Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 115 of 115

Thread: Early U106: A Hypothesis

  1. #111
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    3,882
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    Northwest European
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by imcdonald View Post
    Hi Finn et al.,

    I don't normally post on Anthrogenica (too much for me to keep up with), but I've been asked for my opinion.

    I'd broadly agree with everything here up to the conclusion. I think the origin of R-U106 probably lies towards central Europe, but to put any one ancient DNA result at its centre is probably short-sighted. If you only take a small number of individuals dated 600 years after the foundation of the haplogroup, they are all going to be outliers in their own special ways, especially at a time of such major population upheaval. RISE98 has no living descendants, and Prague I7196 follows the R-Z156 bias towards the south-east of the R-U106 distribution.

    The R-U106 founder is more closely related to the most ancient R-P312 DNA than he is to either RISE98 or Prague I7196, and the foundation of R-P312, R-U106 and R-S1194 are intimately tied together much more closely than they are to existing ancient DNA results. While R-P312 spread in a very different fashion, the origin of these three haplogroups is probably somewhere very culturally and geographically similar. So we should instead weight our discussion toward the R-L151 founder.

    In all this, we are scrabbling around for scraps of data that can't really provide us with a firm conclusion. If I had to put an exact location to the origin of R-U106, I'd say somewhere around Rostock, but that's only a gut feeling - I don't think we have the data to be anything like that precise.

    I recently discussed the spread of R-U106 sub-clades here:
    https://groups.io/g/R1b-U106/message/637

    Cheers,

    Iain.
    When I compare the link of Iain with the 'genetic landscape of the Netherlands' from Maarten Larmuseau and some knowledge of the Germanic migration I get this:

    U198
    Iain
    R-S1688 is the parent of R-U198. The different way in which the R-U198 project runs may add some additional bias to the results, but we expect it to be relatively small. R-S1688 roughly tracks the same distribution as R-Z156, being common in north-western and north-central Europe. So it may share a very similar origin. However, is very strongly enhanced in the British Isles, particularly England, for reasons that aren't clear but probably have to do with relative founder effects.
    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    This looks a typical Saxon subclade, because we know that the Chauci already came in the Roman period to the most NE parts of Groningen and Drenthe.
    See Nieuwhof: http://jalc.nl/cgi/t/text/get-pdfd43...c;idno=0402a03
    This probably explains the high frequency in England you mentioned Iain!

    L48
    Iain:
    R-L48 is known to represent about half of R-U106, and we estimate it to be 52.8% of R-U106 here. This fraction is fairly stable over much of Europe, being slightly higher in eastern and central-eastern Europe, and slightly lower in Scandinavia. The distribution of R-L48 represents largely the middle ground between the extrema of R-Z18 and R-Z156/R-S1688, and is largely similar to R-S1194. This suggests geo-cultural continuity through the period between R-L151 and R-L48, which should be a matter of only a few centuries. Its relatively low frequency in Scandinavia shows that we can't think of R-L48 descendants as regionalising into Germanic people's yet - that's about 2000 years too early - and we are still likely looking at a continental origin for R-L48. Consequently, I would expect the origins of R-L48 to lie in the Single Grave culture or wider Corded Ware culture as well.
    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    Looks a typical (West) Frisian subclade in the Dutch context. It is known that a part of the incoming Germanic people came from Jutland this could explain this subclade? Or even more: is this is an old Frisia residu connected to the SGC population? Because t's especially high in the area above Amsterdam that was not subject of an Anglo-Saxon immigration.

    See Nicolay:
    https://www.academia.edu/35420221/Od...ingian_periods

    And in Dutch but the illustrations are in this respect very clear:

    https://www.academia.edu/9823346/Nie...-zevende_eeuw_

    L47
    Iain:
    Within R-L48, R-L47 is notable for its high frequency in eastern Europe. While it represents around 10% of European R-U106, it represents about 43% of the tests in eastern Europe and about 20% of the tests in south-eastern Europe. The origin of these eastern European clades appears tied to the eastern Germanic expansion, ultimately culminating in the Gothic sack of the Roman Empire. However, R-L47 much older than this migration and is found throughout Europe at generic frequencies of 5-10%.
    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    This puzzles me because this seems high in a small part of NE Dutch, so ad first more Saxon like....but not sure is there another tribe in the game?....a 'Gothic' expansion to NE Dutch as Iain seems to suggest? Anyone?
    Last edited by Finn; 01-01-2020 at 08:09 PM.

