PDA

View Full Version : Anglo-saxon apartheid led to Germanic gene prevalence in Britain



Maciamo
19-07-06, 11:27
BBC News : Britain 'had apartheid society' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5192634.stm)


Scientists believe a small population of migrants from Germany, Holland and Denmark established a segregated society when they arrived in England.

The researchers think the incomers changed the local gene pool by using their economic advantage to out-breed the native population.
...
Estimates range between 10,000 and 200,000 Anglo-Saxons migrating into England between 5th and 7th Century AD, compared with a native population of about two million.
...
"The native Britons were genetically and culturally absorbed by the Anglo-Saxons over a period of as little as a few hundred years," Dr Thomas added.

"An initially small invading Anglo-Saxon elite could have quickly established themselves by having more children who survived to adulthood, thanks to their military power and economic advantage.

"We believe that they also prevented the native British genes getting into the Anglo-Saxon population by restricting intermarriage in a system of apartheid that left the country culturally and genetically Germanised.

"This is exactly what we see today - a population of largely Germanic genetic origin, speaking a principally German language."


Quite interesting, isn't it ? I wonder how common this kind of passive genocide has been in history. We know that in Japan's case the Korean invadors (about 2000 years ago) mostly replaced the indigenous Ainu population is a similar way. But if Ainu language had now almost completely disappeared, like some British indigenous languages (e.g. Cornish Gaelic), DNA test show that the modern Japanese have inherited about 30% of their genes from the "Jomon" Ainu and 70% from the "Yayoi" Koreans. So in Britain's case, genes survived to a similar extent, but language a bit better thanks to the recent revival of Welsh Gaelic in schools.

Another case is that of the Arabian invasion of North Africa. I have explained in the thread Is there such thing as an Arab race ? (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24008) that the Maghreban population which now speaks mostly Arabic and is is generally considered as ethnically Arabic, is in fact only very little genetical trace of Arabic blood. So the Arabs mostly converted the indigenes to their religion, and made them adopt their culture and language, but they didn't replace them genetically. (at least not in North Africa).

On a side note, I wonder what proportion of Frankish or Celto-Roman blood the Belgians inherited, as the Franks invaded, settled and dominated the region politically and economically much in the same way as the Anglo-Saxon did in Britain, and both regions' indigenous population were mostly Latinised Celts. What would be interesting to research in Belgium's case is how the linguistic border between the Flemish (Germanic speakers) and Walloons (Latin speakers) came into existence after the Frankish invasion.

Kinsao
20-07-06, 12:01
That's very interesting! Isn't it in the nature of countries that their 'gene pool' gets changed over a period of time by incomers, though? I always thought that the UK 'people' have a very mixed origin - Scandinavian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, French, Dutch... and probably a lot more races/cultures that invaded the British Isles at various points in its history. :relief: It's always seemed a bit more mixed in this way than some other European countries, and I'd put it down to it being an island nation and therefore subject to invasions from lots of different directions.


The researchers think the incomers changed the local gene pool by using their economic advantage to out-breed the native population.

We believe that they also prevented the native British genes getting into the Anglo-Saxon population by restricting intermarriage in a system of apartheid
I'm not entirely sure how those statements from the article fit together. the first statement, although saying that the incomers outbred the native population, also says that they "changed the gene pool". That couldn't have happened unless they had interbred with the 'natives'. If they hadn't, but stuck with "restricting intermarriage" and using an apartheid-like system as the second statement says, in order to become 'dominant' there would just have become more and more of them, and less and less of the native race... rather than a mixture of the two.

Unless the researchers just meant that it happened like that initially, and then sort of degenerated into interbreeding several hundred years down the line... :?

Maciamo
20-07-06, 18:39
I always thought that the UK 'people' have a very mixed origin - Scandinavian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, French, Dutch... and probably a lot more races/cultures that invaded the British Isles at various points in its history.

Well all of them are Germanic and closely related. Anglo-Saxons are basically Dutch, North Germans and Danish. Scandinavians also include the Danes, and are "North Germanic" just like the Anglo-Saxon/Dutch. The French who invaded and settled England with William the Conqueror were Normands ("Northmen"), who were no more than Danes (yes again !) who had settled in France during the Viking invasions - the same as those that had settled in Northern England ! In fact, the two main protagonists of the battle of Hastings in 1066 (Harold II of England vs William I of Normandy) were distant cousins, both of Danish (Viking) descent. In other words, English people are "North Germanic", closest to the Dutch, Saxons (North Germans) and Danes.

