PDA

View Full Version : The migration that missed out Wales



Caratacus
11-11-2015, 10:06 AM
Just a quick look at the People of the British Ilses pie-chart maps below shows that the main difference between the Welsh and the English is not, as one might have expected, a lack of German signatured DNA in the Welsh but a complete absence of the dark blue 17 which occurs at highest frequency in northern France (both west and east).

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/PotBI%202015%20Britain%20Map%20My%20Version_zpswv5 8tnlo.jpg

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/cb3c74f3-be07-436e-b914-1288030774ad_zpsbu3kb2rk.png

Which historical migration do you think the blue 17 represents and why, apparently, did those migrants/invaders not enter Wales while most of the other (earlier?) groups did?

Dubhthach
11-11-2015, 11:26 AM
What's interesting here is that when you look at their earlier analysis which included Ireland the proportions of the "North French" cluster is quite different. In earlier analysis it was "Cluster 16" ("Cluster 17" == "Cluster 14" of published report somewhat)

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/POBI/POBI-Ireland24.png

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/POBI/POBI-16-17.png

The "Old Cluster 17" appears to be also absent from Wales, but note it's difference when it comes to rest of Britain, I wonder if it's "subsumed" some of the Irish cluster, which had been removed from the later analysis. eg. that a chunk of the old "Cluster 24" got submerged by the algorithm along with "Old Cluster 17" into the new "Custer 16"

As for movements between Northern France and Britain, I can think of two obvious ones in history, the movement of Belgae/Gauls into Southern Britain in 200 years before Caesar (coin minting tribes) and obviously the Norman takeover 1000-1200 years later.

Erik
11-11-2015, 01:09 PM
Welsh are probably closest to the pre-Anglo-Saxon Celtic inhabitants of England.

avalon
11-11-2015, 04:23 PM
Just a quick look at the People of the British Ilses pie-chart maps below shows that the main difference between the Welsh and the English is not, as one might have expected, a lack of German signatured DNA in the Welsh but a complete absence of the dark blue 17 which occurs at highest frequency in northern France (both west and east).

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/PotBI%202015%20Britain%20Map%20My%20Version_zpswv5 8tnlo.jpg

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/cb3c74f3-be07-436e-b914-1288030774ad_zpsbu3kb2rk.png

Which historical migration do you think the blue 17 represents and why, apparently, did those migrants/invaders not enter Wales while most of the other (earlier?) groups did?

I have mentioned the N and NE France cluster 17 on other threads but nobody seemed to have any ideas about it. I don't know if it is the result of a specific migration to Britain from France or not, but if it is, then I doubt it is the Normans because cluster 17 is quite substantial and I can't imagine that the Normans made that much of a genetic impact. IMO, more likely it is an Iron Age movement into Britain (eg. Belgae) that had virtually no impact on NW and SW Wales.

avalon
11-11-2015, 05:19 PM
What's interesting here is that when you look at their earlier analysis which included Ireland the proportions of the "North French" cluster is quite different. In earlier analysis it was "Cluster 16" ("Cluster 17" == "Cluster 14" of published report somewhat)

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/POBI/POBI-Ireland24.png

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/POBI/POBI-16-17.png

The "Old Cluster 17" appears to be also absent from Wales, but note it's difference when it comes to rest of Britain, I wonder if it's "subsumed" some of the Irish cluster, which had been removed from the later analysis. eg. that a chunk of the old "Cluster 24" got submerged by the algorithm along with "Old Cluster 17" into the new "Custer 16"

As for movements between Northern France and Britain, I can think of two obvious ones in history, the movement of Belgae/Gauls into Southern Britain in 200 years before Caesar (coin minting tribes) and obviously the Norman takeover 1000-1200 years later.

I see what you are saying. In the original analysis they had the Irish component "cluster 24" which they then took out in the final analysis and in doing so this altered the proportions of the NW France and the N/NE France clusters? It looks as though the effect was to reduce the NW France component and increase the N/NE France cluster proportion but I have no idea how to interpret this in terms of the history/prehistory.

Dubhthach
11-11-2015, 05:38 PM
Well there are some other differences apparanet note distinct cluster 12 in NE France in published report, that NE cluster is bit different in older material. Though it's hard to tell given their fetish for various shades of Blue :D

zamyatin13
11-11-2015, 09:25 PM
Iron Age Belgic/Gaulish invasions look the most likely to cover that area. The high proportion among the 'West Scotland/N. Irish' cluster (i.e. Highlands, Islands and 'Indigenous' Irish) would seem to support this, as that's not an area known for Anglo-Saxon or Norman settlement.

The other alternatives are of course Anglo-Saxon or even Norse, but then why the matches to France?

