Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: E-BY3880 vs Old Bavarians

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,678
    Sex

    E-BY3880 vs Old Bavarians

    When going through my matches on all levels, I did notice something strange on FTDNA, which is a big hole exactly in the area which was settled by the old Bavarians, there true core zone. It doesn't really matter in which direction you move, every neighbouring tribe and country has a good amount of samples, no matter whether its North, East, South or West. Usually I would consider some sort of testing bias, but some of the regions and groups considered don't really have a better level of testing as far as I know.

    I will post a map which shows the pattern (can't right now, attachments don't work for me) with the largely E-BY3880 free zone marked, its largely identical to the old Bavarian core settlement area. Like some regions in Austria had more Slavic and Frankish input in comparison. The comparison with the countries and tribes to the West, especially the Allemannic groups and Rhenish Franks, is striking. Its even more clealry visible with the larger data base on FTDNA and no matter in which direction one moves from the Bavarian core zone away, more samples pop up.

    Compare - just look at the samples, the coloring is worthless in this case, because it gives green shades to Bavarian areas where not a single sample being present so far:
    https://phylogeographer.com/scripts/heatmap.php

    If this holds up, one might consider it one case of late Germanic tribal differentiation, in which Bavarians had, even though they surely assimilated Celts, Romance speakers, Slavs and others too, a different patrilinear make up which simply included less E-V13 in general and some clades in particular. I'm pretty sure there is no reason why Bavaria should have been always different in this respect, even if one might argue with the Roman legions, because these alone can't explain it, but that the Bavarians themselves, by settling the region the way they did, reduced some and increased other haplotypes frequencies.

    I know some studies might contradict this, probably the impression is wrong, but at least going by public data bases and especially FTDNA, this is quite striking. In the M35 project, half of the testers from Bavaria are so far E-V22, which makes the situation even more extreme. The North and West of Bavaria, which are more Frankish-Slavic and Swabian respectively, have a higher frequency again. So its not about the Bavarian state as a whole, but specifically the Bavarian settlement core. The Allemannic settlement area on the contrary being strongly associated with a much higher frequency, so even though both are in the South, and had a Celto-Roman history, they differ a lot by what I saw.

    Probably someone knows facts contradicting my hypothesis.
    Last edited by Riverman; 04-28-2021 at 03:55 PM.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     capsian (04-28-2021),  Johane Derite (04-28-2021),  Lupriac (04-28-2021)

Posting Permissions

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