Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 54

Thread: "Roman DNA" "Anglo-Saxon DNA" "Viking DNA"

  1. #1

    "Roman DNA" "Anglo-Saxon DNA" "Viking DNA"

    I came across this article yesterday on "Maps of Britain and Ireland’s ancient tribes, kingdoms and DNA."

    https://www.abroadintheyard.com/maps...-kingdoms-dna/

    It's mentioned that as part of a study that:

    The study analysed the DNA of over 2,000 people from rural areas of the UK, whose four grandparents were all born within 50 miles of each other. This provided the researchers with a snapshot of UK genetics in the late 19th Century before mass migration events. (It is a pity the study did not extend to the modern population of the Republic of Ireland as their genetic links to the rest of the British Isles would be fascinating to see).
    Some of the results of which I'm pasting here -

    – Anglo-Saxon invaders tended to intermarry with, rather than replace the existing population.
    – There is no large genetic signature from the Vikings even though they controlled large parts of the British Isles.
    – There is also little Roman DNA in the British genetic make-up.

    My question: How can they positively identify any Anglo-Saxon, Viking, or Roman roots? If they find a participant is R1b-U152, do they just mark em down as Roman? Haplogroup I is an automatic checkmark for Viking? And if so, why aren't we allowed to speculate like that on our own origins? I mean I understand the reason why, but if they're not speculating, what is their secret for confirming ancient Roman, Viking, etc ancestry?
    Last edited by RandomUsernameGuy; 12-12-2018 at 09:42 PM.

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RandomUsernameGuy For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (12-13-2018),  Nino90 (12-13-2018),  Scarlet Ibis (12-13-2018),  [email protected] (12-13-2018),  Trelvern (12-13-2018)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,136
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Dinaric
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y7627
    mtDNA (M)
    H5c

    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Ftdna haplotree database:

    haplogroup I:
    England 3,416
    Scotland 1,312
    Ireland: 1,190
    UK: 1,173

    R1b:
    England 5,632
    Scotland 3,869
    Ireland 5,982
    UK 2,231

    If the Vikings made little genetic contribution to the British Isles then haplogroup I is certainly not an automatic Viking marker.
    23andme V5.9

    63.1 Balkan (BiH, Croatia, Serbia)
    36.4 Eastern Europe
    0.5 Sub-Saharan (Sudanese)

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oz For This Useful Post:

     Aroon1916 (12-14-2018),  JonikW (12-13-2018)

  5. #3
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,776
    Sex
    Location
    Kent
    Ethnicity
    North Sea/Irish Sea
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1 Z140+ A21912+
    mtDNA (M)
    V
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b L21+ L371+
    mtDNA (P)
    J1c2l

    Wales England Cornwall Scotland Ireland Normandie
    Quote Originally Posted by Username View Post
    Ftdna haplotree database:

    haplogroup I:
    England 3,416
    Scotland 1,312
    Ireland: 1,190
    UK: 1,173

    R1b:
    England 5,632
    Scotland 3,869
    Ireland 5,982
    UK 2,231

    If the Vikings made little genetic contribution to the British Isles then haplogroup I is certainly not an automatic Viking marker.
    It may not be, but then in any case it's indistinguishable from the earlier Anglo-Saxon DNA from much the same region. I think trying to extrapolate much of this stuff back in time as Roman or Viking is problematic. L21 seems straightforward as a Celtic marker, however, and there may be others that people will add.
    Living DNA's former Cautious mode:
    Wales-related ancestry: 86.8%
    Cornwall: 8%
    North England-related ancestry: 5.2%
    Y line: Peak District, England. Big Y match: Scania, Sweden; TMRCA 1,250 ybp (YFull);
    mtDNA: traces to Glamorgan, Wales
    Mother's Y: traces to Llanvair Discoed, Wales

  6. #4
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,326
    Sex
    Location
    California
    Ethnicity
    British-Scandinavian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-DF99
    mtDNA (M)
    J2a1a