I found an intriguing suggestion while reading Morris' excellent 'Age of Arthur' recently. In it, he suggested fairly large-scale Anglo-Saxon movements from England to Northern France (covering the Cotentin to Calais) in the Sixth Century. The suggestion was that after the Britons had stabilized the frontier circa 500, recent Germanic immigrants expanded out to France instead of heading West, founding 'hundreds' of villages in the area. I don't know if this has since been debunked, but if both areas were Belgic/Gaulish with a topping of Anglo-Saxon and later Norse (plus later Norman invasion), it would not be a surprise if Northern France and England showed up as basically identical.

rms2
11-11-2015, 11:46 PM
Iron Age Belgic/Gaulish invasions look the most likely to cover that area. The high proportion among the 'West Scotland/N. Irish' cluster (i.e. Highlands, Islands and 'Indigenous' Irish) would seem to support this, as that's not an area known for Anglo-Saxon or Norman settlement.

The other alternatives are of course Anglo-Saxon or even Norse, but then why the matches to France?

I found an intriguing suggestion while reading Morris' excellent 'Age of Arthur' recently. In it, he suggested fairly large-scale Anglo-Saxon movements from England to Northern France (covering the Cotentin to Calais) in the Sixth Century. The suggestion was that after the Britons had stabilized the frontier circa 500, recent Germanic immigrants expanded out to France instead of heading West, founding 'hundreds' of villages in the area. I don't know if this has since been debunked, but if both areas were Belgic/Gaulish with a topping of Anglo-Saxon and later Norse (plus later Norman invasion), it would not be a surprise if Northern France and England showed up as basically identical.

There were Saxon settlements in the Loire valley in the immediate post-Roman period.

rms2
11-12-2015, 12:24 AM
I should have added that Flanders extends into NE France and was Frankish (Germanic) territory.

ffoucart
11-12-2015, 12:59 AM
Boulonnais and Ponthieu are known Anglo-Saxon settlements, some directly from Jutland (IIId/IVth centuries, probably allied of Rome in the Litus Saxonicum) other from England (VIth/VIIth centuries).
90% of toponyms around Boulogne are of Anglo-Saxon origin, and some can be found on both sides of the Channel, like Colincthun/Colington, Sangate/Sandgate....
You can find many studies about it.
Think about the coins of Quentowic (on of the maker was "Anglo").

Gravetto-Danubian
11-12-2015, 02:14 AM
Just a quick look at the People of the British Ilses pie-chart maps below shows that the main difference between the Welsh and the English is not, as one might have expected, a lack of German signatured DNA in the Welsh but a complete absence of the dark blue 17 which occurs at highest frequency in northern France (both west and east).

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/PotBI%202015%20Britain%20Map%20My%20Version_zpswv5 8tnlo.jpg

http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu295/Alchemyst/cb3c74f3-be07-436e-b914-1288030774ad_zpsbu3kb2rk.png

Which historical migration do you think the blue 17 represents and why, apparently, did those migrants/invaders not enter Wales while most of the other (earlier?) groups did?

I'm not sure these clusters represent real historic events or peoples. They're just modern clusters which have been conditioned by many factors over the ages.

razyn
11-12-2015, 03:59 AM
Think about the coins of Quentowic (on of the maker was "Anglo").
I must admit those had slipped my mind. Interesting, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quentovic

ffoucart
11-12-2015, 11:59 AM
about Anglo-saxons in Gaul:

in French:
http://www.academia.edu/1146646/La_pr%C3%A9sence_saxonne_et_anglo-saxonne_sur_le_littoral_de_la_Manche
http://www.persee.fr/doc/rnord_0035-2624_1977_num_59_235_3449

in English:
https://books.google.fr/books?id=RXU5AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA168&lpg=PA168&dq=saxon+boulogne+migration&source=bl&ots=V7yIaHWrxL&sig=yd4IS9W0HDOZoELak8lHj8D8fQU&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0CFUQ6AEwCWoVChMIveOJmOeKyQIVyT8aCh38xgju#v=on epage&q=saxon%20boulogne%20migration&f=false
https://books.google.fr/books?id=C19glZh7zfoC&pg=PA84&dq=saxon+boulogne+settlement&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0CDYQ6AEwA2oVChMIs9vTleiKyQIVSB8aCh0fKAHa#v=on epage&q=saxon%20boulogne%20settlement&f=false

But I doubt it can explain the cluster 17

Caratacus
11-12-2015, 07:49 PM
I'm not sure these clusters represent real historic events or peoples. They're just modern clusters which have been conditioned by many factors over the ages.
You might be right, but the PotBI team are assuming the different DNA types represent pop. movements from as far back as the post Ice Age.

