire to be of German origin in him, or any of the others for that matter. I got the impression he would have preferred to have Scottish ancestry.

rms2
11-15-2014, 01:07 PM
Of course, I wasn't commenting on DF99; my experience has mostly been with L21. But once one has made the (possibly erroneous) connection, it isn't hard to find plenty of German given names. After all, the researcher has made an error and is looking at someone else's ancestors, i.e., Germans. Naturally they all have German names, belong to German churches, etc.

It has been my experience that in the USA British and Irish ancestry are so ubiquitous that the desire to be something else - almost anything else - is strong. I mean, finding out your ancestors came from the Isles is tantamount to merely confirming that one is a North American; many people want something a little more exotic and foreign; that, and Germanic wannabeism is a potent force in genealogy and in genetic genealogy.

Of course, many people in North America do actually descend from German immigrants; I'm not saying they don't. It's just that in my experience American claims of continental ancestry that are somewhat removed in time from the source, and especially those that involve an alleged surname change, have to be carefully scrutinized. Naturally, a project admin must accept what his or her members put forward, but sometimes the claims are doubtful, and it is well to keep that in mind.

alan
11-15-2014, 01:26 PM
Was reading recently that most of John Denver's family were from Russian Germans.

rms2
11-15-2014, 01:34 PM
Was reading recently that most of John Denver's family were from Russian Germans.

Of course, John Denver changed his name himself from Henry John Deutschendorf, Jr. I wonder to what y haplogroup he belonged.

Hard to imagine a popular singer with the surname Deutschendorf, but then again, there is Engelbert Humperdinck (George Dorsey - now he is probably L21+).

Gray Fox
11-15-2014, 02:03 PM
Of course, John Denver changed his name himself from Henry John Deutschendorf, Jr. I wonder to what y haplogroup he belonged.

Hard to imagine a popular singer with the surname Deutschendorf, but then again, there is Engelbert Humperdinck (George Dorsey - now he is probably L21+).

That's a name right there :heh:

GoldenHind
11-15-2014, 06:34 PM
Of course, I wasn't commenting on DF99; my experience has mostly been with L21. But once one has made the (possibly erroneous) connection, it isn't hard to find plenty of German given names. After all, the researcher has made an error and is looking at someone else's ancestors, i.e., Germans. Naturally they all have German names, belong to German churches, etc.



I can't recall a single instance in my experience of someone of British ancestry whose 67 marker matches all appeared to be of German ancestry. I find the suggestion that all their matches are also British and merely adopted someone else's genuine German ancestry to be very dubious, especially when there several different surnames involved among their matches.

There was once a prolific poster who had some pet theories about the history of various R1b subclades. When someone turned up with a paper trail which didn't fit in with his theories, he would simply dismiss their trails as erroneous. If they did fit with his theories, he would accept them at face value. Of course paper trails can be erroneous, and no doubt there are many in the FTDNA database fall into that category. But i see no reason to challenge them selectively. I simply try to follow the evidence where it leads, rather than attempting to mold it to fit in with any particular theory.

rms2
11-15-2014, 06:49 PM
I can't recall a single instance in my experience of someone of British ancestry whose 67 marker matches all appeared to be of German ancestry. I find the suggestion that all their matches are also British and merely adopted someone else's genuine German ancestry to be very dubious, especially when there several different surnames involved among their matches.

There was once a prolific poster who had some pet theories about the history of various R1b subclades. When someone turned up with a paper trail which didn't fit in with his theories, he would simply dismiss their trails as erroneous. If they did fit with his theories, he would accept them at face value. Of course paper trails can be erroneous, and no doubt there are many in the FTDNA database fall into that category. But i see no reason to challenge them selectively. I simply try to follow the evidence where it leads, rather than attempting to mold it to fit in with any particular theory.

Once again, I was not speaking of DF99 but of my experience with L21 (this thread is called "L21 in the Rhineland", after all), and believe me, if anything I wanted all of those with claims of German ancestry to be right, because I was hoping for something that would point to the place on the Continent where L21 might have originated. I still think L21 probably originated in Central Europe somewhere.

I think I know to which former prolific poster you are referring, and, yes, he did a lot of that, but I do not.

On the other hand, I like to think of myself as pretty hardnosed when it comes to ferreting out the truth and embracing it for what it is. I have even encountered a few of our L21+ guys with claims of French or Scandinavian ancestry whose claims are doubtful. That seems to be far less common among the French claims than it is among the German and Scandinavian claims, which I think is also reflected in the Busby results.

DF99 may be relatively frequent in Germany, although it appears to be rare overall, but it would be nice to see some more test results from genuine continentals.

rms2
11-15-2014, 07:26 PM
. . .
DF99 may be relatively frequent in Germany, although it appears to be rare overall, but it would be nice to see some more test results from genuine continentals.

This post really has little to do with DF99, but I wanted to quote the above to make a point from my own experience.

I mentioned this before, but in the early days of the L21 Project, we had plenty of "PA Dutch" results that made us think the Rhineland was an L21 hotspot. Busby came along in 2011 and punched holes in all that. Now maybe Busby was wrong, and further testing will reveal more L21 here and there in the Rhineland, but Busby is the best we have thus far, and it certainly makes it look as though L21 is relatively rare anywhere in Germany.

Of course, it is still possible that L21 originated in Germany or somewhere else in Central Europe. I still think that is likely, and the massive frequencies in western parts of the British Isles are the consequence of the wave surfing effect.

I also want to say we have some German L21+ folks with solid pedigrees or who are actual German citizens, with German surnames, etc. I did not want to leave the impression that there is absolutely no genuine German L21. But what I said of my experience is true.

I'm sure if Goldenhind has PA Dutch DF99+ guys with plenty of German matches at 67 markers, as he indicated, he will follow up and try to recruit those matches for DF99 testing. That is what I would do and have done in the case of L21.

Reith
11-16-2014, 03:31 PM
German Americans are the largest self reported ethnic group in the USA or about 50 million. A portion have very ethnic sounding surnames so maybe it is not as popular to test compared to Americans whose ancestors had British sounding surnames and had been in the country for a Few hundred years earlier. Germans mostly came over in the 1800s opposed to the 16-1700s.

The only reason I started to do genealogy and DNA is because my paternal family changed its surname from Reith to Wright. All out the first names definitely German sounding, such as Frederich, Ulrich, Otto, Gustav etc. They all spoke German in the home as well..

