Speculation on Norse Nobility

[kef1989]

P312/DF19 Finley checking in here! First post on Anthrogenica.

Does anyone here have any theories on what SNP the line of the Norse Noble line of Halfdan Sveidasson? Halfdan is descended from Fornjot the Ancient Giant. Supposedly, this is the line that eventually branched into Danish Nobility/Kings, Norwegian Kings, House of Normandy, Orkney Jarls, and many more! This line is said to be of Odin.

Based purely on speculation, one can deduce the SNP of this ancient line by investigating various Families who claim descent from Ancestors of this line. I can think of a few families off the top of my head, that I have spent many hours poking around and investigating history/legends! We have the famous Sinclair family, Grants, and Bassets (?)...

All information I post here is freely available on various family research sites. I cannot guarantee any degree of accuracy... I appologize for any wrong information and will happily correct! Believe and read at your own risk!


Let's start with:


Sinclair - There are many lineages within the Sinclair family, unfortunately. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's just harder to narrow down the original line with any certainty. And I think most Sinclair's believe their family story that they are descendants of Rollo (Rolf Granger). Rollo was of royal blood and a supposed descendant from the line of Odin. Based on a family research website, the Sinclairs of Roslyn are assumed to be the "original" Sinclair's. Not that there are any *true* holders of a surname. It is just believed that the Sinclair's of Roslyn came first. Then moved throughout scotland and especially Caithness. But there are others who are believed to be completely unrelated to each other. The Roslyn/Caithness line is apparently S21/u106. Further, it has been narrowed down to Z346. This has a very telling conclusion *IF* the main Sinclair line is truely descended, unbroken, from Duke Rolf Granger (and the Duke himself didn't result from any Hanky Panky). My own conclusion, is that there is no way to definitively prove descent from the line of Norse Kings, Chieftains, and Nobles. But what if they are?

Grant: There are once again, numerous lines of Grants. The one I will be focusing on is the so-called "Chiefly Line." There are numerous origins for the Grant family. Some say the Grants are descended from the line of Kenneth Mac Alpin, who was a great Gael. The most probable, however, is that some Grants are descended from Vikings. Specifically, Haakon Sigardarson, the Ladejarl of Trondheim. This is reinforced by the fact that the current Chief of the Clan Grant is a Grant who is DF19/DF88. Being a part of the DF19 project myself, I can attest that DF19 is believed to arose in Denmark, Southern Scandinavia, or Northern Germany.. Haakon is believed to be a descendant of Odin, whom gave birth to a line of Nobles who eventually rule all of Northern Europe. Once again, I see no definitive proof of the Grants descent from the line of Odin. But what if they are?

Basset: I cannot find even supposed documented proof of this families descent. But based on a Geni webpage, the Bassets are descended from a Osmunde De Centeville, who was a descendant of Duke Bathel. Now this is where things get cloudy. There are not many sources who Bathel descends from. All I've been able to dig up, is once again on Geni. Depending on who's Geni page you look at, Bathel (Basset) is descended from William I Longsword or from a great grandson of Eyestein Ivarsson, named Asperling. There is no documentated proof which one of these men Bathel is descended from, or if any. But if Bathel is descended from either of these men, then that also makes the Basset family descendants of Halfdan and thus Fornjot the Ancient Giant. There is a DF19/DF88 branch of the Bassets. I have no idea if DF88 Bassets are descended from Bathel. I have found documented "proof" that the Bassets of Bathel were of Noble blood. Their nobility was actually uncontested back in the days of the Normans. The descent in which their Nobility flows, is unknown to me, as I have found no proof other than a couple of Geni pages.

Last, I would like to bring to your attention the work of an author. He has done far more research than I. Though his work is also based upon shaky family history passed down many generations. To sum it up, just in case I'm not allowed to link to websites in my thread: Based upon different families and their supposed history, this author speculated that Rollo's DNA is R1b. Furthermore, based on these families his origin shows a center around Denmark. After sampling DNA results of families who claim descent from Rollo, he comes up with L21 being the SNP of Rollo. Specifically, he claims DF13 for Rollo. Here is the link http://originhunters.blogspot.com/2014/04/exploring-rollos-roots-dna-leads-way.html (Rollo) There seem to be many families who claim descent from Rollo who are DF13... This gives a strong possibility of DF13 being at least the SNP of Rollo. However, the origin of DF13 is apparently from the Danube area. This does not fit the family orientation of Rollo in my opinion. I personally don't believe there is proof of this origin. I think the families used in this calculation have other lines, which might be either u106 or DF19/DF88. Based upon the Surnames listed as possibly descended from Rollo, there is a DF19 Stewart in my project. Likewise, there are many u106 Sinclairs. The question is, which of these families were the original and which ones hooked on to the name at a later date. Furthermore, Mckenzies are a big DF13 family, and the main line claims descent from King Kenneth Alpin... I question if many of the DF13 families in this study were Scottish Gael families who adopted many of those surnames at a later date than the original families who were descended from Rollo.

