Anglo Saxon Haplogroups and Types

[BillMC]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the most common one is I-M253. There will be some within the R1A haplogroup and about 40% within R1B1?

Any others?

How are they distributed within the nations of the British Isles?

[George Chandler]

In "my opinion" I personally think that different variants below U106 are a pretty good contender for primary old Saxon percentages and so are variants below I-M253 for both Angles and old Saxons. They were a mix just like any other group though.

George

[Athiudisc]

I'd put my money on the bulk of Angles/Saxons/etc. being I1 and U106, personally.

[Jean M]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the most common one is I-M253

So far we have only one Y-DNA result from an actual Anglo-Saxon. It was I1 from Norton Bishopsmill, Teesside 650–910 AD. See http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/medievaldna.shtml

All the rest is guesswork. We can guess that some haplogroups that appear in various Germanic-speaking populations, such as U106+, will crop up in Anglo-Saxon samples, but we'd need masses more ancient DNA from Anglo-Saxons before we got anywhere near the point where we could confidently start estimating percentages of this or that haplogroup in these incomers.

[JMcB]

I would think that more aDNA testing is needed before we'll really know for sure. Although, I would think that R1b may have the edge if more recent tests are indicative.

Attachment 9707

Attachment 9708

See the second map: Y Haplogroups of Europe

http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonal...groupsMaps.pdf

[New_Englander]

Are the any U106 subclades particularly associated with the Anglo-Saxons or Danes? For example, is there any association between Z18 and its subclades and any particular origin amongst the various Anglo-Saxon or Nordic tribes?

[spruithean]

Are the any U106 subclades particularly associated with the Anglo-Saxons or Danes? For example, is there any association between Z18 and its subclades and any particular origin amongst the various Anglo-Saxon or Nordic tribes?

I'm not really sure, so far with the recent Viking paper we've seen a rather assorted group of I1, R1b and IIRC R1a (to name only a few) that were associated with various Viking settlements, however we don't have much Y-DNA data on Anglo-Saxons or Early Nordic tribes, we have some Continental Germanic Y-DNA data, which is again a range of I1, I2, R1b, R1a, etc.

[dsm]

I believe you can look at today’s Jutland to see so called Anglo-Saxon DNA.

IIRC, U106 is the larger %, Then I1, then R1a & P312.
If we look at Denmark Y-DNA mix it shows I1 strongest in the east (of Zealand) and diminishing to west Jutland while U106 is strongest in west Jutland and diminishes to the east of Zealand. Not unlike how U106 is stronger in East England and diminishes to west England while P312 is strongest in west England and diminishes to the east.

One real problem anyone has re identifying so called Anglo-Saxon DNA, is that in reality it should be called Jute-Angle-Saxon-Frisian. And up until 1864, the areas that the Jutes (nth Jutland), Angles (nth Schleswig), Saxons (Sth Schleswig and Holstein) came from was considered part of greater Denmark. Note to, that Hamburg at the bottom of Holstein, was an independant city until 1864.

So when the Danes came to England later, between roughly 850AD and 1030AD, they brought the same DNA as the Jutes- Angles-Saxons-Frisian had previously (because they were mostly exactly the same people). there may have been more Danes from east Denmark which would include a higher % of I1 DNA than just from Jutland. R1a is fairly consistent in its % across Denmark west to east.

In the period 850AD-1000AD. The Danes established a powerful zone of control in the nth of England called 'the Danelaw' where Danish was the default language. It was anchored in the city of York. In time Alfred the great regained control of this area. The Danes didn't get back in control until 1018AD when Canute finally defeated Ethelred and his son Edmund Ironside. Canute and Edmund Ironside initially shared control but in 1018AD Edmund died mysteriously and Canute took complete control of England but he allowed Cornwall, Wales and Scotland their independance providing they paid a Dangeld ( protection money - Dane Gold).

However, it needs to be noted that of the estimated 30 to 40 thousand Danish warriors who invaded in 1013 then 1016, only 3,000 or so stayed in England after 1018 and the bulk of these were sent to defend the 3 borders (Cornish border, Welsh border and Scottish border). A 4th group became part of a navy kept in reserve on the Thames. These warriors who remained eventually became part of the King’s frontline fighters (Housecarls) and remained prominent under King Harold, right up to the Norman invasion at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.

To date as best I know, there is *no* way to differentiate between the later Danish DNA brought to England after 850AD, and the earlier Jute-Angle-Saxon-Frisian DNA from 400AD-600AD. I am all ears and eyes if anyone can explain a realistic way to tell the difference.

DSM

[dsm]

Are the any U106 subclades particularly associated with the Anglo-Saxons or Danes? For example, is there any association between Z18 and its subclades and any particular origin amongst the various Anglo-Saxon or Nordic tribes?

I believe there is a very strong link to U106=>L48. IIRC There was a time when that was thought of as Frisian DNA. But as said above the Jutes-Angles-Saxons-Frisians (Ingvaeones) were thought of as a common people in Roman times. This same DNA is strong from Frisian Netherlands up to the tip of Danish Jutland.

[Roger]

To be honest, if they ever do an Anglo Saxon paper like the recent Viking paper, i think we will see the same plethora of mixed Germanic haplogroups, in the migration period it would be very likely that folk joined a new tribe at the drop of a hat.