Webb
11-16-2014, 05:50 PM
This is a very good topic. There were a lot of Germans that were here prior to the revolution. The problem is that the first wave of Germans typically anglicized their surnames. This is the pre-revolution wave. The second wave typically did not. This wave mainly arrived in the 1800's to escape enlistment into the Franco-Prussian War. This wave is typically settled places like Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Ohio, and Michigan. The first wave settled mid-Pennsylvania and were farmers moving down into Maryland and Virginia. The Shenandoah Valley was settled by predominately Germans from this first wave. The second wave moved into industrialized areas. My grandfather had three grandparents born in Germany. Prosch, Schlegel, Ohlinger. They settled in Tiffin, Seneca, Ohio. My grandmother's family was from Loudoun. All English names. However, when I started this journey before she died, we ended up at the Lutheran Church in Lovettesville, Virginia. We found that her father's family were all Germans from the first wave and settled Lovettesville around 1740. Boekker became Baker, Keiffer became Cooper, Trittenbach became Trittipo, Boltz became Pulse, Frey became Fry, Virtz became Virts and Wertz. I could go on and on. Russell Baker, the famous author and host of Masterpiece Theater is my grandmother's second cousin. Most of these families started in Pennsylvania and migrated through Frederick, Maryland down into Virginia. Loudoun County Virginia formed the only Union Regiment in the whole state of Virginia. Though by 1860 these Germans had been here for a number of generations they typically sided with the overall view that slavery was not good. They also kept very good records. My grandmother's English side is very hard to trace past 1820 because of the poor record keeping. Not so with her German side. The Lutheran church in Lovettsville has records going back to the 1740's. So when I come across someone who claims they have Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry, I know they mean ancestry from the first wave of Germans, and if they have done their research, no matter how english sounding the surname is, I do not question them. Everyone is always talking about the impact the scotch-irish had on our country. I think the German gentleman farmers had an even larger impact but rarely get credit for it. Sorry, I am getting off the soapbox.

rms2
11-17-2014, 12:40 PM
Of course, nobody said there were no German immigrants to North America or that no German immigrants ever changed their surnames to fit in or had them changed for them. That did happen. I lived for years in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and knew or knew of many Funkhousers, Orndorfs, Strohsniders, Stoneburners, usw (und so weiter, since we're discussing Germans), whose names were relatively unchanged but had been anglicized at least somewhat.

I simply said that some people make claims of Pennsylvania Dutch, usw, ancestry that are erroneous. My experience has mostly been with the L21 Project, so I wasn't talking about DF99 or whatever, although this is apparently a subject into which a lot of emotion is invested for some odd reason.

Heck, people make all kinds of erroneous genealogical claims, not just claims involving German ancestry. Look at Ancestry.com. The place is a veritable minefield of bogus family trees.

As an FTDNA project admin, I am not allowed to reveal private information about project members, so I cannot give you details of claims of German ancestry that are unlikely to be true. You'll just have to take my word for it. They are out there. They're not super numerous, but there are enough of them to cause me to reserve some doubt for similar claims unless accompanied by some solid paper trail and/or genetic evidence.

BTW, as I mentioned before, it does little good to claim that one's ancestors had German given names. Once one has made the initial error and fastened onto the wrong ancestor, in this case a German, naturally one discovers a gusher of German given names. Never mind that they belong to other people's ancestors, as long as one is convinced they are his own!

JRW
11-18-2014, 12:53 AM
Anyone who has reviewed the work of a relative or others who have conducted genealogical research probably has found an error or two. Good paper trail research involves a process of cross-checking and cross-referencing that takes considerable patience, time and detective work. So, IMO, it is not at all surprising that there are errors in reported ancestry -- they should be expected. The real question and issue is whether those errors are biased in some way.

I recall Alan in an earlier post on this thread made the point that although those who state German ancestry in public databases may disproportionately (for a variety of reasons) over-represent the Palatinate as the locale of their MDKAs, there is no evidence or basis to suggests why any haplogroup or subclade should be over-represented -- especially considering that most folks who take DNA tests have no idea which halogroup they belong to at the time they enter the location of their MDKA into a database. Thus, the difficulty in reconciling the higher proportion of L21 in the Rhineland as suggested in public databases (and the earlier referenced dissertation) relative to the Busby datapoints.

Regardless, if one buys-into the concept of genetic genealogy, then differentiating erroneous ancestral claims from valid ones is a simple exercise of comparing GDs. Simply put, someone indicating German ancestry who has close GDs (at 67 or 111 STR markers) to kits having non-Germanic surnames and non-German (or ethnic German) MDKA locations, is highly unlikely to have German (patrilineal) ancestry. For L21, unlike for Isles kits, my observation is that many, if not most, kits of true "German" descent do not have close GDs to anybody in Mike Walsh's L21 spreadsheet... including other "German" kits. IMO, this is due to a combination of relative low sampling (compared to the Isles) and the age of L21 in what is now Germany. Many "fill the gap" lines have died-out over the centuries from a variety of causes...

GoldenHind
11-18-2014, 01:55 AM
Regardless, if one buys-into the concept of genetic genealogy, then differentiating erroneous ancestral claims from valid ones is a simple exercise of comparing GDs. Simply put, someone indicating German ancestry who has close GDs (at 67 or 111 STR markers) to kits having non-Germanic surnames and non-German (or ethnic German) MDKA locations, is highly unlikely to have German (patrilineal) ancestry.

This is precisely the point I mentioned above, which evidently some failed to understand. The people of Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry I referred to all have 67 marker matches with others whose EKAs also have German names, rather than with people of established English origin or with English names. Unless one wants to suppose that some overwhelming desire to have German ancestors has compelled whole hoards of people of English colonial origins to concoct forged German ancestry, this should be adequate proof to anyone with an open mind. I don't make a practice of challenging people's EKAs, but I do generally check their matches to see if they are consistent with their apparent origins.

As rrocca mentioned a while ago, much of the FTDNA Germany database is composed of Americans with origins from the Palatine. I suppose if one is looking for rampant examples of "German wannabes" lurking under every rock, one would have to disregard the entire lot, of whatever haplogroup or subclade- unless one believes this odd compulsion is limited to only certain groups.

rms2
11-18-2014, 04:42 PM
This is precisely the point I mentioned above, which evidently some failed to understand
. . .

Nobody missed that, and nobody failed to understand it.

In my posts I think it is pretty clear I was talking about my own experience as a project admin. I never said I thought people with high-resolution matches with men of German ancestry, German surnames, etc., were making erroneous claims. Some people are German, after all.

I was talking about people who make such claims in the face of pretty obvious evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but I was not making any reference to DF99. I have not been privy to any DF99+ FTDNA member pages, so I have not seen their matches, etc. I left the P312 Project and turned it over to Henry Zenker long before DF99 was discovered. For all I know, it could be as Germanic as Germanic can be. Evidently, that is extremely important.

But there are people who make mistakes and claim Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry for any number of reasons when the evidence is against it. And the desire to be Germanic (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3312-Ancient-Celt-from-Hinxton-DF21-Z246&p=58179&viewfull=1#post58179) and belong to a Germanic y haplogroup is a strong motivator. It's a particularly virulent and prevalent form of wannabeism.

GoldenHind
11-18-2014, 07:40 PM
Nobody missed that, and nobody failed to understand it.

In my posts I think it is pretty clear I was talking about my own experience as a project admin. I never said I thought people with high-resolution matches with men of German ancestry, German surnames, etc., were making erroneous claims. Some people are German, after all.

I was talking about people who make such claims in the face of pretty obvious evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but I was not making any reference to DF99. I have not been privy to any DF99+ FTDNA member pages, so I have not seen their matches, etc. I left the P312 Project and turned it over to Henry Zenker long before DF99 was discovered. For all I know, it could be as Germanic as Germanic can be. Evidently, that is extremely important.