    England Denmark Wales Scotland Sweden
    Quote Originally Posted by RandomUsernameGuy View Post




    My question: How can they positively identify any Anglo-Saxon, Viking, or Roman roots? If they find a participant is R1b-U152, do they just mark em down as Roman? Haplogroup I is an automatic checkmark for Viking? And if so, why aren't we allowed to speculate like that on our own origins? I mean I understand the reason why, but if they're not speculating, what is their secret for confirming ancient Roman, Viking, etc ancestry?
    They can't positively identify such origins for individuals. Everyone is free to speculate, but holding this type of gross oversimplification up as scientific is unjustifiable.
    Last edited by GoldenHind; 12-13-2018 at 01:13 AM.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GoldenHind For This Useful Post:

     Kanenas (12-20-2018),  Scarlet Ibis (12-13-2018)

  8. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,607
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Nationality
    Canadian

    Canada Netherlands United Kingdom Cornwall Ireland France
    Quote Originally Posted by RandomUsernameGuy View Post
    I came across this article yesterday on "Maps of Britain and Ireland’s ancient tribes, kingdoms and DNA."

    https://www.abroadintheyard.com/maps...-kingdoms-dna/

    It's mentioned that as part of a study that:



    Some of the results of which I'm pasting here -

    – Anglo-Saxon invaders tended to intermarry with, rather than replace the existing population.
    – There is no large genetic signature from the Vikings even though they controlled large parts of the British Isles.
    – There is also little Roman DNA in the British genetic make-up.

    My question: How can they positively identify any Anglo-Saxon, Viking, or Roman roots? If they find a participant is R1b-U152, do they just mark em down as Roman? Haplogroup I is an automatic checkmark for Viking? And if so, why aren't we allowed to speculate like that on our own origins? I mean I understand the reason why, but if they're not speculating, what is their secret for confirming ancient Roman, Viking, etc ancestry?
    Wasn't the POBI study and the map made in response based solely off of autosomal DNA?

    Haplogroup R-U152 is in no way Roman and Haplogroup I is most definitely not Viking. Branches of Haplogroup I (notably I1 and those with northern European distributions) are more likely to have been present in Viking populations, but they were just as likely to be among populations who preceded the Vikings (Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Goths, Suebi, etc).

    It is still quite odd that we make these conclusions from DNA testing. I'm sure there were plenty of people in Roman Britain who were of British origin (or elsewhere) who saw themselves as Roman, and descendants of Britons who adopted Anglo-Saxon culture/language also existed. I imagine these ancient civilizations were a little more fluid in "who" someone was. Roman generals and leaders of Frankish descent existed and they saw themselves as Roman, because they lived within the empire, and experienced Roman "things".

  9. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to spruithean For This Useful Post:

     Aroon1916 (12-14-2018),  Cascio (08-21-2019),  Jessie (12-15-2018),  JonikW (12-13-2018),  Judith (12-19-2018),  Scarlet Ibis (12-13-2018)

  10. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    884
    Sex
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Ethnicity
    Norse-Gael/Celto-Germani
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U106-DF98
    mtDNA (M)
    T2b2bIrish/Scan

    Ireland Scotland Germany Norway England Northern Ireland
    Hmm I think anything along these lines (assigning a "culture" or "tribe" to a male line) needs to be done along sub groups (and better than that - smaller family groups right before the adoption of surnames) and not the larger groups like U106 etc... though for instance already we can tell through what aDNA we have that U106 was quite common in German Migration burials of at least the Longobards of Szolad and Collegno, Baiuvarii around Munich, and that Alamanni burial ground at Niederstotzingen. We need much more aDNA from known burial context and even then who is to say who these people considered themselves to be. I have read papers suggesting that people (even now-a-days) have more than one "identity." We can draw some general conclusions as more aDNA comes in.

