PDA

View Full Version : Celtic or Norse?



DavidCoutts
23-10-10, 22:26
I am L21+ and Scottish. Obviously, the odds are that I am of pure(I always feel like a bloody Nazi when I use this term :ashamed2:)Celtic ancestry.

But...

If I recall correctly, L21+ is also widespread in Norway. And of course, most of the Viking raids and settlements in Scotland came from Norway.

So is it possible to find out if one has Norse DNA as well as Celtic or is it just too widespread to narrow down?

Maciamo
24-10-10, 08:59
L21 is far more common in the British Isles and the Celtic cultures of the Atlantic coast of Europe than in Norway. It is still unclear how L21 got to Norway, but if you are Scottish I'd say there is 95% of chances that your L21 is Celtic, not Norse.

Farquharson
01-11-11, 01:59
L21 also has a decent presence in Sweden and the coasts opposite Denmark (although Northern Jutland is higher in L21 than places like Schleswig). Its presence along the coasts of Norway makes me think it got there by sea (Bronze Age?), and I wonder about Iceland too.

It depends on where in Scotland your family comes from. My L21 is from Strathspey, so I am Gaelic, but if your line hails from a place like Caithness or Lewis, that is a different story.

Taranis
01-11-11, 02:24
L21 also has a decent presence in Sweden and the coasts opposite Denmark (although Northern Jutland is higher in L21 than places like Schleswig). Its presence along the coasts of Norway makes me think it got there by sea (Bronze Age?), and I wonder about Iceland too.

It depends on where in Scotland your family comes from. My L21 is from Strathspey, so I am Gaelic, but if your line hails from a place like Caithness or Lewis, that is a different story.

R1b-L21 in Norway most likely arrived from Goidelic slaves that were taken by the Vikings to Norway. If R1b-L21 already arrived in the Bronze Age, it's unlikely that we would see the subclade R1b-M222 present in Norway because it must have arisen substantially later than L21 as it seems to be only linked with the Goidelic peoples.

Farquharson
01-11-11, 03:32
The recent Old Norway study out of Gothenburg actually shows L21 in much higher frequencies in Norway (even further inland) than its downstream clade of M222. The latter is clearly absent from much of the Norwegian male population which makes me think how many slaves were actually taken back to Norway - not that many it seems.

The M222 in Norway can be associated with the Viking Age, but L21?.... Meh, not so much.

Farquharson
01-11-11, 03:35
It is interesting to note L21's rarity amongst the Low Countries, but it picks up again in Scandinavia. It must have gotten there by sea, and earlier than the Viking Age to put up some decent numbers there.

Taranis
01-11-11, 03:44
The recent Old Norway study out of Gothenburg actually shows L21 in much higher frequencies in Norway (even further inland) than its downstream clade of M222. The latter is clearly absent from much of the Norwegian male population which makes me think how many slaves were actually taken back to Norway - not that many it seems.

The M222 in Norway can be associated with the Viking Age, but L21?.... Meh, not so much.


It is interesting to note L21's rarity amongst the Low Countries, but it picks up again in Scandinavia. It must have gotten there by sea, and earlier than the Viking Age to put up some decent numbers there.

I think the jury is still out. I admit that the actual extend of the impact of slavery is debatable, but there is no doubt that slavery had an impact. Non-M222 L21 might also come from other sources, for instance - I'm not saying it does, but I'm pointing out the possibility. The reason I'm sceptical with the Bronze Age hypothesis is that there's no evidence for such migration/interaction from the archaeological perspective.

Farquharson
01-11-11, 03:49
I agree with that. No doubt some of that L21 came from Scotland and Ireland, but not all of it.

DavidCoutts
01-11-11, 13:02
Love the user name; the Coutts were a Sept of the Clan Farquharson.

DavidCoutts
01-11-11, 13:09
The recent Old Norway study out of Gothenburg actually shows L21 in much higher frequencies in Norway (even further inland) than its downstream clade of M222. The latter is clearly absent from much of the Norwegian male population which makes me think how many slaves were actually taken back to Norway - not that many it seems.

The M222 in Norway can be associated with the Viking Age, but L21?.... Meh, not so much.

Sorry, am I reading this right: M222 is associated with slaves taken back to Norway during the Viking Age, but the L21+ in Norway is from another source?

Farquharson
01-11-11, 15:49
Sorry, am I reading this right: M222 is associated with slaves taken back to Norway during the Viking Age, but the L21+ in Norway is from another source?
I should have explained myself better. The ratio of M222 to L21 in Norway is so low, it implies that the Viking slave trade had little effect on the genetics of that country. L21 must have been there earlier.