But there are people who make mistakes and claim Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry for any number of reasons when the evidence is against it. And the desire to be Germanic (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3312-Ancient-Celt-from-Hinxton-DF21-Z246&p=58179&viewfull=1#post58179) and belong to a Germanic y haplogroup is a strong motivator. It's a particularly virulent and prevalent form of wannabeism.

I have no doubt there are people who would prefer to have Germanic origins, but I can't remember having encountered any. What I have observed, especially among people of British origin, is a very common desire to have Norman ancestors.

With regard to DF99, I have never claimed it is of Germanic origin, which you apparently think is important to me. What I do know is that there are DF99 people who have ancestry from Germany. There are also DF99 people who have Welsh origins. What irritates me is an attempt to dismiss results which do not conform to some preconceived notion of what they think they should be.

What I think is toxic to this hobby is the insistence on assigning Iron Age ethnic labels to SNPs that predate the existence of such groups by two millennia or so. This has caused an enormous amount of bickering and resentment. It also causes people to jump through hoops to explain away evidence which doesn't support such assignments. Many P312 subclades have a presence in Scandinavia and Germany as well as in former Celtic lands, though obviously not in the same proportions. Some of this could be a result of the Viking slave trade, Germanization of Celtic tribes or modern migration, but I strongly suspect at least some of it is due to settlement patterns during the Bronze Age. Further SNP resolution may eventually answer the question, but in the meantime, I believe the best course is to simply to keep an open mind.

I will now bow out of this argument and let you all return to discussing L21 in the Rhineland.

rms2
11-18-2014, 07:55 PM
No one is trying to dismiss anyone's results.

I merely recounted my experience with claims of Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry that are apparently erroneous because they are contrary to the evidence. That apparently offended you. My point was that such claims should be carefully scrutinized and cannot be regarded as substitutes for the results of scientific studies like Busby et al. As I mentioned, early on we were getting indications that the Rhineland might be an L21 hotspot. Busby's results did not support that.

I don't think I recall anyone who has ever said that all P312 clades must be exclusively one thing or another or that some of them could not have gone to Scandinavia or the non-Celtic regions of Germany during the Bronze Age or even earlier, although attacking that straw man does seem to be a recurrent theme of yours. L238 is a pretty obvious example of a predominantly Scandinavian variety of P312. On the other hand, P312 and U106 have definite clines in distribution that allow for fairly accurate ethnolinguistic/historical generalizations to be made about the bulk of them. Some may want to deny that because those generalizations do not suit their preferences.

David Mc
11-20-2014, 12:18 AM
Rich, I've chosen to avoid getting involved in this discussion, because I've said all I need to in other threads. Time will tell about how broadly L21 was dispersed in the chalcolithic and Bronze Age, and I'm fine either way. What I am seeing associated with this discussion is a recurring tendency on your part to talk about "Germanic wannabes." Maybe it's my oversensitive nature, but as you and I have been the primary debating partners on this front, I can't help but wonder if you're making a backhanded reference to me. If that's what you're doing, I strongly object on two fronts:

Firstly, I have never been a "Germanic wannabe" (no offence to any Germanic types). My last name is Gaelic. I have always assumed Gaelic (either Irish or Scottish) origins-- it was my identity, and I was deeply at home with it. When I found out we were actually Manx in origins, and that there is no DF49* stronghold anywhere in the British Isles, I began to wonder where DF49* might cluster-- presumably on the continent. The only significant continental influx into Man was from Scandinavia, with a smattering of Saxon settlers in the 7th century. Add to this one of my closest non-McElrea matches is from Finland (he may or may not be DF49) and the only non-Isles DF49* is from Sweden. Pairing that with some of the more recent migration theories, particularly those associated with the movement of Rhenish Beaker populations allowed me to postulate non-"Celtic" L21 and possibly DF49*. It's a theory that I obviously think is worth considering, because I've argued it. If you're reducing all of this-- which was a huge and somewhat self-alienating leap-- to "Germanic wannabeism," it's more than a little bit offensive, and not a little uncharitable. And it also leads me to the second front of my objection: ad hominem. You are perfectly welcome to disagree with me on how widely L21 was dispersed and how much of it remains on the continent. Don't reduce my argument to wishful thinking on my part. I'm trying to follow the facts as much as you are, and without bias. I will be perfectly thrilled if DF49* turns out to be associated with Britons or Gaels or Frenchmen-- I just want to know where we came from. For the reasons given here and elsewhere, I'm open now to the possibility that it came from the north-- thought I never entertained until I began to look at the paucity of DF49* in the Isles.

rms2
11-21-2014, 08:58 AM
David,

Honestly, I did not think of you once in this whole discussion. Not once.

I have been around these kinds of forums since 2006 and have encountered all sorts of wannabeisms and wannabes. I told my own story, which has two different avenues of my own Germanic wannabeism. I think my case of it was mild, and I got over it pretty quickly, but I was a Viking wannabe and overall a Germanic wannabe myself. I never thought you were a Germanic wannabe. You have never shown any signs of that.

You should not be so quick to be read personal insult into a discussion in which you are never once mentioned or even hinted at.

David Mc
11-21-2014, 09:40 AM
Then I apologise, Rich, for seeing offence where there was none. And thank you for your gracious response.

rms2
11-21-2014, 12:10 PM
Then I apologise, Rich, for seeing offence where there was none. And thank you for your gracious response.

No problem. What I mentioned in this thread that apparently touched a nerve (not from you) was my questioning of claims of PA Dutch ancestry by people with what look like British Isles surnames and who have British Isles haplotype neighbors at 67 or more markers. My experience has been mostly with the L21 Project, and I did not say there are no people of PA Dutch descent or that no PA Dutch person ever had his surname anglicized (e.g., from Schneider to Taylor, or Becker to Baker, or Schmidt to Smith, etc.).

I was talking about people whose claims are contrary to the actual evidence. That was it.

Webb
11-21-2014, 05:07 PM
Rich, I've chosen to avoid getting involved in this discussion, because I've said all I need to in other threads. Time will tell about how broadly L21 was dispersed in the chalcolithic and Bronze Age, and I'm fine either way. What I am seeing associated with this discussion is a recurring tendency on your part to talk about "Germanic wannabes." Maybe it's my oversensitive nature, but as you and I have been the primary debating partners on this front, I can't help but wonder if you're making a backhanded reference to me. If that's what you're doing, I strongly object on two fronts:

Firstly, I have never been a "Germanic wannabe" (no offence to any Germanic types). My last name is Gaelic. I have always assumed Gaelic (either Irish or Scottish) origins-- it was my identity, and I was deeply at home with it. When I found out we were actually Manx in origins, and that there is no DF49* stronghold anywhere in the British Isles, I began to wonder where DF49* might cluster-- presumably on the continent. The only significant continental influx into Man was from Scandinavia, with a smattering of Saxon settlers in the 7th century. Add to this one of my closest non-McElrea matches is from Finland (he may or may not be DF49) and the only non-Isles DF49* is from Sweden. Pairing that with some of the more recent migration theories, particularly those associated with the movement of Rhenish Beaker populations allowed me to postulate non-"Celtic" L21 and possibly DF49*. It's a theory that I obviously think is worth considering, because I've argued it. If you're reducing all of this-- which was a huge and somewhat self-alienating leap-- to "Germanic wannabeism," it's more than a little bit offensive, and not a little uncharitable. And it also leads me to the second front of my objection: ad hominem. You are perfectly welcome to disagree with me on how widely L21 was dispersed and how much of it remains on the continent. Don't reduce my argument to wishful thinking on my part. I'm trying to follow the facts as much as you are, and without bias. I will be perfectly thrilled if DF49* turns out to be associated with Britons or Gaels or Frenchmen-- I just want to know where we came from. For the reasons given here and elsewhere, I'm open now to the possibility that it came from the north-- thought I never entertained until I began to look at the paucity of DF49* in the Isles.