Kinsao
21-07-06, 12:14
I kinda figured that... but these days, most people in England are from many different origins, rather than from the 'original stock' as one might say. :relief:

I suppose if you look deeply enough, you can find one place that everyone came from! Well, I exaggerate a bit, but probably there's one origin of European peoples. :souka: Maybe...

DavidCoutts
03-02-10, 22:46
The Anglo-Saxon/Germanic genes may be prevailent in England, but they hardly seem to have made a dent in Scotland; last time I checked we are mainly Celtic, gentically speaking.

rms2
03-02-10, 23:10
The report that article is based on has been around for awhile. I'm not sure how accurate its conclusions are.

There is an awful lot of L21 in England. One would have to argue that most of it was brought to what is now England by the Anglo-Saxons in order to maintain the wipe-out/apartheid argument.

I think the process by which what is now England came to be English speaking was more complex and nuanced than what is conveyed in that rather sensational report.

But there does seem to be a lot of L21 in Normandy. Maybe the Normans practiced a little wipe-out/apartheid on the Anglo-Saxons? :innocent:

Turnabout is fair play, as they say.

^ lynx ^
03-02-10, 23:16
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j617mImHVvk

Joro
04-02-10, 14:30
That's very interesting! Isn't it in the nature of countries that their 'gene pool' gets changed over a period of time by incomers, though? I always thought that the UK 'people' have a very mixed origin - Scandinavian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, French, Dutch...
That is all Germanic,excluding the French who,however,certainly have significant Germanic admixture.

Chris
05-02-10, 16:28
The Anglo-Saxon/Germanic genes may be prevailent in England, but they hardly seem to have made a dent in Scotland; last time I checked we are mainly Celtic, gentically speaking.

Overall, this is a more complex subject than the more simplistic solutions put forward with such certainty by a number of experts, I suspect. Likewise, the following may or may not be accurate, but is food for thought:

(From 'Anglo-Saxon Britain' by Grant Allen)


...Nor must we suppose that this first wave of Scandinavian conquest in any way swamped or destroyed the underlying English population of the North. The conquerors came merely as a "host," or army of occupation, not as a body of rural colonists. They left the conquered English in possession of their homes, though they seized upon the manors for themselves, and kept the higher dignities of the vanquished provinces in their own hands. Being rapidly converted to Christianity, they amalgamated readily with the native people. Few women came over with them, and intermarriage with the English soon broke down the wall of separation. The archbishopric of York continued its succession uninterruptedly throughout the Danish occupation. The Bishops of Elmham lived through the stormy period; those of Leicester transferred their see to Dorchester-on-the-Thames; those of Lichfield apparently kept up an unbroken series. We may gather that beneath the surface the North remained just as steadily English under the Danish princes as the whole country afterwards remained steadily English under the Norman kings.


There was, however, one section of the true English race which kept itself largely free from the Scandinavian host. North of the Tyne the Danes apparently spread but sparsely; English ealdormen continued to rule at Bamborough over the land between Forth and Tyne. Hence Northumberland and the Lothians remained more purely English than any other part of Britain. The people of the South are Saxons: the people of the West are half Celts; the people of the North and the Midlands are largely intermixed with Danes; but the people of the Scottish lowlands, from Forth to Tweed, are almost purely English; and the dialect which we always describe as Scotch is the strongest, the tersest, and the most native modern form of the original Anglo-Saxon tongue. If we wish to find the truest existing representative of the genuine pure-blooded English race, we must look for him, not in Mercia or in Wessex, but amongst the sturdy and hard-headed farmers of Tweedside and Lammermoor.."

willy
18-03-10, 03:42
The Anglo-Saxon/Germanic genes may be prevailent in England, but they hardly seem to have made a dent in Scotland; last time I checked we are mainly Celtic, gentically speaking.