    I try to keep the data in mind - in that sub groups including my DF98's brother group DF96 have been found in Germanic migration burials (the tribe may be in question, but the period and burial type isn't etc) and that DF98 is associated with House of Wettin (and by extending that further back as an agnatic relative to Margrave Rikdag - the East Saxon magnate families) - I am still reluctant to say DF98 is mainly "Germanic Migration" or even "Germanic" in that we DO NOT yet have a Germanic migration burial positive for DF98. Instead we have an ancient Northern Briton named 6drif-3 who might have been a gladiator (or soldier)... and while the burial site is on the Mount (where a lot of military funeral material has been found since the 1600s) and the cemetery is full of men in their prime and well built/trained not to mention partially or completely decapitated etc... we really don't have much context other than the evidence saved in their skeletal record (all the trauma and evidence of training etc)... so to me it's still a mystery. I am assuming (especially since the Germanic vs Celtic PCA and additionally keeping in mind that per isotopes they were fairly local) that these ancient Romano-Britons were local tribesman in the north, or even from SW Scotland... from the tribes the Romans were still fighting. Then again around starting in the early AD times and especially later many Germanics served in the Roman armies... the cemetery on the Mount would have been even more helpful if there were more burial goods and context - but that is such an old cemetery in a such a well traveled place (even having a fort built near or on top of it back in the 1600s and skeletons dug up from near there) that most of the context is gone. The only context that I am able to find is all the records of funeral material found there since about the 1600s recorded under Roman burials from York.

    Really we need more aDNA samples from known context - the burials at Niederstotzingen are great in that detail - showing that family's relations with the Byzantines and Franks through burial goods... I think each burial site needs to be interpreted from scratch so-to-speak and not from a viewpoint of what we already "know" about who these people were because even in Roman times those ideas were generalizations. The men at Niederstotzingen match one of the Longobards in sub group to below L48 (Z9 I think - I'd have to check my aDNA list) from Szolad - and you can see cultural influence from the Byzantines (Longobards were allies of them for a while before 600 AD) and also the Franks - who knows maybe that clan of men were playing both sides - also the Longobards were allied through marriage to the Bavarians early on in their presence in Northern Italy. On top of matching a "Longobard" from Szolad - those men were assigned to the Alamanni - who really were just a collection of tribes - so they could easily have been Longobards or Baivuarii or who knows. I think it's safe to say that subgroup is solidly Germanic Migration though ;-).

    So really we need to develop a standard of when we dig up these sites that have great context and evidence - we need good testing similar to the Niederstotzingen site - it needs to become standard operating procedure and when they dig up enough of these sites we will have more U106 and I in Germanic contexts I'm sure... and also P312 in Celtic contexts and I'm sure a small amount of those groups crossing over i.e. a bit of U106 in Celtic context (such as the Roman Gladiators) and P312 in a Germanic context (and by that I mean not in the same burial site as the P312 with the Longobards, but P312 with very Northern European ancestry and not local to those southern burial sites etc). I am particularly interested in any later Unetice from Northern Germany as I already know DF98 was present in early Unetice outside of Prague at Jinonice - makes sense it would have moved West and I have a feeling it settled in Northern Germany... and then that allows for a possible later Bronze Age and Iron Age connection of DF98 with the area of Wettin - and that ancestral tribal grouping, but to even prove that we need middle and later Bronze Age burials from Germany and specifically from Saxony and Thuringia.

    For you haplogroup I guys - I think we can already assume that you guys will be numerous among some Germanic tribes since it's so common up North anyway - you guys are just having to wait a bit longer - but already you have an Anglo-Saxon among your number correct ;-). Become an expert on that site and burial while you are waiting on the next aDNA group I sample ;-). It's only a matter of time (and of SOP for the testers) before you find yourself a 1000 year old connection to a Germanic tribe for something along those lines with a nice match with a sample from a great contextual burial site ;-)!