David, if you could, sometime check out the Slagle Surname DNA Project at FTDNA. Of the 15 lineages, one is confirmed M222 and two are predicted M222. All three appear to be unrelated. My maternal grandfather was a Schlegel, who's grandfather was born in Bavaria. So this project has a lot of interest for me. I am currently trying to talk my mother's cousin into joining and testing. When I first looked at this project I was very surprised to see the three possible L21 lineages. There is also a confirmed SRY2627 and a confirmed L2 lineage. Then there is one confirmed P310, two predicted P311 and a predicted L23. I am not sure of the phylogenic layout of L21 anymore, so I am not sure of M222's relationship with DF49. I am going to past this in a quote to Goldenhind as well to see if he could take a look at the L23, P310, and P311 lineages. Thanks,
Webb

Webb
11-21-2014, 05:08 PM
I have no doubt there are people who would prefer to have Germanic origins, but I can't remember having encountered any. What I have observed, especially among people of British origin, is a very common desire to have Norman ancestors.

With regard to DF99, I have never claimed it is of Germanic origin, which you apparently think is important to me. What I do know is that there are DF99 people who have ancestry from Germany. There are also DF99 people who have Welsh origins. What irritates me is an attempt to dismiss results which do not conform to some preconceived notion of what they think they should be.

What I think is toxic to this hobby is the insistence on assigning Iron Age ethnic labels to SNPs that predate the existence of such groups by two millennia or so. This has caused an enormous amount of bickering and resentment. It also causes people to jump through hoops to explain away evidence which doesn't support such assignments. Many P312 subclades have a presence in Scandinavia and Germany as well as in former Celtic lands, though obviously not in the same proportions. Some of this could be a result of the Viking slave trade, Germanization of Celtic tribes or modern migration, but I strongly suspect at least some of it is due to settlement patterns during the Bronze Age. Further SNP resolution may eventually answer the question, but in the meantime, I believe the best course is to simply to keep an open mind.

I will now bow out of this argument and let you all return to discussing L21 in the Rhineland.

David, if you could, sometime check out the Slagle Surname DNA Project at FTDNA. Of the 15 lineages, one is confirmed M222 and two are predicted M222. All three appear to be unrelated. My maternal grandfather was a Schlegel, who's grandfather was born in Bavaria. So this project has a lot of interest for me. I am currently trying to talk my mother's cousin into joining and testing. When I first looked at this project I was very surprised to see the three possible L21 lineages. There is also a confirmed SRY2627 and a confirmed L2 lineage. Then there is one confirmed P310, two predicted P311 and a predicted L23. I am not sure of the phylogenic layout of L21 anymore, so I am not sure of M222's relationship with DF49. I am going to past this in a quote to Goldenhind as well to see if he could take a look at the L23, P310, and P311 lineages. Thanks,
Webb

Dubhthach
11-21-2014, 07:30 PM
Just to provide some clarity with regards to relationship of DF49 and M222, here is the tree from the R-DF49 FTDNA project page:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10258680/Draft%20DF49%20x%20M222%20Tree%20v16.png

M222 itself has huge number of subclades as found in Chromo2 and NGS testing:

http://www.kennedydna.com/M222_tree.png

DF49 is a very ancient SNP, so it wouldn't surprise me if arose on the continent in the first place, going on "Big Y"/Y-Prime testing it doesn't seem to have any equivalents and is right below DF13.

-Paul
(DF41+)

Dubhthach
11-21-2014, 07:36 PM
David,

Not to start an argument, but I should point out that the concept of "Gael" covers a speaker of a Goidelic language from Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man. Manx Gaelg been derived (like the other two languages) from Old Irish. The isle of man was majority Gaelg speaking until the 19th century. Though interesting enough there is some debate that "Old Irish" might have been introduced to Isle of Man by the Vikings (Norse-Gael's of Dublin etc. eg: Gall-Ghaeil -- who also introduced it to Galloway)

-Paul

David Mc
11-21-2014, 08:54 PM
I know Dubhthach. I was using "Gael" in the non-technical sense. The Isle of Man is often assumed to have an original Brythonic base with later influxes from Ireland, Dal Riata, Scandinavia, and so on. If there was evidence of DF49* in Ireland, I would have assumed that my ancestors came to Man from there, and continued to use the word "Gael," in the self-same non-technical sense, to distinguish it from British and Scandinavian lines. All I have now is a great big mystery, though.

David Mc
11-21-2014, 09:00 PM
David, if you could, sometime check out the Slagle Surname DNA Project at FTDNA. Of the 15 lineages, one is confirmed M222 and two are predicted M222. All three appear to be unrelated. My maternal grandfather was a Schlegel, who's grandfather was born in Bavaria. So this project has a lot of interest for me. I am currently trying to talk my mother's cousin into joining and testing. When I first looked at this project I was very surprised to see the three possible L21 lineages. There is also a confirmed SRY2627 and a confirmed L2 lineage. Then there is one confirmed P310, two predicted P311 and a predicted L23. I am not sure of the phylogenic layout of L21 anymore, so I am not sure of M222's relationship with DF49. I am going to past this in a quote to Goldenhind as well to see if he could take a look at the L23, P310, and P311 lineages. Thanks,
Webb

Hi Webb. As Dubhthach has shown, M222 is a descendant of DF49. In my primary arguments, I was focusing on DF49* rather than on its descendants. I honestly don't know where M222 was born. I would have guessed northern Britain, but it is interesting to see it popping up in a continental context. As rms reminds us elsewhere, there are always other explanations for how an SNP turns up in different places. It's possible that German M222 could descend from an Irish soldier or settler in Germany, or it's possible that M222 actually had its start somewhere along the Rhine with the majority moving across the channel to the British Isles. I haven't studied it closely enough to be able to say either way, and would direct you to those who know better. Sorry!

GoldenHind
11-21-2014, 09:38 PM
I am going to past this in a quote to Goldenhind as well to see if he could take a look at the L23, P310, and P311 lineages. Thanks,
Webb

Have you tested negative for the three SNPs shown directly below DF49 in the DF29 X M222 chart?

Webb
11-21-2014, 09:43 PM
Have you tested negative for the three SNPs shown directly below DF49 in the DF29 X M222 chart?

I am DF27. When I first perused the Slage project I was surprised on the diversity and number of P312 clades. I thought you might want to take a look at the P311, P310, and L23 predicted STR's to see if any fit for DF99 or other P312 groups. My maternal grandfather was a Schlegel. I do not have any family members yet to join this project.

