Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 64

Thread: Who do modern-day Dutch, Frisian, and Flemish people descend from?

  1. #41
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,536
    Sex
    Location
    Canada
    Nationality
    Canadian

    Canada Netherlands United Kingdom Cornwall Ireland France
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Spence View Post
    Thank you for the thread, guys and thank you Finn for the other thread you shared.

    I have one last question though and that is so since the Germanic tribes were an amalgamation of different populations, do you think they were mostly Proto-Germanic or Continental European Bell Beaker in ancestry?
    Wouldn’t Proto-Germanic in turn be derived from a predecessor population like Beakers and whatever other source population?

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to spruithean For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-29-2020)

  3. #42
    Moderator
    Posts
    1,688
    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 spruithean View Post
    Wouldn’t Proto-Germanic in turn be derived from a predecessor population like Beakers and whatever other source population?
    I wonder what resulted from Pitted Ware/Battle Axe contacts.
    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

  4. #43
    Registered Users
    Posts
    336
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    WHG + EEF + STEPPE
    Y-DNA (P)
    I2a1b-PH908
    mtDNA (M)
    J2b1

    Serbia Croatia Split-Dalmatia England Scotland France Greece
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Spence View Post
    So does this mean perhaps a group like the English aren’t just British Beaker + Germanic? Maybe British Beaker + Central European Beaker + Germanic?
    I think we've known this for a while since modern English are more neolithic shifted than both British Beakers and Anglo-Saxons; also with the existence of u152/G2a in England. More like post bronze age Celt/Gaul + Germanic + beaker.

     
    Last edited by Ayetooey; 06-29-2020 at 07:45 PM.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ayetooey For This Useful Post:

     Cascio (06-29-2020),  jstephan (06-30-2020),  Psynome (06-30-2020),  tipirneni (06-29-2020)

  6. #44
    Registered Users
    Posts
    46
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    Thanks!
    I would guess that besides the Bell Beakers (rooted in Single Grave Culture) the Funnelbeakers were a constituting population for the (proto) Germanics.
    That's a rather anachronistic statement, as the last Funnelbeakers disappeared at about the same time (give or take a few hundred years) as the the Bell Beakers appeared, being absorbed by them and other Corded Ware (derived) cultures.

    So the Funnelbeakers were a constituting population for the Bell Beakers and other late Neolithic groups who in turn (most likely) were (among the) constituting populations for the later Germanics.

  7. #45
    Registered Users
    Posts
    46
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by JonikW View Post
    I wonder what resulted from Pitted Ware/Battle Axe contacts.
    Probably not much, if Coutinho et al. 2020 is any hint, plus that the Battle Axe genomes we have don't seem to show the high rates of SHG admixture that should be the result of Pitted Ware mixing into Battle Axe in significant numbers (Malmström et al. 2019 looked for such signals).

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

     JMcB (07-01-2020),  Revmac (06-29-2020)

  9. #46
    Moderator
    Posts
    1,688
    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 Angantyr View Post
    Probably not much, if Coutinho et al. 2020 is any hint, plus that the Battle Axe genomes we have don't seem to show the high rates of SHG admixture that should be the result of Pitted Ware mixing into Battle Axe in significant numbers (Malmström et al. 2019 looked for such signals).
    I read that paper* and agree, but their descendants presumably mixed in the ensuing centuries. That's what I'd like knowledge of.

    EDIT: *Coutinho.
    Last edited by JonikW; 06-29-2020 at 09:35 PM.
    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

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

     JMcB (07-01-2020),  Revmac (06-29-2020)

  11. #47
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    3,915
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    Northwest European
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Angantyr View Post
    That's a rather anachronistic statement, as the last Funnelbeakers disappeared at about the same time (give or take a few hundred years) as the the Bell Beakers appeared, being absorbed by them and other Corded Ware (derived) cultures.

    So the Funnelbeakers were a constituting population for the Bell Beakers and other late Neolithic groups who in turn (most likely) were (among the) constituting populations for the later Germanics.
    TRB/Funnelbeaker influenced the whole North German Plain. They were the early farmers known for their dolmens, genetically a Ertebølle/ EEF combination. The Bell Beakers are a Corded Ware/Single Grave derivative. The pastoralist from the Steppe. It's known in Denmark that they were some kind of seperated (Single Grave and TRB ) and eventually mixed (during Bronze Age) indeed absorbed like you said.
    https://images.app.goo.gl/d9qK36wxSq6cb8XF9
    Last edited by Finn; 06-30-2020 at 06:07 PM.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (07-01-2020),  JonikW (07-01-2020),  Revmac (06-30-2020)