    Edit: As for my personal sub group - I have a new match with ancestry from Poland - but before that it was Prussia (as I understand the history of the area - still learning it since I met him!) - Warmia to be exact. He has agreed to do more testing which is great (hopefully we match at some more of my variants) and also for him so he is set up for the future to match others as they come in and test etc. The fact that he has history from Prussia interests me greatly for these reasons: there are Weaver male lines from my area of Pennsylvania that have tested their Y-DNA and I don't match them (they are German and Swiss and even English), but there are Weaver male lines showing up in my FTDNA autosomal matches that are Prussian or from Lower Saxony - that makes it slightly more likely my connection with someone over there is from Prussia or roughly Northern Germany. All the Weaver male lines from my area from the late 1700s that I can find family trees or info on are all German (and of the ones that do not have Y-DNA testing - more they are Prussian and/or Lower Saxony)... so statistically it makes the Northern Germany connection (including the Unetice and Wettin idea and Saxony etc in here) more likely for the time being unless the data changes!!

    2nd edit: yes culture and tribe could be fluid - just got done reading some history of the Longobards in N. Italy via the "Early Germans" book - and their eventual shift to Christianity (of the non-Arian type) would include inheriting the legacy of the Roman world to some extent - you had the early Dukes (some subordinate to the "King" and the ones further south basically did what they wanted and sometimes took the side of Rome) as almost an authority to themselves, but eventually in the North a Lombard kingdom was established and that had to come to terms with the Byzantines, Rome, and also the Franks pushing in from the East... so you had people who had a tribal identity - that after a few hundreds years had adopted other "cultural traits." This bring me back to burial site context - in that you can examine the first generation burials of the Longobards to get the best picture of them pre-Italy - as they were when the came into that area.
    Last edited by Bollox79; 12-13-2018 at 03:51 AM.
    Y-DNA: 4th GGF Adam Weaver born 1785 in Pennsylvania (most likely Rhineland German) - Sergeant, US 17th Inf, War of 1812: R1b-U106-DF98-S1911-S1894/S1900-S4004/FGC14818/FGC14823-FGC14816/FGC14817 shared with 6drif-3 - one of the "Headless" Roman Gladiator/Soldiers!

    mtDNA: 3rd GGM Bridget O'Danagher b. 1843 Lorrha/Dorrha, Ireland - T2b2b - Pagan Migrant Icelander SSG-A3 (grave 4) - Sílastađir in Eyjafjarđarsýsla, North Iceland is T2b2b.

  11. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Bollox79 For This Useful Post:

     ajc347 (12-13-2018),  Aroon1916 (12-14-2018),  Cascio (12-13-2018),  Finn (12-13-2018),  Jessie (12-15-2018),  JonikW (12-13-2018),  [email protected] (12-13-2018),  spruithean (12-13-2018)

  12. #7
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,013
    Sex
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Ethnicity
    mixed European
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    Dad: R1b/L21/DF63
    mtDNA (M)
    K2b2
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-M269
    mtDNA (P)
    K2b1a1a

    United States of America England Wales Sweden Germany
    I believe the study about AS origins relied on some rare mutations across the whole genome, but there seems to be some overlap with earlier populations still: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663

    I'm very skeptical about the ability to tell AS and Danes from each other, so I don't believe Vikings left no trace.

    Even with L21 (my dad's haplogroup), it's hard to know precisely when it came to the Isles. It's pretty common in parts of France, for example. (My dad is L21 and probably has a Welsh patrilineal line, so that fits the Celtic model, but he also has a somewhat rarer subclade (DF63) and no close matches -- some closer ones are in Scotland and others in England, but it's really very far back to TMCRA -- could easily be pre BB migration to the Isles, so common ancestor could be continental).

    So at this point I think there's lots we don't know and will likely get to learn going forward.