I agree !!!

genetic code
19-03-10, 12:06
yes you are picts and true britons genetically speaking
but if you realy r1a1a as you write than you are probably descendent of norse viking
who make fun during the viking era
regards genetic code

willy
19-03-10, 19:34
yes you are picts and true britons genetically speaking
but if you realy r1a1a as you write than you are probably descendent of norse viking
who make fun during the viking era
regards genetic code
I am not sure about my ancestors but about you if you are realy e1b1b1bc1 as you write I wondering about your ancestors ? I will be interested

regards Willy

genetic code
19-03-10, 22:16
since you ask i am middle eastern my ancestor was born in damascus syria
e1b1b1c1 is present in syria in 5% i could be descendts of jews who were in syria for thousand of years mainluy damascus and antiocia my clade is middle eastern
bu there is ocuurence in mediterreanean cost for example m34 4% in ibizia
5% minorca 3.5% sardinia probably descendents of the jewish legion sent by tiberius in 19 Ad also in sicily 4.7% so it is rare in europe but not so much in mediterreanean coast
more than r1a1 in those araes thats for sure
in europe itcould be pheonician there is on e famous english man calle dwilliam harvey who discovered the circulation of bloode belong to the same haplogroup as mine e1b1b1c1 he could be descendt of jews back in time since many jews were in rouen normandy many of them converted to chrisatianity just before the norman invasion .
another e1b1b1c1 confirmed by the e3b project is norman darcy comapanian of william the conquer and lord justice of ireland
regards genetic code

rms2
20-03-10, 01:43
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j617mImHVvk

Dated material, just like the study that forms the basis of this thread.

R-L21 is probably the most frequent R1b1b2 subclade in all of the British Isles, including England.

So, how does one prove the L21 in England is "Anglo-Saxon" and somehow different from the L21 in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland?

:laughing:

Chris
20-03-10, 09:49
R-L21 is probably the most frequent R1b1b2 subclade in all of the British Isles, including England.

So, how does one prove the L21 in England is "Anglo-Saxon" and somehow different from the L21 in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland?

:laughing:

Is there a user-friendly web link that illustrates (a) the various sub-clades in the UK, and (b) their likely origins, based on most recent research?

rms2
20-03-10, 19:39
Is there a user-friendly web link that illustrates (a) the various sub-clades in the UK, and (b) their likely origins, based on most recent research?

Not that I know of. This site probably has the most comprehensive information all in one place anywhere, thanks to Maciamo.

rms2
27-03-10, 20:52
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j617mImHVvk

By the way, I have tried twice to post a response to that YouTube clip, merely mentioning that it is very dated material that does not take into account the latest developments in genetics.

Neither of my posts has been approved. Apparently the original poster has an anti-English agenda. He wants there to be some kind of clear ethnic distinction between the English and the rest of Britain's inhabitants.

So much for truth! :startled:

JackMack
31-03-10, 04:09
The Anglo-Saxon theory of Britian has now been debunked....It seems that most of the people in England have more DNA of the old Britons than Anglo-Saxon. I guess apartheid didn't happen there. This post is another example of many on this site that are based on opinion and not fact.

Maciamo
31-03-10, 09:50
The Anglo-Saxon theory of Britian has now been debunked....It seems that most of the people in England have more DNA of the old Britons than Anglo-Saxon. I guess apartheid didn't happen there. This post is another example of many on this site that are based on opinion and not fact.

You are right. I posted the topic from this BBC article 4 years ago. In the meantime I have written a summary of what is known of British genetics (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24907). It emerged that the pre-Germanic lineages are indeed much more common than was expected - around 40% of all lineages in England. But a strong east-west gradient does exist. In East Anglia and Yorkshire the percentage of Germanic Y-DNA exceeds 80%. Close to the Welsh border it can drop to under 20%.

^ lynx ^
31-03-10, 19:36
By the way, I have tried twice to post a response to that YouTube clip, merely mentioning that it is very dated material that does not take into account the latest developments in genetics.

Neither of my posts has been approved. Apparently the original poster has an anti-English agenda. He wants there to be some kind of clear ethnic distinction between the English and the rest of Britain's inhabitants.

So much for truth! :startled:

That's disgusting.:sad-2: I just want to state that I'm not related in anyway to the uploader of that video.

Cambrius (The Red)
31-03-10, 20:17
I think Maciamo's research and opinions provide something considerably closer to reality. There is a Basque / Iberian genetic substratum in the British Isles, however, the Germanic tribes and Nordics made significant contributions as well. In any case, the English are hardly all Germanic.