I would have to lean towards u106 or DF19/DF88 as being the line of the Norse Nobility of Odin. Or both! Who knows how many NPE's there were within the Norse Royals. Both of those SNP's have a North Germanic orgin, and there is family history to support this, true or not.


So to sum it all up.. Options that I have researched for the Odin line SNP are DF19, DF13, or U106.. Sometimes family history is completely incorrect, and sometimes families wrongly attached themselves to older, more respected established names. Sometimes it might be true, though going back this far in time with any amount of certainty is virtually impossible.

What do you you guys think? I'd love for people to chime in. Thanks for reading!

[Jenny]

I wanted to read te Rollo page at OriginHunters but it's unavailable. New linky?

[kef1989]

I wanted to read te Rollo page at OriginHunters but it's unavailable. New linky?

Certainly Jenny! I apologize about the broken link! There are actually a few errors in my first post I need to correct. I think it's too late for me to edit my first post, so I will just reply with corrections.

Link: http://originhunters.blogspot.com/2014/04/exploring-rollos-roots-dna-leads-way.html
Also: http://originhunters.blogspot.com/2013/07/conquering-williams-dna.html

Just copy and paste those into your browser and hopefully it will work this time! I am absolutely no way affiliated with these websites ^^^

First of all, I stated the Grant Chiefly line is DF19/DF88/464xQuadC. I don't know what I was thinking, but that is majorly wrong. The Grant chief does NOT have 464xQuadC... Instead they are DF88 as stated, which is the most recent SNP shared with the L644 families. This DF88 mutation occured presumably around 200 BC, give or take. The DF19 Grant line has sub-family and family exclusive SNP's below DF88. Thus these exclusive Grant family SNP's aren't shared by the L644 families. Further, I would like to point out that the most recent common ancestor, according to some Basset and Grant family tree's, would be Godwulf, who was supposedly born around 80 AD. From Godwulf came Fornjot the Ancient Giant, and Finn. Finn was the grandfather of Odin. I made a boo boo when I assumed both Bassets and Grants were descended from Odin. There appears to be a split from Godwulf via Fornjot and Finn. Fornjot's line gave rise to many Jarls, Dukes, and Chiefs. Likewise, Finn prognated some of the major Kingly, Noble, and Royal lines of Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. Grants are possibly descended from Finn and the Bassets from Fornjot. These lines split off many, many years ago, but still come from the same source - Godwulf. Therefore the Grants are the only one of the two families descended from Odin. Basset's come from the line of the House of Normandy through Fornjot, brother of Finn. Finn's grandson Odin gave rise to the Fairhair Dynasty Kings and Nobility of Norway.

Keep in mind that this is all based on family history, which tends to be shaky at best when it comes to reliability. Also, the further you go back in time, the less accurate family geneaology becomes because people tend to embelish their story. Not to mention there were very few people who can read and write during these days. The only reason why there is even a miniscule chance to put a name to an ancestor from 2000 years ago or even 1000 years ago, is because we are talking about a Kingly line.


PS: Falcouner I got your private message the other day, but it appears I can't send PM's yet (post count). I don't think I should go into your question in public like this. Let me just say that the kit in question was erroneous resulting in a false positive for that SNP for this individual. Unfortunately, the owner of that kit wasn't too happy. Both kits were retested as P312+. No back mutation! It isn't that interesting of an explanation.... Also, I do not share the 464xQuadC mutation like you do. I was tested as cccg which came as a shock because there are Findley's in your group that tested positive for 464xQuadC with you. Interesting that we share the same surname minus one letter, and are both DF88. But DF88 is where Finley and Findley branch off...





Here is another source for you all to look at if you are interested: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-df19/photos This will give you a visual reference of the breakdown of DF19.





In all honesty, I am very much a beginner at these things. I'm not sure I fully understand SNP's, and whether the family tree's even fit with the suspected flow of the DF19 SNP tree...

