Norman haplogroup I1, SNP M253+( the most neglected SNP )

[onslo]

I1 is indigenous to Europe , the direct descendant of Cro-Magnon. Germanic branch of R1b1b2 moved north and mixed with indigenous I1 . Hybrid Germanic tribe retained highest percentage if I Haplogroup. Germanic language assimilated large part of I1? Is SNP M253+, with all other following SNPs being - negative indicative of northern France being a root of I1 haplogroup?

[sparkey]

I1 is indigenous to Europe , the direct descendant of Cro-Magnon. Germanic branch of R1b1b2 moved north and mixed with indigenous I1 .

Don't forget R1a as a component in this equation, as it was clearly introduced via Corded Ware, before R1b-U106 is thought to have arrived.

The best Germanic Y-DNA recipe I've come up with looks like: Paleolithic hunter-gatherers (I1+I2a2a) + Neolithic Corded Ware early IE types (R1a) + Bronze Age Centum IE types (R1b-U106) = Germanic peoples.

Is SNP M253+, with all other following SNPs being - negative indicative of northern France being a root of I1 haplogroup?

You didn't really test "all other following SNPs," only the ones that your testing company provided you with. Some others are known.

Anyway, I already answered this question here. Quoting myself:

Most I1 L22- are Z58+, that's a more useful marker to test than a lot of those that you list. Z58+ is typical of West Germanic peoples (English people, Dutch people, etc.) and usually indicates Anglo-Saxon ancestry if you're an American unaware of your deep ancestry.

But it's also possible that you're L22- Z58-, and you're the rare Celtic type of I1 (I1*-AS4) or L22- Z58- Z68+, which is usually tied to East Germanic peoples, like the Goths. There are also some more rare possibilities. In short, we can't guarantee what your background is just by that data, other than "probably not Viking." Most Viking I1 would have been L22+.

[onslo]

My Igenea testing co.provided me with : P259- P15- P109- M72- M69- M286- M227- M21- M201- L91- L42- L30- L22- L211- L141- L140- L14- L13-.There you are.

[sparkey]

My Igenea testing co.provided me with 109-;M72-;M69-;M227-;L42-;L22-;L21-;L141-;L140-;L14-;L13-;There you are.

You went with iGENEA; there's your problem. See if you can transfer to FTDNA or get iGENEA to test you for more specific SNPs like Z58 if you want to get serious about narrowing it down more.

[onslo]

My M21- is negative.I1a is only possible if M21is + positive .I1a3 (S244/Z58) test you are suggesting is useless.So, IGenea did a very good job. I1* is Pre-Germanic (Nordic) and as such - Viking (Indigenous)."The Gutes (Gotlanders) themselves had oral traditions of a mass migration towards southern Europe, recorded in the Gutasaga. If the facts are related, this would be a unique case of a tradition that endured for more than a thousand years and that actually pre-dates most of the major splits in the Germanic language family."According to Jordanes’ Getica, written in the mid-6th century, the earliest migrating Goths sailed from Scandza (Scandinavia) under King Berig[16] in three ships.(wikipedia.org)

[sparkey]

My M21- is negative.I1a is only possible if M21is + positive .I1a3 (S244/Z58) test you are suggesting is useless.So, IGenea did a very good job.

You must be mixing nomenclatures, because Z58 is not downstream of M21. See ISOGG, which places M21 as private. Most I1 who are L22- M227- are Z58+, so I'm guessing that you probably are (but it's not 100% sure, of course).

I1* is Pre-Germanic (Nordic) and as such - Viking (Indigenous).

Make sure to be precise with your terms and time periods. "I1*" means truly no further subclade known, and is, according to Nordtvedt's tree, currently limited to the rare I1*-1212 branches. Even the wacky Welsh/Pomeranian branch isn't I1* anymore. You may mean I1 as a whole... which makes sense, in a way, to call "pre-Germanic" and even "Nordic pre-Germanic." I think it's possibly a leftover from something like Ertebølle Culture. But the word "Viking" doesn't make sense in this context. "Viking" is an occupational term more than an ethnic term, and it's not an applicable term for pre-Germanic cultures at all... Vikings came much later. Also, they wouldn't have tended to carry I1*... they probably mostly carried I1-L22, as far as I1 goes.

[piero sinclair]

I'm trying to establish the probabilities re the Haplogroups of the Norman Vikings. They got there from Denmark and possibly some from Norway in the 9th century. The R1b U106 people were expanding from Netherland/North Germany from the 5th century. I've noticed that on the map of the distribution of these people Denmark seems to be strongly delineated as R1b on the West of the narrow peninsula and other haplogroups to the East (presumably predominantly I1). Such a clear demarcation suggests that, (given I1 were settled in Denmark well before the U106 migrations) the U106 haplogroup is pretty recent to Denmark. What I'd like to know is would this migration up the West coast of Denmark be early enough for the Danes who invaded Normandy in the 9th century to have had a strong U106 component?
Hoping someone has some idea out there.
Cheers
Piero

[MOESAN]

I'm trying to establish the probabilities re the Haplogroups of the Norman Vikings. They got there from Denmark and possibly some from Norway in the 9th century. The R1b U106 people were expanding from Netherland/North Germany from the 5th century. I've noticed that on the map of the distribution of these people Denmark seems to be strongly delineated as R1b on the West of the narrow peninsula and other haplogroups to the East (presumably predominantly I1). Such a clear demarcation suggests that, (given I1 were settled in Denmark well before the U106 migrations) the U106 haplogroup is pretty recent to Denmark. What I'd like to know is would this migration up the West coast of Denmark be early enough for the Danes who invaded Normandy in the 9th century to have had a strong U106 component?
Hoping someone has some idea out there.
Cheers
Piero

I have only a very "light samples" survey %s:
North-Jutland: Y-R1b (all): 45,2% (U106: 23,8% within R1b: 52,6%)
West-Jutland: Y-R1b (all): 31,6% (U106: 21,0% within R1b: 44,4%)
East-Jutland: Y-R1b (all): 23,0% (U106: 17,6% within R1b: 60,0%)
South-Jutland: Y-R1b (all): 31,7% (U106: 13,6% within R1b: 37,5%)
the same surveys (I didn't note the name) said the isles (East) had less than 33% of Y-R1b
East Jutland is (if I'm right, because they didn't give precise localisation) is not the shorter way to Scandinavia, so the possible U106 invaders (maybe with or after some L21S145) that passed into Scandinavia passed rather through South (say: South-East) Jutland, and the reverse movement surely enough took the same way: it should be there the less total R1b and the more internal U106, and IT SEAMS being the case for East Jutland -
all that is very nice, but I think small samples can push us to do unreliable theorie samples are ridiculously small
and even logic could be contradicted by facts:
the high level of R1b in N-Jutland seams checking the same high level in South Norway, (Aust-Agder) and suggests rather a maritime way for some R1b introductions
at a general point, I think U106 is not so new in N-Europe and Scandinavia (and the same for L21) and surely, yes, among Danish Vikings it was already present

[piero sinclair]

Thanks very much Moesan, sorry for may delayed reply. That was useful. I hadn't thought of a sea route, and it would be interesting if we could ever find out if U106 was more coastal in Denmark. Perhaps they were originally Friesans.
Cheers, Piero