  13. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to msmarjoribanks For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (12-13-2018),  Jessie (12-15-2018),  JonikW (12-13-2018),  Judith (12-19-2018),  Marmaduke (12-13-2018),  Ruderico (12-13-2018),  Scarlet Ibis (12-13-2018),  [email protected] (12-13-2018),  spruithean (12-13-2018)

  14. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,724
    Ethnicity
    Pred.Anglo-Saxon + Briton
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b S21184, BY50830+
    mtDNA (M)
    U4b1a2 - FGS
    Y-DNA (M)
    ?
    mtDNA (P)
    I2

    Canada England Wales Netherlands France Cornwall
    Quote Originally Posted by RandomUsernameGuy View Post
    I came across this article yesterday on "Maps of Britain and Ireland’s ancient tribes, kingdoms and DNA."

    https://www.abroadintheyard.com/maps...-kingdoms-dna/

    It's mentioned that as part of a study that:



    Some of the results of which I'm pasting here -

    – Anglo-Saxon invaders tended to intermarry with, rather than replace the existing population.
    – There is no large genetic signature from the Vikings even though they controlled large parts of the British Isles.
    – There is also little Roman DNA in the British genetic make-up.

    My question: How can they positively identify any Anglo-Saxon, Viking, or Roman roots? If they find a participant is R1b-U152, do they just mark em down as Roman? Haplogroup I is an automatic checkmark for Viking? And if so, why aren't we allowed to speculate like that on our own origins? I mean I understand the reason why, but if they're not speculating, what is their secret for confirming ancient Roman, Viking, etc ancestry?
    I don't know how they would test Roman since I'm not aware of any results from an actual Roman. There was definitely I1 among Danes and Anglo-Saxons. Whether or not I1 traveled to Britain from other migrants needs to be demonstrated.
    YDNA: R1b-BY50830 Stepney, London, UK George Wood b. 1782 English <-> Bavarian cluster
    maternal-gf YDNA: ?? Gurr, James ~1740, Smarden, Kent, England.
    maternal-gm YDNA: R1b-P311+ Beech, John Richard b. 1780, Lewes, England
    maternal-ggf YDNA R1b-U106 Thomas, Edward b 1854, Sittingbourne, Kent
    paternal-ggf YDNA: R1b-Z17901. Gould, John Somerset England 1800s.
    paternal-ggf YDNA: R1b-L48. Scott, William Hamilton Ireland(?) 1800s

    other:
    Welch: early 1800s E-M84 Kent, England.

  15. #9
    To be honest, J2a and R-Z2103 and E-V13 look like better candidates for a Roman haplogroup. Anglo-Saxons and Norse (or Vikings) invaders should have been mostly I1 and perhaps some R1a and R1b as well.
    Last edited by Lupriac; 12-13-2018 at 06:42 PM.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lupriac For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (08-21-2019),  Joe B (12-13-2018)

  17. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,607
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Nationality
    Canadian

    Canada Netherlands United Kingdom Cornwall Ireland France
    Quote Originally Posted by Moe12 View Post
    To be honest, J2a and R-Z2103 look like better candidates for a Roman haplogroup. Anglo-Saxons and Norse (or Vikings) invaders should have been mostly I1 and perhaps some R1a and R1b as well.
    I suspect that the Anglo-Saxons would have slightly higher levels of R1b relative to I1 and R1a (given their proximity to Germany). R1b is one of the more dominant haplogroups in Denmark compared to I1 and R1a. However Norse invaders from Norway/Sweden could have had higher levels of R1a and I1.

  18. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to spruithean For This Useful Post:

     ajc347 (12-13-2018),  Cascio (12-15-2018),  Finn (12-13-2018),  Jessie (12-15-2018),  JonikW (12-13-2018),  Lupriac (12-13-2018),  Scarlet Ibis (12-13-2018)

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-25-2019, 09:02 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-17-2019, 07:22 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-24-2018, 08:50 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM
  5. "Indus Valley" and "Kalash" admixtures in Khvalynsk?
    By Tomenable in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-12-2016, 10:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •