Upcoming paper on Anglo-Saxon migration period??

[Finn]

If you look at the individual samples for Alt-Inden (rather than the average) you can see three fit inside the Groningen range (including DF19 IND002), and three are to the "east" of the Dutch samples.
Truly a crossroads of cultures by that point.
Attachment 51575

^^I made a CNE polygon with HVN, HID and Hartlepool samples. The HID samples all lie in the interior of CNE and have no effect on the polygon shape. And yet it's the Haeven samples who were related.

Also, if you were to draw a polygon around the ancient DF19s, you almost get the Groningen polygon.

Yes and no.

No,-like you stated- because on average the Groningen samples are 81% CNE that's substantial higher than the 38% of Alt Inden.

Yes, because Groningen was in the end 'captured' by the Franks, the samples go way beyond the strict migration ages. A sample like G024 (that causes the link to the SW), could be from the Alt-Inden context, Kellebell (from Maastricht) and the woman side of her family is specific attracted to that sample.

Mark that this samples are from the Martinikerkhof in the city centre (I see it almost on daily basis) was were the elite was buried not Jan average, so likely also some new Frankish rulers from the Rhineland. And mark that Groningen was already then a kind of small urban center ("Sigtuna effect"), with people from a broad range, GR0021 for example was most likely from Northern Scandinavia....

PS I know your D19 'fetish' nevertheless I don't think a specific Y-DNA even not R1b U106 can tell the whole story, to scattered for that.

[jadegreg]

This process revealed that CNE ancestry was present in Britain before the early medieval period, but only sporadically – 1% during the Bronze/Iron Age, rising to 15% during the Romano-British period – followed by a dramatic spike up to 76% during the early and middle Anglo-Saxon periods

Whoa 15% is quite high for the Roman period. And they are not the only romans who were brought or settled in Britain. One gets the feeling that perhaps the british population in the SE was decimated (excuse the pun!) already in the roman period. If CNE is 15 %, at least by late 4th century AD, then maybe its likely that CWE/French IA would be equal to 15% as well?

Did their 15% CNE disappear before AS arived, or should we subtract 15 from 76, so the actually post 410AD AS contribution is 61% average in england, (but thats without British samples from further west yet to add to the england average)

That seems to be the indication so far, from the Eboracorum/York Samples (6/7), not the SE (though we do have 1 or 2 poor Roman Samples from Canterbury), but this is tentative at best given the context of the site. It may turn out to be fair for dense Roman-British population centres (laeti/merchants etc), but not so much for the rural areas? God, we need some more Roman Period DNA.....

Then we still have the question of what about Romano-British who didn't integrate with the incoming A-S, at least until later (650-700AD) according to current historical thinking. Where are they? Indeed, are there even separate rural Briton sites, separate from the Caer, and A-S settlements? Still a lot of unknowns.......

[Finn]

That seems to be the indication so far, from the Eboracorum/York Samples (6/7), not the SE (though we do have 1 or 2 poor Roman Samples from Canterbury), but this is tentative at best given the context of the site. It may turn out to be fair for dense Roman-British population centres (laeti/merchants etc), but not so much for the rural areas? God, we need some more Roman Period DNA.....

Then we still have the question of what about Romano-British who didn't integrate with the incoming A-S, at least until later (650-700AD) according to current historical thinking. Where are they? Indeed, are there even separate rural Briton sites, separate from the Caer, and A-S settlements? Still a lot of unknowns.......

Indeed along the Hadrian Wall there were old Frisii and Tubanti, so kind of Dutch IA with 45% CNE. And in Eboracorum/ York unto the middle eastern Roman soldiers where there.....

[jadegreg]

........... I don't think a specific Y-DNA even not R1b U106 can tell the whole story, to scattered for that.

Very true!! Though it's looking like we are developing a clearer picture for the L48 at least......Still waiting on our two lines though (DF96/DF98)

[JonikW]

Is there another Anglo-Saxon period paper due to be released? I can't find any reference to "Updown girl" in the one released in September.

Tweet:


Source: Twitter

This is interesting and there seems to be a bit of a mystery here, unless I'm missing something. There are five Eastry samples in the paper, but while the Updown Girl named in this Tweet as Grave 47, is shown on the Supplementary Figure 1 site plan (with grave goods including a comb) she doesn't seem to feature anywhere else at all.