[faulconer]

Thank you for the reply! Do you have Big Y results? When I first received my Y-STR results back in 07, Findley was the closest match. Since then I have wondered if Faulconer was a branch of the Findley family or vice versa. Although it's likely that the connection predates surnames, I find it very interesting that there are Finleys and Findleys branching before quadC occurred. I think Big Y results might shed some light on that.

[kef1989]

Thank you for the reply! Do you have Big Y results? When I first received my Y-STR results back in 07, Findley was the closest match. Since then I have wondered if Faulconer was a branch of the Findley family or vice versa. Although it's likely that the connection predates surnames, I find it very interesting that there are Finleys and Findleys branching before quadC occurred. I think Big Y results might shed some light on that.
Thank you Falcouner for the shared enthusiasm. I ordered my Big Y testing this past week. I can't wait to contribute to the DF19 project and my Finley group! As far as I know, no other Finley from my group has Big Y tested. If they have, they are likely keeping their results private. When I get my results I would be happy to share them with you! In a way, you are something like my 43rd cousin 18 times removed or somewhere around that lol :D

[faulconer]

That's great news! Can't wait to see the results.

This topic beings up a point that I have been thinking about over the last few years. Originally, when we had low SNP resolution, our theories on Norse DNA often included the idea that R1b in Scandinavia was the result of Celtic slaves. I was always skeptical of this as it seemed to me that the percentage of R1b in Scandinavia was too high. As the phylogenetic tree has grown more granular and more ancient DNA has been analyzed, it seems likely that U106 in Scandinavia may have been there for a very long time (not the results of Viking slaves).

With new SNPs like L238, DF19 and DF99, I wonder if we will begin to question whether P312 may not be only Celtic. Perhaps some P312 branches separated earlier than thought and became part of the beginning of the Germanic peoples (along with I, R1a and R1b-U106).

I think that a wave of migration (perhaps Yamnaya or the like) associated with Indo-European brought R1(a & b) to Europe, along with new tech and the horse/pastoral way of life. It seems possible that the oral traditions leading to the sagas had an echo of this migration (referring to Aesir/Vanir war).

Anyway, there are many people on this board with a greater understanding of these concepts. It is fun to theorize on where our ancestors may have come from and how they got there!

[kef1989]

That's great news! Can't wait to see the results.

This topic beings up a point that I have been thinking about over the last few years. Originally, when we had low SNP resolution, our theories on Norse DNA often included the idea that R1b in Scandinavia was the result of Celtic slaves. I was always skeptical of this as it seemed to me that the percentage of R1b in Scandinavia was too high. As the phylogenetic tree has grown more granular and more ancient DNA has been analyzed, it seems likely that U106 in Scandinavia may have been there for a very long time (not the results of Viking slaves).

With new SNPs like L238, DF19 and DF99, I wonder if we will begin to question whether P312 may not be only Celtic. Perhaps some P312 branches separated earlier than thought and became part of the beginning of the Germanic peoples (along with I, R1a and R1b-U106).

I think that a wave of migration (perhaps Yamnaya or the like) associated with Indo-European brought R1(a & b) to Europe, along with new tech and the horse/pastoral way of life. It seems possible that the oral traditions leading to the sagas had an echo of this migration (referring to Aesir/Vanir war).

Anyway, there are many people on this board with a greater understanding of these concepts. It is fun to theorize on where our ancestors may have come from and how they got there!

I'm by no means an expert in Genetics or Anthrogenics....and all of the Haplogroup I - Germanic purists in here would probably argue with me until we're all blue in the face.

But I believe it would only make sense that the Germanic language and culture spread to Scandinavia by the R1b and R1a people. Not I2 or I1. The Germanic branches of R1b and R1a likely carried the culture and language up through Denmark to Scandinavia eventually followed by multiple back migrations into Denmark and Germany.

R1b and R1a are both the original carriers of Indo-European languages. Haplogroup I is far too old, much older than the Germanic language. I firmly believe that I2 and I1 were both a part of the pre Indo-European people who settled in Scandinavia before all recorded history. These were the Scandinavian aborigines who likely assimilated with R1b and R1a, or were perhaps even conquered by them.

Proof? Well to me it makes absolutely no sense for Haplogroup I to be the original Germanic people when it has been in Scandinavia far before the language came around. Plus this fits the origin "myths" of the Swedes, Norwegians, Danish, and Frisians better.

Germans migrated from the Black Sea area some time after the R1b Celts, and traveled up through Denmark into Scandinavia.

I also believe Celts and Germanic's to be of the same stock of people. So it would make perfect sense to have them come from the same area, although following different migration paths and times.