GoldenHind
11-22-2014, 12:56 AM
I am DF27. When I first perused the Slage project I was surprised on the diversity and number of P312 clades. I thought you might want to take a look at the P311, P310, and L23 predicted STR's to see if any fit for DF99 or other P312 groups. My maternal grandfather was a Schlegel. I do not have any family members yet to join this project.

My apologies- I confused you with David. I will reply to your questions about the Schlegels by PM, since it's not really relevant here.

David Mc
11-22-2014, 02:35 AM
Hi Goldenhind. Sorry, I didn't realise you were addressing me. David Steadman identified me as ZP20, so I suppose I'm no longer, strictly speaking DF49*. As far as I can tell ZP20 is close enough to the root that it makes little temporal difference, though, in considering origin points. Ironically my mtDNA haplogroup is also extremely rare (sigh)...

Dubhthach
11-24-2014, 12:41 PM
Just regards Isle of Man, I was looking at "Four Courts Press" webpage there and came across the following, might be interested in anyone looking for info on the Vikings and the Kingdom of Man.

"Manx Kingship in its Irish Sea Setting, 1187–1229
King Rognvaldr and the Crovan dynasty"

http://www.fourcourtspress.ie/books/archives/manx-kingship-in-its-irish-sea-setting-11871229/



For over forty years King Rognvaldr Godredsson of Man and the Isles (r. 1187–1226) was a power to be reckoned with in the seas between Britain and Ireland. Praised by Irish bards and Icelandic saga-men as a great warrior, Rognvaldr was also a devout Christian prince who patronized religious houses round the shores of the Irish Sea and maintained diplomatic relations with the rulers of surrounding lands and beyond. Despite his contemporary stature, Rognvaldr and his dynasty have been largely ignored by modern historians.
This book explores Rognvaldr’s reign within the framework of the dynasty to which he belonged (the Crovan dynasty) and the ultra-competitive arena of the Irish Sea basin in the decades around 1200. It explores kinship, marriage, succession, military power, foreign relations and religious patronage, and concludes with a detailed analysis of late Norse Manx kingship within a broader British context.

R. Andrew McDonald is associate professor of history and director of the Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Brock University, Canada.

MJost
11-24-2014, 09:38 PM
John Creer posted a blog on this fact, that for 350 years the Isle of Man was under the rule of a number of Scandinavian or Norse-Gael invaders and the study reveals that approximately 25% of men of Manx origin today are descended from these Scandinavian visitors. What a few men can do to a isolated island.

The Isle of Man: Historically a more closely-knit community than we think!

Posted on November 20, 2014 by John Creer
https://manxresearch.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/the-isle-of-man-historically-a-more-closely-knit-community-than-we-think/#more-525

MJost

jdean
11-25-2014, 12:01 AM
Have you tested negative for the three SNPs shown directly below DF49 in the DF29 X M222 chart?

DF49 has most definitely popped and there are a lot more than three SNPs to test if you are DF49+ x DF23 !!

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10258680/Draft%20DF49%20x%20M222%20Tree%20v16.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10258680/R1b-DF49_Tree_Chart.pdf

David Mc
11-25-2014, 04:28 AM
Any new possibilities coming down the line, jdean?

jdean
11-25-2014, 09:22 AM
Any new possibilities coming down the line, jdean?

Nothing obvious at the moment, we're working on the DF49 x M222 SNP panel but that's not going to make much difference to the majority of current known DF49 x DF23 though it will be good for Z2961 x M222.

Unfortunately I don't see much speculative DF49 testing happening until FTDNA get round to putting it on their haplotree but fingers crossed that should happen when the SNP panel comes out ?

Of course Big Ys are still rolling in and I keep a close eye out for new DF49s, each has the potential for further splitting the tree with Evans and ZP80 being a good case in point : )

zaru7
11-29-2014, 03:14 AM
I'd like to add to the mystique of L21, and the obscure trajectories. Some of you might know my story: I have an NPE in my Y-line which is undetermined at this point. I have no matches beyond 12 markers, save for my brother (who is a GD=1@37 with me), which is unheard of for an R-L21 man. I have a haplotype with a whole lot of off modal alleles and many of us were surprised when I returned derived for L21. Then DF13. Then DF21. And now DF5. My closest match within the DF21 project is a gd=38. What this should tell us is that the door is wide open for growth. We have a Mexican/Spaniard who is also DF5.

I have also discovered that I might have a substantive match with a man of Cornish ancestry. It's a match that has plagued me for two years, but due to FTDNA's algorithm pertaining to null values, we do not show up as a match, otherwise we are a GD=5@76 markers. Considering our way off modal haplotypes and severe dearth of matches, this one looks promising, but, this places him in Brythonic Celt territory, which would be an anomaly, since neither of us have any matches in a heavily biased BI database.

Mac von Frankfurt
07-28-2015, 06:21 AM
I haven't lurked much in the last year and was surprised to stumble across this thread. Back when I was considering additional testing there didn't seem to be much interest in Germany. I am descended from the oft overlooked Carolina-Dutch (think kilt wearing trombone players). I recently transferred my 23andMe results to FTDNA and would welcome suggestions on how to proceed from here.

According to 23andMe I am L21. I have a MDKA in Frankfurt born 1727. I have a German occupational surname currently centered around southern Germany and parts of Switzerland, Austria, and the Czech Republic. There is a surname project at FTDNA with two members, one stops at M269 (predicted) and the other at R-S12547. I didn't find anyone else with a phonetically similar name in the German project. I am happy to provide my kit number as well as the kit numbers for the other two of the same name if anybody wants to look through them and suggest a testing program.

Reith
07-28-2015, 12:05 PM
Did you try using Gedmatch yet?

rms2
07-28-2015, 12:25 PM
I haven't lurked much in the last year and was surprised to stumble across this thread. Back when I was considering additional testing there didn't seem to be much interest in Germany. I am descended from the oft overlooked Carolina-Dutch (think kilt wearing trombone players). I recently transferred my 23andMe results to FTDNA and would welcome suggestions on how to proceed from here.

According to 23andMe I am L21. I have a MDKA in Frankfurt born 1727. I have a German occupational surname currently centered around southern Germany and parts of Switzerland, Austria, and the Czech Republic. There is a surname project at FTDNA with two members, one stops at M269 (predicted) and the other at R-S12547. I didn't find anyone else with a phonetically similar name in the German project. I am happy to provide my kit number as well as the kit numbers for the other two of the same name if anybody wants to look through them and suggest a testing program.

I suggest you get at least 67 STR (Short Tandem Repeat) markers from FTDNA; 111 markers would be even better. This would allow you to see if you have any matches or near haplotype neighbors, who they are, and where their ancestors came from.

S12547 is a possibility for you, since it is under FGC5494 like this: L21>DF13>FGC5494>S12547 (there could be some very recently discovered SNP between FGC5494 and S12547 I don't know about yet, but you get the basic picture). However, you won't know unless you either test for it or find out whether or not you match that man with your surname who is R1b-S12547.