Chris
31-03-10, 21:55
Nothing can be ruled in or out, as no-one knows.
- As Maciano points out, Germanic Y DNA is strongly regional in England; some extremely high, some low.

- Almost all place names in England are Anglo-Saxon in origin, as is the language - not Celtic. (The ‘Celts’ did not exist as a homogenous entity anyway. They were tribes that shared much in common culturally, but the term was coined in the early 18th century). One way or the other, the Germanic tribes dominated and established the core of English culture.

Genetically - as I understand it - the overwhelming majority of an individual's DNA/appearance is due to paternal/maternal ancestry of within 400-500 years. Every English person will have a mixture of DNA derived from our ancestral past. The Y haplogroup is a paternal 'signature' pointing to the origins of one's paternal line but does not describe the holistic entity of who we are.

Eochaidh
31-03-10, 23:36
You are right. I posted the topic from this BBC article 4 years ago. In the meantime I have written a summary of what is known of British genetics. It emerged that the pre-Germanic lineages are indeed much more common than was expected - around 40% of all lineages in England. But a strong east-west gradient does exist. In East Anglia and Yorkshire the percentage of Germanic Y-DNA exceeds 80%. Close to the Welsh border it can drop to under 20%.
There is a nice map on another page on Eupedia that shows this gradient.

I can't post a link, but here is how to see it.

Go to the 'Facts & Trivia' page from the top menu.
Under 'Maps of Europe', click the fifth one called 'Map of main ethnic groups in Europe'.

rms2
02-04-10, 00:21
I think Maciamo's research and opinions provide something considerably closer to reality. There is a Basque / Iberian genetic substratum in the British Isles, however, the Germanic tribes and Nordics made significant contributions as well. In any case, the English are hardly all Germanic.

Er . . . uh, "Basque/Iberian substratum"?

And that is represented by what?

Wilhelm
02-04-10, 00:55
Er . . . uh, "Basque/Iberian substratum"?

And that is represented by what?
Yes :
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/science/06brits.html?_r=1
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-406108/Ancient-Britons-come-mainly-Spain.html
http://www.ebc.ee/EVOLUTSIOON/publications/Achilli2004.pdf

(http://www.ebc.ee/EVOLUTSIOON/publications/Achilli2004.pdf)

rms2
02-04-10, 02:07
Yes :
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/science/06brits.html?_r=1
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-406108/Ancient-Britons-come-mainly-Spain.html
http://www.ebc.ee/EVOLUTSIOON/publications/Achilli2004.pdf

(http://www.ebc.ee/EVOLUTSIOON/publications/Achilli2004.pdf)

All seriously out-of-date material. The first two articles cite Oppenheimer and Sykes and rely on the discredited theory that R1b spent the last Ice Age in Iberia. Oppenheimer and Sykes relied on REALLY short haplotypes to say that the modern inhabitants of the British Isles are like Basques. We know now that's not really the case.

The last article dates from 2004 and deals with mtDNA. Even so, 2004 was an age ago in terms of the development of genetics.

Wilhelm
02-04-10, 03:13
All seriously out-of-date material. The first two articles cite Oppenheimer and Sykes and rely on the discredited theory that R1b spent the last Ice Age in Iberia. Oppenheimer and Sykes relied on REALLY short haplotypes to say that the modern inhabitants of the British Isles are like Basques. We know now that's not really the case.

The last article dates from 2004 and deals with mtDNA. Even so, 2004 was an age ago in terms of the development of genetics.
So, according to you, where does H1 and H3 originate and who spread it ??

Cambrius (The Red)
02-04-10, 04:35
All seriously out-of-date material. The first two articles cite Oppenheimer and Sykes and rely on the discredited theory that R1b spent the last Ice Age in Iberia. Oppenheimer and Sykes relied on REALLY short haplotypes to say that the modern inhabitants of the British Isles are like Basques. We know now that's not really the case.

The last article dates from 2004 and deals with mtDNA. Even so, 2004 was an age ago in terms of the development of genetics.

So ,what is your take? What research of substance exists that refutes the Basque / Iberian theory? If the genetic substratum of the British Isles is not Basque / Iberian, what is it then?

Cambrius (The Red)
02-04-10, 16:34
So, according to you, where does H1 and H3 originate and who spread it ??

Everything I have read, including the most recent research, strongly suggests H1 and H3 are of Central Asian origin, spreading to Western Europe from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge.