[Paul_Johnsen]

I'm by no means an expert in Genetics or Anthrogenics....and all of the Haplogroup I - Germanic purists in here would probably argue with me until we're all blue in the face.

But I believe it would only make sense that the Germanic language and culture spread to Scandinavia by the R1b and R1a people. Not I2 or I1. The Germanic branches of R1b and R1a likely carried the culture and language up through Denmark to Scandinavia eventually followed by multiple back migrations into Denmark and Germany.

R1b and R1a are both the original carriers of Indo-European languages. Haplogroup I is far too old, much older than the Germanic language. I firmly believe that I2 and I1 were both a part of the pre Indo-European people who settled in Scandinavia before all recorded history. These were the Scandinavian aborigines who likely assimilated with R1b and R1a, or were perhaps even conquered by them.

Proof? Well to me it makes absolutely no sense for Haplogroup I to be the original Germanic people when it has been in Scandinavia far before the language came around. Plus this fits the origin "myths" of the Swedes, Norwegians, Danish, and Frisians better.

Germans migrated from the Black Sea area some time after the R1b Celts, and traveled up through Denmark into Scandinavia.

I also believe Celts and Germanic's to be of the same stock of people. So it would make perfect sense to have them come from the same area, although following different migration paths and times.

I1 is estimated to be between 5,500 years old and 3,900 http://www.yfull.com/tree/I1/ . Clearly it is a (if not the) major Germanic haplogroup. I can't really understand how anyone could doubt that.

[faulconer]

I1 is estimated to be between 5,500 years old and 3,900 http://www.yfull.com/tree/I1/ . Clearly it is a (if not the) major Germanic haplogroup. I can't really understand how anyone could doubt that.

Perhaps it would be easier to understand if we attempt to define the word Germanic in this context. My reading of kef1989's post is that the Germanic languages (and perhaps cultures) are likely derived from the same people who brought the Indo-European languages to Europe. Who exactly those people were and whether they were comprised of mainly( or only) R1 Y lineages is still up for debate. However, there seems to be a strong argument that this could be the case. If we take the position that R1 lines brought IE languages, then it seems possible that the R1 lines were part of the Germanic peoples from the beginning of the language and culture associated with them. As opposed to being carried into Germanic areas at a later time.

I don't think any of this argues against I1 being a major Germanic haplogroup. I don't think that anyone is doubting that. Though, I do think it's healthy to doubt at this stage in the genetic anthropology game.

My question is a bit more controversial as I am wondering if it's possible that some P312 lineages may have participated in this mixing pot that became Germanic. Conventional wisdom at this point has been that P312 = Celtic. I think that L238 and DF19 (among others) might challenge that position.

[kef1989]

Perhaps it would be easier to understand if we attempt to define the word Germanic in this context. My reading of kef1989's post is that the Germanic languages (and perhaps cultures) are likely derived from the same people who brought the Indo-European languages to Europe. Who exactly those people were and whether they were comprised of mainly( or only) R1 Y lineages is still up for debate. However, there seems to be a strong argument that this could be the case. If we take the position that R1 lines brought IE languages, then it seems possible that the R1 lines were part of the Germanic peoples from the beginning of the language and culture associated with them. As opposed to being carried into Germanic areas at a later time.

I don't think any of this argues against I1 being a major Germanic haplogroup. I don't think that anyone is doubting that. Though, I do think it's healthy to doubt at this stage in the genetic anthropology game.

My question is a bit more controversial as I am wondering if it's possible that some P312 lineages may have participated in this mixing pot that became Germanic. Conventional wisdom at this point has been that P312 = Celtic. I think that L238 and DF19 (among others) might challenge that position.

Exactly. Thank you Falcouner for clarifying better. I don't argue against I1 being a major Germanic haplogroup. As matter of fact, it's distribution is very Germanic.

I just believe I1 didn't bring the Germanic language with them. I'm thinking I1 was already an established haplogroup when Indo Europeans arrived with what branched into various forms of Germanic. If I recall, the Saami are majorly haplogroup I. Can't remember if whether I1 or I2. But the Saami aren't Indo European.

Falcouner I don't believe it is so cut and dry with p312. DF19 might very well be Germanic in origin. Actually, based purely on its origin on the map, it is Germanic in origin. But what the D19 man considered himself, we may not know. There were both Celts and Germanic's who inhabited the areas. Think Belgiae (sp?)

Then again, I probably have a dog in this fight. (R1b) I may not know anything.