I'm guessing you could probably test for S12547 with YSeq fairly cheaply, but you're going to want some STR markers eventually, if you're really interested in genetic genealogy. NGS testing has not rendered them obsolete quite yet.

Mac von Frankfurt
07-28-2015, 02:01 PM
I suggest you get at least 67 STR (Short Tandem Repeat) markers from FTDNA; 111 markers would be even better. This would allow you to see if you have any matches or near haplotype neighbors, who they are, and where their ancestors came from.

S12547 is a possibility for you, since it is under FGC5494 like this: L21>DF13>FGC5494>S12547 (there could be some very recently discovered SNP between FGC5494 and S12547 I don't know about yet, but you get the basic picture). However, you won't know unless you either test for it or find out whether or not you match that man with your surname who is R1b-S12547.

I'm guessing you could probably test for S12547 with YSeq fairly cheaply, but you're going to want some STR markers eventually, if you're really interested in genetic genealogy. NGS testing has not rendered them obsolete quite yet.

I figured I would need to start with STRs. There is no reason to expect a match with S12547 given the occupational surname. I'll have to think about 67 vs 111 a bit.

Mac von Frankfurt
07-28-2015, 03:01 PM
Did you try using Gedmatch yet?

I have not tried Gedmatch yet. In what way have you found it useful?

MJost
07-28-2015, 04:11 PM
I suggest you get at least 67 STR (Short Tandem Repeat) markers from FTDNA; 111 markers would be even better. This would allow you to see if you have any matches or near haplotype neighbors, who they are, and where their ancestors came from.

S12547 is a possibility for you, since it is under FGC5494 like this: L21>DF13>FGC5494>S12547 (there could be some very recently discovered SNP between FGC5494 and S12547 I don't know about yet, but you get the basic picture). However, you won't know unless you either test for it or find out whether or not you match that man with your surname who is R1b-S12547.

I'm guessing you could probably test for S12547 with YSeq fairly cheaply, but you're going to want some STR markers eventually, if you're really interested in genetic genealogy. NGS testing has not rendered them obsolete quite yet.

@ Mac...

Ok, originally there were a few SNPs discovered by BisDNA Chromo2 which one was in my Full Y NGS results, S1088 and further lead to these SNPs.

1) S1088, S1090
2) S12547,S17749
3) S1079,S1105,S7953
There were three guys (ID:976, 983 & 1515) that went positive for S1088 now DF13>FGC5494>FGC5561>FGC5496>FGC5521>S1088

This and the other SNPs were reviewed and narrowed down for use as a 'Lead' for testing to three by ThomasK.

"Difficult choices, because all of them are quite stable.
My best guess is S1088, S17749, S1105."

We now know that ID 1515 branched into S1088>CTS2457. ID 983 went into S1088>S1105 (Position 21228506) branch but who is still unknown to date and yet to have any matches at that level from any known NGS kits.

Just with in the last week, we now have 5494-5561-5496-5521>S1088>A194 with a Wigand and Barber. A194 also show PGP50 positive and AlexW may have a deeper look at his SNP file to see were it goes. So there are three men in A194 branch now.

Let me know if you are interested in testing further.

MJost

Reith
07-28-2015, 05:18 PM
I have not tried Gedmatch yet. In what way have you found it useful?

I found a few matches and the admixture app helped out..

cairn
07-28-2015, 06:09 PM
Mac von Frankfurt, in addition to the STR testing, I would suggest you take a look at the L21 panel offered by YSEQ (http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=4321) for $88. Since you are conformed L21 through 23andMe, the L21 panel will likely take you the next two steps down the haplotree: either DF13 or DF63, and then your next subclade under that. Family Tree DNA is supposedly going to offer a similar L21 panel "soon", but they don't yet and I don't think anyone outside of FTDNA knows how much it will cost or exactly which SNPs will be tested.

STR testing has been a mixed bag for me. I only have one "match" at 67 markers with a GD of 3. That match has a different surname and the participant won't return my emails, so STR testing didn't really help me at all. My father-in-law, on the other hand, has dozens of matches at 67 markers that share his surname, but we used a YSEQ SNP panel to discover that most of those matches were on different SNP branches. Some of the people who share his SNP branch actually have a greater genetic distance at 67 markers than those on other SNP branches.

dp
07-28-2015, 09:34 PM
I have not tried Gedmatch yet. In what way have you found it useful?
Kits tested as 23andme, FamilyTreeDNA and Ancestry.com can all be compared for their autosomal DNA matches. From what I've seen everyone with Northern European roots has at least a 4th cousin match there, and have 1500 potential matches.
dp :-)

Mac von Frankfurt
07-29-2015, 12:51 AM
Mac von Frankfurt, in addition to the STR testing, I would suggest you take a look at the L21 panel offered by YSEQ (http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=4321) for $88. Since you are conformed L21 through 23andMe, the L21 panel will likely take you the next two steps down the haplotree: either DF13 or DF63, and then your next subclade under that. Family Tree DNA is supposedly going to offer a similar L21 panel "soon", but they don't yet and I don't think anyone outside of FTDNA knows how much it will cost or exactly which SNPs will be tested.

Thanks for the info about the L21 panel at Yseq. That looks like an economical way to get started.

cairn
07-29-2015, 06:16 AM
I just saw in another thread the Family Tree DNA just released their M269 SNP pack today (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5027-R1b-M343-Backbone-SNP-Pack-FTDNA). I don't know if FTDNA is requiring an STR test before ordering the SNP pack, but it's another option for you. It looks like FTDNAs panel covers 140 SNPs for $79, so it's cheaper than YSEQ and might give you a deeper clade assignment than what YSEQ offers. Maybe YSEQ will also lower their prices or offer more SNPs in their L21 panel in the next few days?

edit: changed link to more relevant thread

Mac von Frankfurt
07-30-2015, 01:54 AM
I just saw in another thread the Family Tree DNA just released their M269 SNP pack today (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5027-R1b-M343-Backbone-SNP-Pack-FTDNA). I don't know if FTDNA is requiring an STR test before ordering the SNP pack, but it's another option for you. It looks like FTDNAs panel covers 140 SNPs for $79, so it's cheaper than YSEQ and might give you a deeper clade assignment than what YSEQ offers. Maybe YSEQ will also lower their prices or offer more SNPs in their L21 panel in the next few days?

edit: changed link to more relevant thread

Thanks for the heads up on the FTDNA option. I just ordered the YSEQ R1b-L21 panel.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-05-2015, 01:11 AM
My DNA sample is on its way to Berlin, which I find strangely satisfying in a circle-of-life kind of way.

I am not sure how relevant my results will be to this thread. Even though my ancestor is from Frankfurt the present distribution of the surname is centered around Bavaria and Austria. It also occurs with some frequency in Switzerland, Israel, and a few in the Czech Republic. The highest density for an entire country is Austria but the density in Bavaria is the highest for a region.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-13-2015, 10:23 PM
Results of round 1 testing are starting to come in for my R1b-L21 ancestor from Frankfurt. If anyone wants to prognosticate then now is the time. I will give you a small hint; he is not DF49 (I did say it was a small hint.)