Wilhelm
02-04-10, 17:01
Everything I have read, including the most recent research, strongly suggests H1 and H3 are of Central Asian origin, spreading to Western Europe from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge.
Yes, I know, I want him to answer, because he says this theory is outdated. The paleolithic Iberians spread the H1/H3 to western Europe after the glacial refuge.

^ lynx ^
02-04-10, 21:50
http://www.ebc.ee/EVOLUTSIOON/publications/Achilli2004.pdf


Another study from 2005: High-resolution mtDNA evidence for the late-glacial resettlement of Europe from an Iberian refugium (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC540273/?tool=pmcentrez)


It seems likely, on the basis of this evidence, that haplogroup H entered Europe not much more than ∼20,00025,000 years ago, and dispersed rapidly to the southwest of the continent. Although this was at the peak of the last Ice Age, a passage into Europe at this time is not implausible from an archaeological perspective, since there is evidence for extensive contacts between people of the Badegoulian culture of east-central Europe and those of southwest Europe.

Indeed, it now seems likely that the west European Magdalenian culture had its roots in the Badegoulian, and not in the local Solutrean of the western glacial refugium. It is the Magdalenian culture that is seen to expand dramatically from the Iberian refugium from ∼15,000 years ago in the radiocarbon record for western Europe, although Europe was probably never completely depopulated during the LGM (Housley et al. 1997 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC540273/?tool=pmcentrez#ref10); Terberger and Street 2002 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC540273/?tool=pmcentrez#ref20); Gamble et al. 2004 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15101580)).


Haplogroup V was identified, on the basis of control-region sequences, as a likely marker of a human dispersal in Late Pleistocene Europe (Torroni et al. 1998 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9545392)). Higher phylogenetic resolution of the lineages concerned clarified the geographic pattern by distinguishing the more derived haplogroup V from its ancestor, pre-V, which could now be seen to display a quite distinct phylogeographic pattern (Torroni et al. 2001 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11517423)). Haplogroup pre-V appeared to have entered Europe from the east sometime around 20,00025,000 years ago, at the time of the LGM. However, the diversity and frequency of the derived haplogroup V suggested that it had evolved from pre-V in western Europe, with its age suggesting an expansion from a glacial refuge in Iberia ∼15,000 years ago, accompanying the Magdalenian expansion.


It is clear that the phylogeographic patterns displayed by sub-haplogroups H1 and H3 both closely resemble that of haplogroup V. The star-like phylogenies, geographic distribution, and estimated ages of all three clades suggest that they all took part in a major expansion from southwest to northeast Europe ∼12,00014,000 years ago. Between them H1 and H3 amount to around half of the haplogroup H samples in our coding-region database. They comprise ∼65% of haplogroup H lineages in Iberia, ∼46% in the northwest, ∼27% in central and eastern Europeans, and ∼5%15% in the Near East/Caucasus, falling to zero in the Gulf. It is notable that the diversity does not fall within H1 moving from west to east, unlike the situation with haplogroup V (Torroni et al. 2001 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11517423)), but a rapid expansion within the time-frame of the Magdalenian would in fact not be expected to result in a west-east diversity gradient. The cline seen in haplogroup V diversities most likely has its explanation in more recent founder events in the east.


The remaining haplogroup H lineages present a more complex pattern. The explanation must include the evolution of haplogroup H from its ancestor haplogroup HV, probably in the vicinity of the Near East (Richards et al. 2000 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11032788); Loogvli et al. 2004 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15254257)), and subsequent founder events in Europe, seen in H*. Minor sub-clades found in both Europe and the Near East (H4, H7, and H13) may also have entered Europe around the LGM, and/or during later dispersals from the Near East, such as the Neo-lithic. H must have given rise to H1 and H3 in the western refuge (analogous to ancestral lineages within haplogroup pre-V giving rise to haplogroup V; Torroni et al. 2001 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11517423)), and itself appears very likely to have been partly redistributed alongside them by the late-glacial re-expansion, since an Atlantic European cluster clearly forms part of the H* phylogeny.

