Genetics of the British and Irish people

Assessing the percentage of Viking paternal lineages in the UK and Ireland

Ireland

Many surnames in Ireland are also English, further confirming that a big part of the Irish population (about one fourth) is of English descent on their paternal side.

Many surnames in Ireland are English because when they were translated from Gaelic into English, the English translators gave names that sounded similar to English names e.g. Ó Coileáin is anglicised to the english name Collins, hence there are many Collins in Ireland, most of whom are indigenous.

Also a name like Smith is common in Ireland but this again is mostly as a result of translating Irish names into english. [FONT=Verdana,Arial,Times New I2] Mac an Gabhain[/FONT] (literally translates as the son of the smith) was changed to Smith and and also the anglicsized MacGowan.
 
Many surnames in Ireland are English because when they were translated from Gaelic into English, the English translators gave names that sounded similar to English names e.g. Ó Coileáin is anglicised to the english name Collins, hence there are many Collins in Ireland, most of whom are indigenous.

Also a name like Smith is common in Ireland but this again is mostly as a result of translating Irish names into english. [FONT=Verdana,Arial,Times New I2] Mac an Gabhain[/FONT] (literally translates as the son of the smith) was changed to Smith and and also the anglicsized MacGowan.

Nevertheless there is a small, but substantial percentage of Irish people who are clearly of English descent. The English have started settling in Ireland since Norman times. Most of the big landowners from the 16th century until the 19th century were English.
 
Nevertheless there is a small, but substantial percentage of Irish people who are clearly of English descent. The English have started settling in Ireland since Norman times. Most of the big landowners from the 16th century until the 19th century were English.

Of course there is a percentage of Irish people of English descent. But it would be no where near 25%. Most of the big landowners were absentee landlords or arisitocratic planters who did not intermarry with any native Irish. They were and in some cases still are bascially English people born in Ireland and adhere to English customs. Even to this day (although their numbers are so tiny) many of these send their children to school in England.
 
I've read somewhere that the percentage of Irish folk of English descent totals about 10-15%.
 
In summary, the population of England could be composed of :

- 31.5% of Ancient Briton paternal lineages
- 11% of Near-Eastern paternal lineages
- 26.5% of Anglo-Saxon/Frisian paternal lineages (19.5% R1b + 4% I1 + 3% I2b1)
- 31% of Danish Viking paternal lineages (15% R1b + 4.5% of R1a + 10% I1 + 1.5% I2b1)

Because a low percentage of R1a in fact probably came with the Anglo-Saxons, it is likely that the above calculations overestimated the proportion of Vikings and underestimated that of the Anglo-Saxons.


I have read " indigenous English " is a controversy subject in England.

I've suspected indigenous population of Celtic-Breton origin accounts for a significant percentage of English genetics.I think it's native Bretons lost their ethnic identity to the Anglo-Saxon majority.It's common belief among English nationals I met online,that English are predominately " Germanic " closely related to Dutch & Scandinavians & Germans.A few even told me that they do feel kinship toward those European peoples.
 
I have read " indigenous English " is a controversy subject in England.

It's common belief among English nationals I met online,that English are predominately " Germanic " closely related to Dutch & Scandinavians & Germans.A few even told me that they do feel kinship toward those European peoples.

The vast majority of Brits don't care or have an awareness of their roots, other than they're 'English, Scots' etc. What does that mean? They have no idea other than the modern manifestation, which is often a contrived, tourist board version. If you said that the English language had Germanic roots (i.e. not just Germany, but also Frisian etc) they would be amazed. Pre-Norman conquest cultural and linguistic heritage is virtually ignored or at worst, suppressed by the establishment.
 
Minimum 25 Percent

Of course there is a percentage of Irish people of English descent. But it would be no where near 25%. Most of the big landowners were absentee landlords or arisitocratic planters who did not intermarry with any native Irish. They were and in some cases still are bascially English people born in Ireland and adhere to English customs. Even to this day (although their numbers are so tiny) many of these send their children to school in England.