JohnStorch
08-29-2015, 04:58 PM
I'm a newbie here in terms of this website and genetic genealogy trying to navigate through the volumes of information here and elsewhere. I wasn't sure it would be appropriate to just put this out there on the forum, but I am interested in the topic of L21 in the Rhineland. It looks like the highest concentration of L21 is in the British Isles, but there are my ancestors in the middle of Germany. So, from my reading, I guess they were... proto-Celtic, most of their descendants moved on to the Isles and they stayed on the mainland? Are there any other sites where this discussion and research continues?

Additional information: FamilyTreeDNA Kit# N138095. Paternal Line R-L21. My father, grandfather and great grandfather in my male lineage were all born in the US, but my great great grandfather, and presumably his ancestors, came from Dipperz, a municipality in the district of Fulda in Hesse, Germany.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-29-2015, 05:32 PM
So, from my reading, I guess they were... proto-Celtic, most of their descendants moved on to the Isles and they stayed on the mainland? Are there any other sites where this discussion and research continues?


You have got the gist of it. This site is as good as it gets for this type of discussion. What we need to sort this out is both more modern and more ancient DNA results from the continent. I should have my last SNP result in a few days and then I will decide which NGS (next generation sequencing) test I will take.

JohnStorch
01-07-2016, 10:19 PM
After National Geographic Geno 2.0, FamilyTreeDNA M343 Backbone SNP Pack and YSEQ L21 Super-Clade Panel testing, my terminal SNP now stands at DF13*. That’s enough SNPs for now. Maybe it’s time to take a look at some STR tests.

JRW
01-08-2016, 03:36 AM
John,

Your situation is not uncommon for men of German ancestry. In fact, your patrilineal ancestry and SNP status are consistent with other indications that DF13 arose (at least to a detectable level) in central Europe. Consider your uniqueness to be another piece of evidence suggesting the geographic area where one can reasonably infer DF13 to be the oldest. (I hesitate to use the word “originate,” given that Bronze Age people where surprisingly mobile. The fellow who first carried the DF13 mutation could have traveled a significant distance before leaving a legacy that we could detect in the 21st century.)

A recent paper by Cassidy et al about several ancient genomes found on Raithlin Island (off the coast of Northern Ireland) discussed extensively on another thread in Anthrogenica (see http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6111-Neolithic-and-Bronze-Age-migration-to-Ireland-and-establishment-of-the-insular-Atlant) makes an observation that you might find interesting. The paper’s authors compared the ancient genome of a DF13>DF21 man who lived about 4000 years ago (known as Raithlin1) with the genomes of modern populations. Not surprisingly, Raithlin1 had the greatest haplotype-based affinity to the samples from Scotland (36.512), Ireland (36.313) and Wales (35.745). What was somewhat surprising was that the sample from GermanyAustria was fourth (33.658), ahead of France (32.290) and even England (32.213). The authors illustrated Raithlin1’s affinity to modern populations in the following graphic:

7206

The sample sizes were small, so IMO the observations should be interpreted as being suggestive, rather than definitive, of Raithlin1’s genome’s affinity to modern populations. However, they are consistent with the thrust of this thread and your DF13* status.

Dubhthach
01-08-2016, 09:47 AM
It's quite possible that DF13 arose someone around the Rhine, if you consider the Rathlin sample above what it might be telling us is that DF13 (and L21 as result) spread into Ireland and Britain via a corridor up the River Rhine.

A DF13* from Germany is very interesting if you ask me, given the M343 panel and yseq super-panel, the only options really left to you is some form of NGS testing such as BigY. In general in likes of Ireland most men tend to fall into large sub-clades of DF13 (DF49, DF21, L513, ZZ10 -- which encompases Z253 and Z255, etc)

rms2
01-08-2016, 11:51 AM
Another interesting recent result is Thomas Krahn's Z39589* status. Z39589 is the INDEL recently discovered by Alex Williamson that unites DF41, DF49, L1335, Z251, S1051, and Y14240 below DF13. Thomas' family came from the Rhineland, as I recall, and settled in Transylvania.

rms2
01-09-2016, 01:10 AM
I'm thinking ancient y-dna will eventually show that L21 came to Britain and Ireland from the Rhineland via Bell Beaker, as French archaeologist and linguist Henri Hubert said, whose book, The History of the Celtic People, is still worth reading. If you don't have his book, you should get a copy and read it.



But whence did the Goidels come, and when did they come? Where must we look for their earliest home on the Continent and their starting-point? Probably they came from north of the Brythonic domain, and it is to them that tradition refers when it tells that the Celts used to live on the low coasts of the North Sea. They must have left those shores very early, for hardly a trace of them remains there (p. 169).
. . . In the first period of the Bronze Age there arrived in the British Isles, coming from the Continent, people with very marked characteristics. The old Neolithic inhabitants (among whom I include those of all the beginning of the Bronze Age) were long-heads of Mediterranean type, who built for their dead, or, at least, for the more distinguished of them, tumuli with a funeral chamber known as the "long barrows", in which one sometimes finds those curious bell-shaped beakers adorned at regular intervals with bands of incised or stamped decoration, of a very simple and austere type. The newcomers were of quite a different type, and had other funeral practices.
They buried their dead under round tumuli, known as "round barrows", in graves in which the body was placed in a crouching position on one side and enclosed in stone flags or woodwork. Later they burned them. In their graves there were zoned beakers (Fig. 33), but of a late type in which the neck is distinguished from the belly, or vases derived from these beakers . . . The grave goods comprised buttons with a V-shaped boring, flint and copper daggers, arrow-heads, and flat perforated pieces of schist which are "bracers", or bowman's wristguards. The skeletons were of a new type: tall, with round heads of a fairly constant shape, the brow receding, the supraciliary ridge prominent, the cheek-bones highly developed, and the jaws massive and projecting so as to present a dip at the base of the nose. I have already described them as one of the types represented in Celtic burials.
The association of the physical type of this people with the beaker has led British anthropologists to call it the Beaker Folk . . . In Scotland they were accompanied by other brachycephals, with a higher index and of Alpine type. In general they advanced from south to north and from east to west, and their progress lasted long enough for there to be a very marked difference in furniture between their oldest and latest tombs.
. . . Their progress was a conquest. It is evident that they subdued and assimilated the previous occupants of the country (pp. 171-173).