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

     JMcB (01-01-2020),  JonikW (01-01-2020)

  3. #112
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    3,882
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    Northwest European
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Ane an add for L48, I guess this one that Iain associates with SGC or CW in a wider context could well be rooted in Unetice. Because it's high in the area that was not subject of the Anglo-Saxon invasion.

    Z18 not displayed in the Larmuseau research could well be associated with the Jutes, corresponding with the papers of Nicolay.....
    Last edited by Finn; 01-01-2020 at 08:31 PM.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (01-01-2020)

  5. #113
    Moderator
    Posts
    1,683
    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 Finn View Post
    When I compare the link of Iain with the 'genetic landscape of the Netherlands' from Maarten Larmuseau and some knowledge of the Germanic migration I get this:

    U198
    Iain


    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    This looks a typical Saxon subclade, because we know that the Chauci already came in the Roman period to the most NE parts of Groningen and Drenthe.
    See Nieuwhof: http://jalc.nl/cgi/t/text/get-pdfd43...c;idno=0402a03
    This probably explains the high frequency in England you mentioned Iain!

    L48
    Iain:


    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    Looks a typical (West) Frisian subclade in the Dutch context. It is known that a part of the incoming Germanic people came from Jutland this could explain this subclade? Or even more: is this is an old Frisia residu connected to the SGC population? Because t's especially high in the area above Amsterdam that was not subject of an Anglo-Saxon immigration.

    See Nicolay:
    https://www.academia.edu/35420221/Od...ingian_periods

    And in Dutch but the illustrations are in this respect very clear:

    https://www.academia.edu/9823346/Nie...-zevende_eeuw_

    L47
    Iain:


    Larmuseau:


    Comment:
    This puzzles me because this seems high in a small part of NE Dutch, so ad first more Saxon like....but not sure is there another tribe in the game?....a 'Gothic' expansion to NE Dutch as Iain seems to suggest? Anyone?
    Interesting post Finn. R-L47's frequency in both the NE Netherlands and eastern Europe looks like an unsolvable problem to me when you consider known and possible movements into and out of what were to become the Saxon lands, not least involving the Longobards and their hangers on.

    The Friesland square-headed brooch study that you linked to sums up for me exactly why artefact styles can be a valuable tool when pondering haplogroup movements like this. Thanks for posting it.

    This passage from the paper is one of many that I enjoyed for what it implies:

    "In the late 5th and first half of the 6th century, the gold bracteates are produced in a typically Scandinavian style; only minor elements, like the human hands and feet on the type D bracteates, can be seen as regional, ‘Frisian’ traits. In the 6th century, the newly found ‘Jutlandic’ brooch was still executed in a Scandinavian style, but now as part of a southern group of ornaments – found in Kent and southern Germany."
    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 1,100 ybp (YFull);
    mtDNA: traces to Glamorgan, Wales
    Mother's Y: traces to Llanvair Discoed, Wales

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JonikW For This Useful Post:

     Finn (01-01-2020),  JMcB (01-01-2020)

  7. #114
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,669
    Sex
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a-L1280>FGC41205
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2(b)
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029>YP517
    mtDNA (P)
    H5a2