Niall of the nine hostages is the 5th century father of 12 percent of the male population of ireland and his mother was queen of england and a saxon. I think that the genetics will bear out a huge british ancestry amongst the irish. I think 25 percent is correct for long range ancestry. I think the poster saying that two groups who lived side by side for a thousand years and didn't interbred counters common sense.
 
I know the Normans conquered large tracts of the Eastern side of Ireland from the 12th century on, they certainly bred with the natives and became in time as the saying goes "more Irish than the Irish themselves". Not sure about this whole genetics thing but would the Normans count as British, French or Nordic?
 
I know the Normans conquered large tracts of the Eastern side of Ireland from the 12th century on, they certainly bred with the natives and became in time as the saying goes "more Irish than the Irish themselves". Not sure about this whole genetics thing but would the Normans count as British, French or Nordic?

So far, the Normandy Y-DNA Project is a small project, in part because membership is restricted to those who can actually trace their y-dna lines to Normandy or the Channel Islands, but here is the Y-DNA Results page:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Normandy/default.aspx?section=yresults
 
Niall of the nine hostages is the 5th century father of 12 percent of the male population of ireland and his mother was queen of england and a saxon. I think that the genetics will bear out a huge british ancestry amongst the irish. I think 25 percent is correct for long range ancestry. I think the poster saying that two groups who lived side by side for a thousand years and didn't interbred counters common sense.

I think this is a good example of how some favoured lineages (e.g. a particularly prolific royal family) can quickly spread their Y-DNA (1500 years is a relatively short time). In this case, I want to stress that 12% of Irish men have the same Y-DNA as Niall Nóigiallach. It doesn't mean that he is the ancestor of 12% of men or 24% of the population, but that he has probably left traces of autosomal DNA in 99% of the Irish. In other words, about any Irish is bound to have some English DNA.
 
Re Niall of the nine hostages:

Niall was the only son of Eochaidh's (pronouced Ucky for those of you who cannot speak Irish) second wife who was a saxon. He had 4 half brothers from Eochaidh's first wife (who was Irish) who all created dynasties in Ireland (my own family being allegedly descended from Fiachra who gave his name to the Ui Fiachrach Muaidhe of north connacht). Niall, his brothers and his father are all descended from the legendary semi-mythical Conn CeCathach.

However, Niall's mother is more likely not saxon as chronologically it doesnt make sense. She could probably have been a Romano-Briton. How it can be inferred from this that all Irish have some English dna is beyond belief.
 
Last edited:
Greetings Maciamo and other forum members!

Thanks Maciamo, I enjoy your website about European haplogroups and I look back for updates.

I would be grateful if you could fill us in on what we presently know about the ancient origins of the English.

Which haplos are associated with which migrations into Britain and with which ancient ethnicities? In what proportions are they present in England today?

My guess is that East Anglia where I am is more Germanic.

I am aware that Walter Bodmer is heading the People of the British Isles Project to investigate British origins and I eagerly await those results.

Btw I tend to agree with you that R1b is IE. You seem to say that the Celts came to England from southern Germany and the Germanics from northern Germany and Denmark. Do we know when these Celts last had common ancestry with the R1b portion of the Germanics?

I am guessing that the R1a in Britain is Scandinavian. Do we know when it last had common ancestry with Slavic R1a?

There seems to be a smattering of Near Eastern haplos here too.

What about the female line? Can we say to what extent it is Celtic or Germanic?

Any info will be much appreciated!

Cheers!
 
Many surnames in Ireland are English because when they were translated from Gaelic into English, the English translators gave names that sounded similar to English names e.g. Ó Coileáin is anglicised to the english name Collins, hence there are many Collins in Ireland, most of whom are indigenous.
I'd like to add to what Eireannach has said.

I lost the source, but I have read as part of my family research, that Irish families living within the English Pale (the counties around Dublin) where required by the government to use English names. Most of them didn't, but many did.

I was lucky enough to find the records of the Catholic Parish (insie the Pale) in which my ancestors were baptized and there is a large percentage of English sounding names. These records are from the late 1700's and it is not likely that these people would have been English, but rather Irish who changed their name as Eireannach has said.
 