I've been wondering if the blue 17 is a result of the Urnfield expansion period:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/UrnfieldCulture.jpg/330px-UrnfieldCulture.jpg


The numerous hoards of the Urnfield culture and the existence of fortified settlements (hill forts) were taken as evidence for widespread warfare and upheaval by some scholars. Written sources describe several collapses and upheavals in the Eastern Mediterranean, Anatolia and the Levant around the time of the Urnfield origins . . . Some scholars, among them Wolfgang Kimmig and P. Bosch-Gimpera have postulated a Europe-wide wave of migrations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture

But for them to go as far as Orkney and possibly across into Ireland while staying out of Wales is pretty mysterious.

avalon
11-12-2015, 08:43 PM
You might be right, but the PotBI team are assuming the different DNA types represent pop. movements from as far back as the post Ice Age.

I've been wondering if the blue 17 is a result of the Urnfield expansion period:
But for them to go as far as Orkney and possibly across into Ireland while staying out of Wales is pretty mysterious.

This is what the POBI people suggested in their supplementary paper:


We thus conclude that the substantial FRA17 contribution to the UK clusters reflects migration events after those of GER6, BEL11, and FRA14, but largely before the Roman occupation of Britain. It might well represent a steady influx of migrants over long periods before, and even during, the Roman occupation from those areas in France close to the UK coast. Other possibilities would be migration and then growth within the UK associated with particular technologies, including agriculture, but in this case a separate explanation is needed for the lack of contribution of this group in Wales.

The only reason I can think of why a migration of people might avoid Wales would be down to poor agricultural opportunities. Most of Wales is upland terrain, unsuitable for growing crops and more suited to pastorialism. Although this is also true of much of Northern England and Scotland so I don't know!

Cinnamon orange
11-13-2015, 01:10 PM
This is what the POBI people suggested in their supplementary paper:



The only reason I can think of why a migration of people might avoid Wales would be down to poor agricultural opportunities. Most of Wales is upland terrain, unsuitable for growing crops and more suited to pastorialism. Although this is also true of much of Northern England and Scotland so I don't know!

Maybe it was more defensible at least in part, as the Welsh borders area is not missing that element.

avalon
11-13-2015, 04:57 PM
Maybe it was more defensible at least in part, as the Welsh borders area is not missing that element.

It could be something like that. One of the reasons that English armies struggled in Gwynedd in the middle ages was due to the difficult terrain and harsh weather. It's speculation but maybe something similar happened in an earlier age.

Or, Gravetto Danubian may be right and actually we cannot link these modern clusters to historic migrations. The Northern France cluster 17 may be more complex than that.

Caratacus
11-13-2015, 08:33 PM
If we assume that the blue 17 arrived in France from the east, perhaps originating in southern Germany, then it would help explain why modern English and Scots appear to be genetically closer to Germans than French. What we really need here is a chart showing the 'distances' between all the different DNA colour codes. Maybe the blue 17 is a genetic neighbour of the orange 1 predominant in southern Germany. But we just don't know.

moesan
11-20-2015, 02:48 PM
I would be very astonished if 90% of Boulogne areas were of uniquely Anglo-saxon origin, that said I can mistake facts; I don't deny a strong imput nevertheless but I rather think into Frankish settlements. So, whatever the kind of Germanic, a strong enough imput of Germanics in ancient Northern France, I agree.
the work made by scholars here doesn't seem an adlmixture one but a more "genealogic" one; I said the doubts I have about the lights that can send us this kind of approach; "west-Germany"is not is not synonymous of "West Germanic", and the "French" clusters are not synonymous of some kind of Celtic or pre-Celtic tribes.
I fear these clusters are not comparable between themselves and that the only positive thing is the possibility to approximatively date the apparition of these subclusters;
or I misunderstood something, what is still possible...
the Isles underwent a lot of colonizations of diverse weight during History and some strong links between the Celtic Fringes and France, and even Germany/Benelux could be broken down between Neolithic (with the megalithic period and Long Barrows), BBs of at least 2 kinds, and diverse Celtic ones. for Wales, I suppose by my readings that BBs imput was light there, and the Belgae one the same. But links existed too between Bretons and some Gauls tribes.
I lack the detailed knowledge to say more about these clades (a bit moving!) in the Isles.

moesan
11-20-2015, 02:50 PM
If we assume that the blue 17 arrived in France from the east, perhaps originating in southern Germany, then it would help explain why modern English and Scots appear to be genetically closer to Germans than French. What we really need here is a chart showing the 'distances' between all the different DNA colour codes. Maybe the blue 17 is a genetic neighbour of the orange 1 predominant in southern Germany. But we just don't know.

agree concerning this problematic of distances and interrelations of groups

avalon
11-22-2015, 10:51 AM
I must admit that when the paper first came out I thought that the blue 17 might be connected to the Franks and that its presence in the UK was due to the Anglo-Saxons being genetically similar to the Franks (i.e, Germanic origins). But this is hard to square with its presence in Orkney, the Scottish Highlands and Islands and in Ulster, areas not known for Anglo-Saxon or English settlement.

So, if it is possible to tie this to a migration, and I am not sure it is, then it looks to me like something Iron Age that bypassed North Wales and SW Wales.