    Poland European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    This puzzles me because this seems high in a small part of NE Dutch, so ad first more Saxon like....but not sure is there another tribe in the game?....a 'Gothic' expansion to NE Dutch as Iain seems to suggest? Anyone?
    I suspect that what Iain had in mind was that both L47 and L48 are much older than the migrations of the Early Germanic peoples, so both these clades could have been already present (at quite decent frequencies) among the Proto-Germanic people, ie. before the territorial expansion of the Early Germanic (Jastorf-derived) subpopulations started. Consequently, both L48 and L47 could have substantially contributed to migrations directed toward very different regions, for example to migrations directed both east (or south-east, eg. with the Vandals or Goths) and west (or south-west, eg. with the Franks or Anglo-Saxons). Only those subclades of L48 and L47 that are estimated to have a TMRCA age of less than about 2000 years should be expected to have been specifically associated with Early Germanic migrations directed only eastward or only westward. This also means that the Proto-Germanic population was likely quite thoroughly mixed, with most major subclades of U106 being present in nearly all subpopulations that were later transformed into separate Early Germanic tribes, although there is no doubt that some regional differences (regarding the proportions of those major subclades) did exist in Jastorf, so this is one of the reasons (in addition to the bottleneck efect in target populations) why we see similar differences in modern populations descending (in part) from those Proto-Germanic (or Early Germanic) people.

    For example, one of my distant ancestors from Poland (or, more specifically, one of my 6th great grandfathers) belonged to the specifically Polish (or Central-Eastern European) subclade Z17913 (Y6453 in YFull) deep under L47 (here is my Google map for Z17913: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...4734375036&z=4). The TMRCA age for Z17913 is about 1500 years (according to YFull) or about 1800 years (according to my own estimates), and it diverged from its most closely related "British" brother clade FGC17294 (A6093 in YFull) about 1800 years ago (according to YFull) or about 2100 years ago (according to my own estimates). All this suggests that the parental clade FGC17304 (ancestral to both the "Polish" subclade Z17913 and the "British" subclade FGC17294) was born within the broadly defined Proto-Germanic homeland (most likely somewhere in a region encompassing Northern Germany and Denmark) in a relatively distant past (2700 years ago according to YFull, 3200 years ago according to my own estimates), while its two major descending sublineages (pre-Z17913 and pre-FGC17294) diverged about 2100-1800 years ago and were later included into at least two Early Germanic tribes migrating in very different directions, ie. either south-east (towards Poland, most likely with the Vandals or Goths) or west (towards England, most likely with the Jutes, Angles or Saxons).
    Last edited by Michał; 01-01-2020 at 11:06 PM.

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Michał For This Useful Post:

     Finn (01-01-2020),  JonikW (01-02-2020),  mihaitzateo (01-02-2020),  spruithean (01-02-2020),  uintah106 (01-02-2020),  Webb (01-02-2020)

  9. #115
    Registered Users
    Posts
    70
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    U106>S1855
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Wing states:

    "Of the 13 Z156+ results (which include DF96 & DF98) 3 are in England (the two Roman Gladiators in York and a Viking buried at Oxford University) with 1 found in Denmark and the another one in Sweden. The other 8 are found in Central Europe, spread between Spain (I10895) and Szolad, Hungary.

    There are a scattering of Z381 & Z18 results found outside of Scandinavia, but it is clear where the bulk of these clades are found in Scandinavia (and England which could be explained by the Germanic and Viking settlements on the Island)."

    It is not clear what your hypothesis is because you have actually stated an hypothesis in any formal sense in your hypothetical commentary. However, your comment above seems somewhat fanciful. Of the 13 Z 156 + ,3 are in England with one a Viking and two Roman gladiators, yet 8 are found in Europe. In other words, two thirds of the samples are European (66.6%) and only 3 (33.3%) in England. You go so far as to say, that of these three discovered specimens 2 were Roman gladiators and the other a Viking. How come when the vast majority of samples discovered point to Europe?

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Similar Threads

  1. A FINNO-SKYTHIAN HYPOTHESIS
    By gravetti in forum General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2019, 07:48 PM
  2. U106* (U106+ Z381- Z18-) & L199.1+ & L217.1+
    By Mikewww in forum R1b-U106
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-09-2018, 07:08 PM
  3. Is the Kurgan hypothesis really dead?
    By XooR in forum R1b General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-15-2016, 03:56 PM
  4. The Out-of Maghreb Hypothesis for Western R1b
    By Abou in forum R1b General
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 10-30-2015, 05:25 AM
  5. Hypothesis about the origin of Z2110 and L51 from L23
    By Rathna in forum R1b Early Subclades
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-19-2014, 02:31 AM

Posting Permissions

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