Several other minor sub-clades (H2, H5a, H6) also seem likely to have taken part in this process, and may also have evolved in western Europe: More data will be needed to trace their phylogeographic patterns more closely. Interestingly, however, the frequency profile of H5a suggests that, if indeed it has largely been distributed by late-glacial dispersals, this sub-haplogroup may trace a distinct dispersal route into central and eastern Europe. In contrast, H1 and H3 appear at least in part to have spread northwards fairly close to the Atlantic coastline, into the British Isles.


The mtDNA evidence therefore correlates well with Y-chromosome evidence for late-glacial expansions from a south-west European refugium (Semino et al. 2000 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11073453); Rootsi et al. 2004 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15162323)). It indicates that the major demographic signal in the modern European mtDNA pool is the result of the expansion of hunter-gatherer populations at the end of the Palaeolithic, although this has not entirely erased the traces of earlier processes.

Trollhattan
02-04-10, 23:46
All seriously out-of-date material. The first two articles cite Oppenheimer and Sykes and rely on the discredited theory that R1b spent the last Ice Age in Iberia. Oppenheimer and Sykes relied on REALLY short haplotypes to say that the modern inhabitants of the British Isles are like Basques. We know now that's not really the case.






It's wise to ignore these few stupid cyber low esteem Spaniards with inferiority complex who now thirst for kinship with the people of British Isles to distant themselves from ( or invalidate ) 20% genetic tie to Middle Eastern race ( Moors - Jews - Phoenecians - other ancient Semite people ) :rolleyes2:

I have met one of them at an anthro-forum,he even confessed to Spain has the LOWEST STATUS in the EU :laughing:

So far,no British or anyone of Germanic stock desires strong kinship with them :laughing:

Michael Folkesson
03-04-10, 02:17
I don't think someone from the meth state should talk about having a low status.

Cambrius (The Red)
03-04-10, 02:22
Thank you Michael. Nice to see that some intelligent people are still on this thread.

Joro
03-04-10, 02:49
what is a meth state?

rms2
03-04-10, 03:03
So ,what is your take? What research of substance exists that refutes the Basque / Iberian theory? If the genetic substratum of the British Isles is not Basque / Iberian, what is it then?

Certainly some people spent the LGM in Iberia. My point is they weren't R1b of any kind. The R1b in Western Europe is overwhelmingly R1b1b2 of various kinds, predominantly either U106+ and its subclades or P312+ and its subclades. None of them is old enough to have been in Iberia or anywhere else during the LGM.

Various studies of R1b1b2 variance show that R1b1b2 is oldest in SW Asia and spread to Europe from there, probably during the Neolithic Period or perhaps the Bronze Age.

http://tinyurl.com/yhc9moz

I think the y-haplogroup in Iberia during the LGM was I2a (P37.2+). I wasn't commenting on mtDNA.

By the way, I am not trying to distance myself from the Spanish and the Portuguese. Obviously, since most of the men are R1b1b2 of one kind or another, we're related. I have even contemplated retiring in Spain in the future. I also try to recruit men of Iberian descent for the R-L21 Plus Project (as you know full well, since I have tried to recruit you more than once via private messages).

Wilhelm
03-04-10, 03:06
Certainly some people spent the LGM in Iberia. My point is they weren't R1b of any kind. The R1b in Western Europe is overwhelmingly R1b1b2 of various kinds, predominantly either U106+ and its subclades or P312+ and its subclades. None of them is old enough to have been in Iberia or anywhere else during the LGM.

Various studies of R1b1b2 variance show that R1b1b2 is oldest in SW Asia and spread to Europe from there, probably during the Neolithic Period or perhaps the Bronze Age.

http://tinyurl.com/yhc9moz

I think the y-haplogroup in Iberia during the LGM was I2a (P37.2+). I wasn't commenting on mtDNA.

By the way, I am not trying to distance myself from the Spanish and the Portuguese. Obviously, since most of the men are R1b1b2 of one kind or another, we're related. I have even contemplated retiring in Spain in the future. I also try to recruit men of Iberian descent for the R-l21 Plus Project (as you know full well, since I have tried to recruit you more than once via private messages).
We were not talking about R1b but mtDNA H1 & H3. All scientists agree that the Franco-Cantabrian was a refuge for the peoples who spread these haplogroups to all western Europe.

rms2
03-04-10, 03:13
I don't think anyone here was talking about R1b but mtDNA H1 & H3. All scientists agree that the Franco-Cantabrian was a refuge for the peoples who spread these haplogroups to all western Europe.