Nevertheless there is a small, but substantial percentage of Irish people who are clearly of English descent. The English have started settling in Ireland since Norman times. Most of the big landowners from the 16th century until the 19th century were English.
Yes, there is no doubt that since times of Cromwell, the English have impacted Irish genetics. How much I don't know, since the population was already quite large. Another interesting question is, Y-DNA-wise, how many of the English landowners in Ireland were just Germanized old Britons?
 
What about the Normans?

In summary, the population of England could be composed of :

- 31.5% of Ancient Briton paternal lineages
- 11% of Near-Eastern paternal lineages
- 26.5% of Anglo-Saxon/Frisian paternal lineages (19.5% R1b + 4% I1 + 3% I2b1)
- 31% of Danish Viking paternal lineages (15% R1b + 4.5% of R1a + 10% I1 + 1.5% I2b1)

What impact do you think the Normans (et al) had on England? I add the "et al" because William recruited his invasionary force from all over France. Also, the Normans were already mixed as of 1066 AD.

I recognize the population of England was large at the time of the invasion, but the Norman (et al) control of land across the Isles must have left a genetic impact of some significance.
 
What impact do you think the Normans (et al) had on England? I add the "et al" because William recruited his invasionary force from all over France. Also, the Normans were already mixed as of 1066 AD.

I recognize the population of England was large at the time of the invasion, but the Norman (et al) control of land across the Isles must have left a genetic impact of some significance.
No, the normans were very minoritary, they did not have a significant impact.
According to Carpenter they were 8,000
 
No, the normans were very minoritary, they did not have a significant impact.
According to Carpenter they were 8,000

The Germanics and some other Nordic groups had a far greater impact than the Normans did in Britain

As a comparison, I suspect that the Normans effected the Sicilian genome more than the British, although that was also quite minor.
 
No, the normans were very minoritary, they did not have a significant impact.
According to Carpenter they were 8,000

I suspect they had a bigger impact than you think. It is fairly well known that in ancient and medieval times the offspring of the wealthy, landed classes had a much greater chance of survival to breeding age than did the offspring of free peasants and especially serfs.

I'm not implying the Normans "replaced" the native British, but I think they may have had a significant impact just the same. Besides their legitimate children, who, as I mentioned, had a better-than-average chance of survival, many Norman lords no doubt fathered quite a few illegitimate sons on the local maidens.
 
I recognize the population of England was large at the time of the invasion, but the Norman (et al) control of land across the Isles must have left a genetic impact of some significance.
In the Irish part of the Isles, the Norman invasion is now being called the Cambro-Norman invasion, where the Cambro refers to Wales. This is because the Norman knights who invaded Ireland, where from the Welsh Marches or the English-Welsh border. They had already intermixed with the Welsh and many of their support troops where Welsh.

So much of the new Norman DNA wasn't new at all.
 
I suspect they had a bigger impact than you think. It is fairly well known that in ancient and medieval times the offspring of the wealthy, landed classes had a much greater chance of survival to breeding age than did the offspring of free peasants and especially serfs.
I'm not implying the Normans "replaced" the native British, but I think they may have had a significant impact just the same. Besides their legitimate children, who, as I mentioned, had a better-than-average chance of survival, many Norman lords no doubt fathered quite a few illegitimate sons on the local maidens.

I understand what you are saying but I doubt ~ 8,000 Normans made a really significant impact, regardless of the circumstances. And, the Normans were already well-mixed with native French when they arrived in Britain.

As a comparison, let's take a look at the Germanic invasions of Iberia. There were between 30,000 to 40,000 Suevi and they ruled the northwest for approximately 200 years, until defeated by the Visigoths and incorporated into the greater kingdom. The Visigoths also totaled in the tens of thousands. They controlled most of Iberia for 300 years. Then, of course, you had a fair number of Vandals... So, with all of these Germanics running around for three plus centuries you would expect Spain and Portugal to have a high percentage of Germanic / Nordic markers, yes? Not quite, both Spain and Portugal average out to a fairly modest 15% or so Germanic / Nordic, Y and mtDNA combined.
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 154902 times.

Back
Top