It is at least certain that the Beaker Folk went from Germany to Britain, and not from Britain to Germany. The typical round-heads of the round barrows are a Nordic type, which may have grown up on the plains of Northern Europe . . . Secondly, the similarity of the British barrows to the tumuli of North Germany at the beginning of the Bronze Age and the constant practice of burying the dead, when inhumation is practised, in a contracted position, as in Central Germany; and lastly, the similarity of many of the urns of the round barrows, which are late developments of the zoned beaker, and of other vases found there, to the so-called Neolithic pottery of North Germany in the region of the megaliths.
. . . At this point it is legitimate to ask what became of all the people who set up the megalithic monuments in the north-west of Germany, and what became of the tribes of bowmen who were mingled with them, for it is a dogma of German Siedelungsgeschichte that all the north-west seaboard, Westphalia, and Hanover were emptied of their inhabitants before the second period of the Bronze Age.
Many scholars, British, German, and French, have accordingly thought that the mixed population of this part of Germany, which one day set off and emigrated, was the original stock of the Goidels (pp. 175-176).
. . . The most obscure point in the hypothesis adopted is the original position of the future Goidels, for if the zone-beaker folk was the nucleus which organized them it is very hard to determine where it was itself formed. Moreover, it spread over almost the whole of the Celtic domain and left descendants there. In any case it occupied all the seaboard districts between the Rhine and the Elbe which remained outside the frontiers previously mentioned. These were the districts which were emptied by the migration of the Goidels to Britain.
. . . Was it a total or a partial emigration? It was probably partial, for there remained what is usually left behind by peoples which have been a long time in a country where they have been engaged in adapting the ground to human life, namely the distribution of dwellings and the shape of villages and fields. In the western part of North-Western Germany, in Western Hanover, and Westphalia, cultivated land and dwellings are arranged in a manner which is foreign to Germany, or has become so. It is the arrangement found in Ireland (Fig. 35), part of England, and France.
. . . Agricultural peoples never change their abode entirely. This is an indication that the Goidels did not leave in one body, and that they did not all leave.
What was the reason of their emigration? It was certainly not weakness or poverty. Perhaps there was some encroachment of the sea on a coast which has altered much. Perhaps some invention in the matter of navigation was discovered. The megalith builders whom the Goidels surrounded were certainly sailors who were not afraid of crossing the North Sea (pp. 187-188).

Mac von Frankfurt
02-15-2016, 05:13 PM
I am supposed to receive my Y Elite 2.0 (Batch 9007) results by 10 March. Additional research suggests my Y-DNA ancestors would have been in a region where Upper German was spoken when surnames were adopted. The root word for my surname was unique to Upper German at the time surnames were adopted. So around 1500 AD my ancestors would have likely been in the blue area in the attached graphic.

7798

Mac von Frankfurt
03-29-2016, 12:45 PM
Looks like I am in the Z39589 Group as well. Tentative results from Alex.


You are now R-L21>DF13>Z39589>A4556/BY2868. Your test shows that the A4556 branch is positive for Z39589.

Alex

WOLFF éric
05-26-2016, 07:35 PM
R1b>L21>DF13>Z35989>Y14240/FGC35995>Y14049/FGC35996 from Alsace here. B)

Mikewww
05-26-2016, 08:17 PM
Here are five charts that show an alignment that I think are important to Central and Western IE people and the beginnings of Italo-Celtic languages as well as potentially Germanic languages.

I've added my own notes in deep-maroon to try to bridge the terminology between the different scientists.

First, David Anthony's propose spread of IE branches from the Pontic Steppes with the Yamnaya. The Italo-Celtic or Pre-Italo-Celtic branches move up the Danube River. The lower right hand corner shows the Ringe language chart with the note that Celtic and Germanic language development must have been in early contact with each other.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/Yamnaya-Spread_of_PIE_by_Anthony_2008.png

This graphic from Martinez shows the full extant of the Bell Beakers and major regional groups with dating. The Southern-Iberian-Ligurian Beakers are earlier than the Northwestern Europe Beaker expansions.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/Beakers-Distribution_and_Dating_by_Martinez_2015.png

This is Desideri's depiction of Bell Beakers, Beakers and Corded Ware converging and then the "reflux".
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/Beakers-Regional_Groups_and_Corded_Ware_meet_by%20Desideri _2008.png

This chart and accompanying paper examines what happened in Switzerland at the time of the "reflux". If you read the paper you can see the convergences of these groups is ominous. Harrison describes how the east culture destroyed the southern (western) culture at this location.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/Beakers-Regional_Groups_meet_at_Sion_by_Harrison_2007.png

Fast forward from the middle of the 3rd millenium BC to the beginning of the 2nd millenium and we have the L21+ Food Vessel/Bell Beaker Rathlin Island ancient DNA. The autosomal DNA matches Central Germany, right about where Hubert thinks the Celts originated.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/Celts-Place_Names_by_Hubert_and_Irish_Genome_by_Cassidy. png

This is just on the east side of the Rhine. A lot was going on there down to the Black Forest and the upper Danube.

Mac von Frankfurt
03-05-2017, 08:12 PM
R1b>L21>DF13>Z35989>Y14240/FGC35995>Y14049/FGC35996 from Alsace here. B)

It looks like we both inhabit sparsely populated branches under R-Z39589. If you look at The Big Tree: R-Z39589 I am the German flag 5 blocks to the left of you.

Welcome to the wilderness.

thewarrider7
05-28-2017, 03:03 PM
So a STR 37 match of genetic distance of 4 would not be very close? How distant could you estimate? I only have one match aswell at gd of 4.

rms2
05-28-2017, 03:09 PM
So a STR 37 match of genetic distance of 4 would not be very close? How distant could you estimate? I only have one match aswell at gd of 4.

Unfortunately, 37 markers are not enough for good resolution. You can have "matches" of 33/37 outside your own subclade. If you go to 111 markers and that 33/37 individual remains close, then you have a match.

If that 33/37 neighbor has your surname or a variant of it, the odds of him staying close at 111 markers are much greater.

Really, both of you need 111 markers, and, ideally, the Big Y test.

If you get the Big Y, you can get all the STR markers you need by getting the analysis from YFull for an extra $49.

thewarrider7
05-28-2017, 03:32 PM
You say "this tribe" what tribe are you referring to exactly?

thewarrider7
05-28-2017, 03:33 PM
Hi Richard,

Ive read many of your post and i got my results back recently.

I am english and my last name is Snooks.

However, R-P312/S116 > Z290 > L21/S145 > DF13 > FGC5494 > FGC5561 > FGC7448 > FGC5496 > FGC5521 > FGC5549 > FGC5511 > FGC5517 > 7564743-C-A
is atlantic celtic?

Snooks is found in hampshire where the belgic celtic tribes settled?

Although my big y test closest matches are north of england borderlands/ Scottish south west and isle of manx

Any ideas?

Kind regards

thewarrider7
05-28-2017, 03:40 PM
Hi richard

Thanks for the quick reply.

I believe the match only tested up to 67 markers. He has a different surname of Appleby. But on the Big y an Appleby has 36 shared novel variants. And 2 non matching SNPs CTS4754 CTS4753.

I match two more applebys with STR 37 testing although they are also a genetic distance of 4.

Can you estimate a branch off in timeline or how close we are?

Kind regards

rms2
05-28-2017, 03:43 PM
Hi richard

Thanks for the quick reply.

I believe the match only tested up to 67 markers. He has a different surname of Appleby. But on the Big y an Appleby has 36 shared novel variants. And 2 non matching SNPs CTS4754 CTS4753.

I match two more applebys with STR 37 testing although they are also a genetic distance of 4.

Can you estimate a branch off in timeline or how close we are?

Kind regards

Take a look at this post (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9633-Big-Y-What-Now&p=239590&viewfull=1#post239590).

thewarrider7
05-28-2017, 04:13 PM
Hi richard,

now i have ten i shold be able to private message you?

I have replied to that post.