Could be. I haven't really studied the spread of mtDNA H of any kind. I am U5 on the mtDNA side (probably U5a of some kind). I have one match, from Poland, and that's it. :good_job:

It could be that H of various kinds spread from Iberia with whatever kind of I2 is found at low frequencies in the British Isles.

Cambrius (The Red)
03-04-10, 05:27
what is a meth state?

The Mexican troll shows the State of Oregon as his location. Oregon I believe has the highest level of meth addiction in the U.S., with high production as well. Oregon is a beautiful state with great people but there are many seriously sick meth addicts there.

Wilhelm
03-04-10, 05:53
Everything I have read, including the most recent research, strongly suggests H1 and H3 are of Central Asian origin, spreading to Western Europe from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge.
Haplogroup H is central asian, but H1 and H3 (the most frequent in Europe) are european origin.

Cambrius (The Red)
03-04-10, 06:25
Haplogroup H is central asian, but H1 and H3 (the most frequent in Europe) are european origin.

Yes, that's right. I wrote the paragraph incorrectly.

^ lynx ^
03-04-10, 20:04
By the way, I am not trying to distance myself from the Spanish and the Portuguese.

That would be unnecessary anyways. These studies aren't stating that the british genetic pool is equal to iberian's or anything like that. They just state that we share a very ancient common ancestors, those who partially abandoned the iberian refuge after the last glacial period.

Greetings.

Mikewww
05-04-10, 03:32
Dated material, just like the study that forms the basis of this thread.

R-L21 is probably the most frequent R1b1b2 subclade in all of the British Isles, including England.

So, how does one prove the L21 in England is "Anglo-Saxon" and somehow different from the L21 in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland?

:laughing:
You can't. L21 in England, which there is a lot of, is a lot like a lot of the L21 in Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Maciamo
05-04-10, 09:51
That would be unnecessary anyways. These studies aren't stating that the british genetic pool is equal to iberian's or anything like that. They just state that we share a very ancient common ancestors, those who partially abandoned the iberian refuge after the last glacial period.

Greetings.

How about the other common ancestors ? All Western Europeans share 4 different groups of common ancestors : Paleolithic Europeans, Neolithic Near-Eastern farmers, Bronze-Age Indo-Europeans (Celtic), and Iron-Age Germanic invaders (well invaders outside their north German/Scandinvian homeland).

The Paleolithic element, the re-expansion from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge northward (e.g. to the British Isles) is the oldest of these genealogical relations, and therefore also the dimmest, because genetic mutations have accumulated for longer since the split.

What the northern Iberians have in common with the Atlantic French, the Irish, the Welsh and to a lesser extent Highlands Scots, is a presumably high admixture of Paleolithic European and IE Celtic blood, and a relatively minor (max. 10% of Y-DNA) Near-Eastern and Germanic proportion of ancestry.

Wilhelm
05-04-10, 22:03
Here is the answer by Oppenheimer about the question of this thread :

See Anglo-Saxon ethnic cleansing?
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2006/10/mythsofbritishancestry/

He is also believes the Celts are of Southwestern europe origin, and that Britihs/Irish people are basically the same as the hunter-gatherers wave (except east parts which have much more Viking influence)

Cambrius (The Red)
05-04-10, 22:20
Here is the answer by Oppenheimer about the question of this thread :

See Anglo-Saxon ethnic cleansing?
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2006/10/mythsofbritishancestry/

He is also believes the Celts are of Southwestern europe origin, and that Britihs/Irish people are basically the same as the hunter-gatherers wave

Also, read John Koch's latest book: Tartessian: Celtic from the South-west at the Dawn of History.

Tartessian is now recognized by many historical linguists and archaeologists as the first Celtic language.

Mikewww
06-04-10, 02:50
From Y-DNA perspective, there is new information available after Dr. Oppenheimer's book of which the NY Times article cites. Please note that we now know much better what the subclades of R-M269 are and how they are distributed.

Some of the sub-clades that are most prevalent in Iberia are not most prevalent in the British Isles. Of particular note, is R-L21+, which is very heavy in the western parts of the Isles but also strong in England. L21+ is only lightly found in Iberia, mostly on the northern edge, while L21+ appears to have a significant distribution in most of France and parts of Germany.... even in Scandinavia more than one might think.