There are six Eastry samples on the site plan, Graves 34, 37, 45, 47, 48 and 52, but only five samples in Table S1, with Grave 34 as EAS001, Grave 45 as EAS002, Grave 48 as EAS004, Grave 37 as EAS005 and Grave 52 as EAS006. So Eastry Grave 47 seems to be the missing EAS003. Perhaps the coverage was poor unless she has indeed been reserved for a future paper, which would be exciting.

Moreover, the section of the supplementary material headed "identifying outliers" says that a separate sample, I11570 from Worth Matravers, was the only outlier of this kind:

"... outlier came from regions in Europe, where North African/Middle Eastern ancestry is elevated, e.g. the Southwest and Southeast. The only exception is the outlier individual I11570 from Worth Matravers. This individual exhibits 22.4% ancestry from the western African component maximised in present-day Yoruba, Mende, and Esan […] While small amounts of sub-Saharan African ancestry might be the result of low-coverage and/or contamination, there is no reason to assume this for I11570."

[Finn]

This is interesting and there seems to be a bit of a mystery here, unless I'm missing something. There are five Eastry samples in the paper, but while the Updown Girl named in this Tweet as Grave 47, is shown on the Supplementary Figure 1 site plan (with grave goods including a comb) she doesn't seem to feature anywhere else at all.

There are six Eastry samples on the site plan, Graves 34, 37, 45, 47, 48 and 52, but only five samples in Table S1, with Grave 34 as EAS001, Grave 45 as EAS002, Grave 48 as EAS004, Grave 37 as EAS005 and Grave 52 as EAS006. So Eastry Grave 47 seems to be the missing EAS003. Perhaps the coverage was poor unless she has indeed been reserved for a future paper, which would be exciting.

Moreover, the section of the supplementary material headed "identifying outliers" says that a separate sample, I11570 from Worth Matravers, was the only outlier of this kind:

"... outlier came from regions in Europe, where North African/Middle Eastern ancestry is elevated, e.g. the Southwest and Southeast. The only exception is the outlier individual I11570 from Worth Matravers. This individual exhibits 22.4% ancestry from the western African component maximised in present-day Yoruba, Mende, and Esan […] While small amounts of sub-Saharan African ancestry might be the result of low-coverage and/or contamination, there is no reason to assume this for I11570."

Right on!

And may be gives some bit hope for my private obsession Y-DNA E-V22, in my case a deep Frisian paternal line.....and look at Midlum in this chart, there is some pale yellow 6,5% IT (Roman????).

But may be just a little straw Jonik....

[Finn]

Very true!! Though it's looking like we are developing a clearer picture for the L48 at least......Still waiting on our two lines though (DF96/DF98)

I have made a little study of DF96 (seen it's also from my grandfather mothers side) it's not on the whole a s 'migration line', but this subclade likely is:

R-U106>Z381>Z156>Z306>DF96>S11515>BY17999

Likely MRCA data range: 400 BC - 700 AD

Likely origin: western Europe, migrating to British Isles

Culture: Pre-Roman Celtic or post-Roman West Germanic cultures

Narrative evidence: This haplogroup represents an important geographical disjoint as, unlike the haplogroups above it, it appears almost uniquely English. While the locations in England aren't often stated, the exact timing of this haplogroup is important. There is very little evidence of R-U106 as a whole in the British Isles before the post-Roman "Anglo-Saxon" invasions. While this period can't be ruled out for this group, it is disfavoured, and an earlier period of history (e.g. Roman- or pre-Roman-era migrations, e.g. Belgae) can't be ruled out.

From Iain Mc Donald the absolute master in this matter!

[jadegreg]

I have made a little study of DF96 (seen it's also from my grandfather mothers side) it's not on the whole a s 'migration line', but this subclade likely is:



From Iain Mc Donald the absolute master in this matter!

Can you provide a link to that document please Finn?

[Trelvern]

Distance to: Trelvern

0.02479298 Briton_LIA
0.02595232 FRA_IA
0.03266885 CNE
0.03705522 Denmark_IA
0.04667687 Nordic_IA:RISE174



Target: Trelvern
Distance: 2.1992% / 0.02199214

49.8 FRA_IA
37.8 Briton_LIA
12.4 Nordic_IA

[Wing Genealogist]

Can you provide a link to that document please Finn?

It is part of the U106 Groups.io forum. I believe you can access the message Iain created via: https://groups.io/g/R1b-U106/message...2C0%2C88756539