R-M269 clades statistics in Anthrogenica

[alejandromb92]

You overlooked LBJ. He was E-V13 evidently.

I wonder how accurate all that is. How do we know which Prez belonged to which Y haplogroup?

Sorry, you are right. Obama might be E1b too, but we are not sure about it.

By the way, about Washington's Y-DNA, someone in the Washington DNA Project of FTDNA claims that he was his great-grand-father, and he is R-BY2744.

[etrusco]

What is the source for George Washington being L21?

The source of the list is Maciamo. as per GW here a post from Richard Rocca from 2017:

Abraham Lincoln was without a doubt U152+L2+, but the statement on Eupedia that "... George Washington (1732-1799) may well have belonged to the L2 subclade of U152" always seemed too speculative for my liking. Yes, there are some Washingtons that are U152+L2+, but none seem to trace back to George Washington's English born great-grandfather; John Washington. The only kit that claims to descend from John Washington, b. 14 Mar 1631/32 d. before 1662 is kit no. 38080. That kit is predicted R-M269 and has a very distinct STR signature. I ran the STRs through the R1b specific version of the Nevgen haplogroup predictor and it returned the following results:

R1b L21>DF13> ZZ10>Z253> Z2186>BY2744
Probability: 100
Fitness: 90.18
Fitness 2: 1.24

[rms2]

It is my case, at least. I am very interested in knowing more about DF63 than L21, because it seems that this clade has a more britton affinity than gael, i might be wrong, but this is based in the frecuency of both clades. By the way, do you know where it came from? I mean, the L21 mutation, where it was originated.

Somewhere on the Continent, my guess is the Lower Rhine, but it could even have originated in the Alpine region, because the Amesbury Archer evidently came from there, and he was probably L21+, given that his likely son, "The Companion", buried just 3 meters away, was L21+.

I'm hoping for at least one L21+ result in the upcoming SGC paper. But you know what they say about wishful thinking.

[rms2]

Sorry, you are right. Obama might be E1b too, but we are not sure about it.

By the way, about Washington's Y-DNA, someone in the Washington DNA Project of FTDNA claims that he was his great-grand-father, and he is R-BY2744.

George Washington had no children of his own, but I believe there are some living males in the same Y-DNA line.

Sorry, I did not see post #22 above before posting my comments about George Washington.

[MitchellSince1893]

...By the way, about Washington's Y-DNA, someone in the Washington DNA Project of FTDNA claims that he was his great-grand-father, and he is R-BY2744.

Was it Paul Emory Washington or son?
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27075856

Old Abe is on my distant line. We share U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222>FGC12378 block (FGC12378+ FGC12379+ FGC12380+ FGC12381+ FGC12382+)
Our lines split around 1000 BC per ytree.net

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....ll=1#post60590

[alejandromb92]

Was it Paul Emory Washington or son?
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27075856

Old Abe is on my distant line. We share U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222>FGC12378 block (FGC12378+ FGC12379+ FGC12380+ FGC12381+ FGC12382+)
Our lines split around 1000 BC per ytree.net

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....ll=1#post60590

It might be them, interesting! It seems that both George Washington and this people, descends from a man born in 1632 and was called John Washington.

Very cool that Abraham Lincoln is in the same line you are, nice!

Somewhere on the Continent, my guess is the Lower Rhine, but it could even have originated in the Alpine region, because the Amesbury Archer evidently came from there, and he was probably L21+, given that his likely son, "The Companion", buried just 3 meters away, was L21+.

I'm hoping for at least one L21+ result in the upcoming SGC paper. But you know what they say about wishful thinking.

The study made of Amesbury Archer indeed determined that he came from the Alps, i don't know how could you determine that but i believe in science 100% of the time, now, even if he came from there, i am not sure if we can conclude that L21 was made in the Alps, i always thought it was near West Germany, this because it has one of the highest incidence of L21, after Brittany and Iparralde, but this is just my observation, i know it's kind a vague.

[rms2]

. . .
The study made of Amesbury Archer indeed determined that he came from the Alps, i don't know how could you determine that but i believe in science 100% of the time, now, even if he came from there, i am not sure if we can conclude that L21 was made in the Alps, i always thought it was near West Germany, this because it has one of the highest incidence of L21, after Brittany and Iparralde, but this is just my observation, i know it's kind a vague.

That's why I said I was guessing, because I don't know where L21 originated. I do know the early British Beaker men were already L21+, and many of them were DF13+, so it isn't likely L21 originated in Britain, despite the popularity of that idea.

Dental isotopes are how scientists guess that the Archer came from the Alpine region. Since he and the Companion, who was buried just 3 meters away, shared the same inherited anomaly in the bones of their feet, it's pretty certain they were closely related, probably father and son (the Companion was the younger of the two). Olalde et al could not get the Archer's genome, unfortunately, but they got the Companion's, and he was L21+.

That makes it very likely the Archer was L21+. Since he was probably not native to Britain, that would make him a continental L21 and part of the evidence that L21 first appeared on the Continent.

[alejandromb92]

That's why I said I was guessing, because I don't know where L21 originated. I do know the early British Beaker men were already L21+, and many of them were DF13+, so it isn't likely L21 originated in Britain, despite the popularity of that idea.

Dental isotopes are how scientists guess that the Archer came from the Alpine region. Since he and the Companion, who was buried just 3 meters away, shared the same inherited anomaly in the bones of their feet, it's pretty certain they were closely related, probably father and son (the Companion was the younger of the two). Olalde et al could not get the Archer's genome, unfortunately, but they got the Companion's, and he was L21+.

That makes it very likely the Archer was L21+. Since he was probably not native to Britain, that would make him a continental L21 and part of the evidence that L21 first appeared on the Continent.

It's laughable and impossible to think L21 originated in the British isles when they were all already DF13, what I do think is that DF13 is 100% British, what is a bit unclear is DF63, but i do think also that is British. What do you think about df63?

[rms2]

That's why I said I was guessing, because I don't know where L21 originated. I do know the early British Beaker men were already L21+, and many of them were DF13+, so it isn't likely L21 originated in Britain, despite the popularity of that idea.

Dental isotopes are how scientists guess that the Archer came from the Alpine region. Since he and the Companion, who was buried just 3 meters away, shared the same inherited anomaly in the bones of their feet, it's pretty certain they were closely related, probably father and son (the Companion was the younger of the two). Olalde et al could not get the Archer's genome, unfortunately, but they got the Companion's, and he was L21+.

That makes it very likely the Archer was L21+. Since he was probably not native to Britain, that would make him a continental L21 and part of the evidence that L21 first appeared on the Continent.

Not to turn this thread into an L21 thread, but dental isotopes show that, although the Companion was evidently born in Britain and spent the first few years of his life there, he was taken as an adolescent or pre-adolescent to the very same sort of region on the Continent where the Archer was born and raised (probably the Alpine region of Switzerland or southern Germany).

He may have traveled there with his father, the Archer, or perhaps, as a high-ranking individual, some sort of Beaker prince, he was part of a system of fosterage that some believe was also practiced earlier in Corded Ware.

It's interesting that the Archer's grave goods included a type of pin that has been found in Swiss Corded Ware (see Marc Heise's paper, "Heads North or East? A Re-Examination of Beaker Burials in Britain", pages 225-226).

[rms2]

It's laughable and impossible to think L21 originated in the British isles when they were all already DF13, what I do think is that DF13 is 100% British, what is a bit unclear is DF63, but i do think also that is British. What do you think about df63?

I don't believe DF13 is 100% British. It's found on the Continent, as well.

There are plenty of continental DF63s, as I recall, although I have not kept up with all of the various L21 clades.