  13. #48
    Registered Users
    Posts
    46
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    TRB/Funnelbeaker influenced the whole North German Plain. They were the early farmers known for their dolmens, genetically a Ertebølle/ EEF combination. The Bell Beakers are a Corded Ware/Single Grave derivative. The pastoralist from the Steppe. It's known in Denmark that they were some kind of seperated (Single Grave and TRB ) and eventually mixed (during Bronze Age) indeed absorbed like you said.
    https://images.app.goo.gl/d9qK36wxSq6cb8XF9
    Well, yes and no. We don't know how much Ertebølle contributed to TRB - very little in areas far from South Scandinavia, I'm pretty sure. And we only have one *possible* published Ertebølle genome this far. But it's definitely plausible that TRB North mixed with the Ertebølle HGs, especially as there's a few Ertebølle settlements that seem to have turned into TRB settlements. (But note that most (coastal) Ertebølle sites were abandoned at about the same time as (inland) TRB sites appeared nearby.)

    Yes, SGC colonized Jutland but not the eastern Danish islands. Your map shows early SGC, later it expanded a bit further on Jutland, but TRB lived on in Zealand. After a few hundred years the clear material TRB expressions ceased though, so who knows exactly what went on there. I read somewhere that archaeologically visible activities seem to decline, there's scattered finds of SGC and BAC artefacts, as well as signs of PWC people visiting coastal areas. We have only one genome from this period, RISE61, who's got mostly steppe ancestry but also more EEF ancestry than for instance any of the Swedish BAC individuals, who otherwise tend to have more EEF ancestry than the average CWC guy. Isotope analysis showed that he might have been non-local, plus that he had a much more marine oriented diet than any TRB or BAC individuals analysed to this date.

    The material culture was homogenised in all of Southern Scandinavia and nearby German areas with the "Flint Dagger Culture" in the Late Neolithic, with typical SGC, BAC and PWC expressions abruptly disappearing, but by then there was no TRB left to disappear. We have little genomic date from this exact period, but I think there must have been an expansion from somewhere, because in Sweden there's all of a sudden no more BAC R1a (or PWC I2a), just R1b and I1. And the rate of EEF ancestry increases a little. But I can't see this expansion coming from Zealand.

    It's really annoying that there's so little Danish aDNA available. Much of Jutland has got crappy preservation conditions, similar to the Netherlands, but parts of it and the islands should have rather good conditions.

  14. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Angantyr For This Useful Post:

     Dewsloth (07-01-2020),  ffoucart (07-02-2020),  Finn (07-01-2020),  JMcB (07-01-2020),  JonikW (07-01-2020),  Radboud (07-01-2020),  Revmac (06-30-2020),  Ryukendo (07-01-2020),  uintah106 (07-01-2020)

  15. #49
    Moderator
    Posts
    1,688
    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 Angantyr View Post
    Well, yes and no. We don't know how much Ertebølle contributed to TRB - very little in areas far from South Scandinavia, I'm pretty sure. And we only have one *possible* published Ertebølle genome this far. But it's definitely plausible that TRB North mixed with the Ertebølle HGs, especially as there's a few Ertebølle settlements that seem to have turned into TRB settlements. (But note that most (coastal) Ertebølle sites were abandoned at about the same time as (inland) TRB sites appeared nearby.)

    Yes, SGC colonized Jutland but not the eastern Danish islands. Your map shows early SGC, later it expanded a bit further on Jutland, but TRB lived on in Zealand. After a few hundred years the clear material TRB expressions ceased though, so who knows exactly what went on there. I read somewhere that archaeologically visible activities seem to decline, there's scattered finds of SGC and BAC artefacts, as well as signs of PWC people visiting coastal areas. We have only one genome from this period, RISE61, who's got mostly steppe ancestry but also more EEF ancestry than for instance any of the Swedish BAC individuals, who otherwise tend to have more EEF ancestry than the average CWC guy. Isotope analysis showed that he might have been non-local, plus that he had a much more marine oriented diet than any TRB or BAC individuals analysed to this date.

    The material culture was homogenised in all of Southern Scandinavia and nearby German areas with the "Flint Dagger Culture" in the Late Neolithic, with typical SGC, BAC and PWC expressions abruptly disappearing, but by then there was no TRB left to disappear. We have little genomic date from this exact period, but I think there must have been an expansion from somewhere, because in Sweden there's all of a sudden no more BAC R1a (or PWC I2a), just R1b and I1. And the rate of EEF ancestry increases a little. But I can't see this expansion coming from Zealand.

    It's really annoying that there's so little Danish aDNA available. Much of Jutland has got crappy preservation conditions, similar to the Netherlands, but parts of it and the islands should have rather good conditions.
    You obviously know what you're talking about Angantyr. Do you have any opinions on the origins and spread of the modern I1 that you mention, which obviously has a considerable role in the Dutch, Frisian Flemish and Scandinavian picture?

    EDIT: I'm particularly interested in where the surviving branch (YFull TMRCA 4,600 ybp) may have been before its likely Nordic Bronze Age expansion. A difficult question...
    Last edited by JonikW; 07-01-2020 at 12:55 AM.
    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

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to JonikW For This Useful Post:

     ffoucart (07-02-2020),  JMcB (07-01-2020),  Revmac (07-01-2020),  spruithean (07-01-2020),  uintah106 (07-01-2020)

  17. #50
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    3,915
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    Northwest European
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Angantyr View Post
    Well, yes and no. We don't know how much Ertebølle contributed to TRB - very little in areas far from South Scandinavia, I'm pretty sure. And we only have one *possible* published Ertebølle genome this far. But it's definitely plausible that TRB North mixed with the Ertebølle HGs, especially as there's a few Ertebølle settlements that seem to have turned into TRB settlements. (But note that most (coastal) Ertebølle sites were abandoned at about the same time as (inland) TRB sites appeared nearby.)

    Yes, SGC colonized Jutland but not the eastern Danish islands. Your map shows early SGC, later it expanded a bit further on Jutland, but TRB lived on in Zealand. After a few hundred years the clear material TRB expressions ceased though, so who knows exactly what went on there. I read somewhere that archaeologically visible activities seem to decline, there's scattered finds of SGC and BAC artefacts, as well as signs of PWC people visiting coastal areas. We have only one genome from this period, RISE61, who's got mostly steppe ancestry but also more EEF ancestry than for instance any of the Swedish BAC individuals, who otherwise tend to have more EEF ancestry than the average CWC guy. Isotope analysis showed that he might have been non-local, plus that he had a much more marine oriented diet than any TRB or BAC individuals analysed to this date.

    The material culture was homogenised in all of Southern Scandinavia and nearby German areas with the "Flint Dagger Culture" in the Late Neolithic, with typical SGC, BAC and PWC expressions abruptly disappearing, but by then there was no TRB left to disappear. We have little genomic date from this exact period, but I think there must have been an expansion from somewhere, because in Sweden there's all of a sudden no more BAC R1a (or PWC I2a), just R1b and I1. And the rate of EEF ancestry increases a little. But I can't see this expansion coming from Zealand.

    It's really annoying that there's so little Danish aDNA available. Much of Jutland has got crappy preservation conditions, similar to the Netherlands, but parts of it and the islands should have rather good conditions.
    @Agantyr, thanks!

    In the Northern Netherlands (in casu Drenthe) was a severe TRB hotspot, connected with Ertebølle. See this nice overview of Frank N.:
    https://adnaera.com/2018/09/09/a-fir...st-group-adna/

    This is a more in depth archeological research of the North Dutch situation, very recommended!
    https://www.sidestone.com/openaccess/9789088900013.pdf

    Quote:
    Although acculturation will probably have occurred on some level,
    it does not explain the subsequent cultural homogeneity of
    the TRB on the one hand and the lack of local Swifterbant
    influences on the other hand. In fact,
    the material culture of the Dutch TRB has more links with
    the Danish Ertebølle than with the indigenous Swifterbant.
    This is reflected for example by the presence of the highly
    characteristic TRB transverse arrowheads. Although this
    tool-type is alien to the Swifterbant culture it is typical for
    the Ertebølle culture (Midgley 1992, 14)
    Privately I always presume that my mother who has only ancestors from the TRB hotspot and who has a Scandic HG level has some TRB residu.... of course no proof, only suspicion....

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

     JonikW (07-01-2020)

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What is the difference between Dutch and Frisian?
    By firemonkey in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-04-2019, 03:52 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-18-2018, 11:29 PM
  3. Frisian or North Dutch but no known Dutch ancestors?
    By OnionLord in forum AncestryDNA
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-04-2017, 04:25 PM
  4. Flemish People in Scotland Conference
    By Jean M in forum Genealogy
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 09-23-2016, 06:01 PM
  5. Distant Dutch "Frisian" ancestry?
    By BalkanKiwi in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-04-2015, 09:23 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
  •