People disagree, but in my opinion, most of the L21 arrives in Norway from a source other than Viking Age trade. L21 puts up decent numbers further inland Norway, Sweden (especially in the west, even in Ostrogotland from the Old Norway study) and Northern Denmark.

Don't get me wrong though, L21 has a very Atlantic feel to it which makes me think it is closely associated with early seafaring. It could have got to Norway through Denmark, although U106 sees a much higher distribution there.

Farquharson
01-11-11, 15:52
Love the user name; the Coutts were a Sept of the Clan Farquharson.
I just consulted my Scottish clans manual, and you are right! Have any family from the Strathspey/Badenoch area?

DavidCoutts
01-11-11, 18:06
I just consulted my Scottish clans manual, and you are right! Have any family from the Strathspey/Badenoch area?

Possibly, but my father's immediate family are from Daviot.

DavidCoutts
01-11-11, 18:09
I should have explained myself better. The ratio of M222 to L21 in Norway is so low, it implies that the Viking slave trade had little effect on the genetics of that country. L21 must have been there earlier.

People disagree, but in my opinion, most of the L21 arrives in Norway from a source other than Viking Age trade. L21 puts up decent numbers further inland Norway, Sweden (especially in the west, even in Ostrogotland from the Old Norway study) and Northern Denmark.

Don't get me wrong though, L21 has a very Atlantic feel to it which makes me think it is closely associated with early seafaring. It could have got to Norway through Denmark, although U106 sees a much higher distribution there.

IMHO, that's the frustrating thing about trying to narrow down L21; it's so wide-spread it's like trying to nail fog to a wall.

JKU
20-01-12, 20:15
I should have explained myself better. The ratio of M222 to L21 in Norway is so low, it implies that the Viking slave trade had little effect on the genetics of that country. L21 must have been there earlier.

People disagree, but in my opinion, most of the L21 arrives in Norway from a source other than Viking Age trade. L21 puts up decent numbers further inland Norway, Sweden (especially in the west, even in Ostrogotland from the Old Norway study) and Northern Denmark.

Don't get me wrong though, L21 has a very Atlantic feel to it which makes me think it is closely associated with early seafaring. It could have got to Norway through Denmark, although U106 sees a much higher distribution there.


A problem I see w using M222/L21 ratio is that it was likely a much different ratio back in the 800’s 900’s when Norse were taking prisoners in raids. If M222 is as believed, to be a gene spread by upper class nobles, 2 problems arise. 1. It was most likely less frequent in the era of Viking raids 2. in Gaelic societies the upper class w the exception of clergy, were ALL warriors/protectors of the people, so capturing or taking them prisoner was far less likely than say a pig farmer or cowboy unless it was children or clergy.

M222 were supposed to be from the upper class of N Ui Niall (also possibly Connacht kinsmen) so they are located in Ireland where those clans/tribes were known to be i.e. the Northwest, west. This spread is said to have happened from their being preferable mates because of status (Gaelic marriage practices also would have played a large role). Since today they are up to (IIRC) 20% or so of N Ui Niall names it is likely they were far less in previous generations. In Scotland they would be located initially in the western coast/isles in the form of allies, mercenaries, of Dal Riata, ( The kinel Connaill kings were generally allies of Dal Riata, so intermarriages, mercenary work, military assistance etc are quite probable avenues for M222 spread). There would also be clergy n laymen connected to Columba/Columcille abbeys. These would later move inland to Athol because of raids.. Eventually this branch would give the Scots their kings from 1030’s to late 1200’s. At that time branches of the family were said to have spread far an wide as upper class noblemen from the very N (McKay rulers) to Cumbria (Washington’s for instance). So you would not expect to see many as prisoners except, initially clergy such as from attacks on Iona or children and M222 would have been a very minor portion of Scots until the 1000’s so you would not expect them to pop up in large numbers among prisoners taken to Norway.

Also keep in mind L21 can come from S Britain or elsewhere as well where there would likely be very little M222 (try telling the percentage genes of Anglo Saxons taken as slaves apart from Dane or Norse genes)

MOESAN
21-01-12, 23:44
A problem I see w using M222/L21 ratio is that it was likely a much different ratio back in the 800’s 900’s when Norse were taking prisoners in raids. If M222 is as believed, to be a gene spread by upper class nobles, 2 problems arise. 1. It was most likely less frequent in the era of Viking raids 2. in Gaelic societies the upper class w the exception of clergy, were ALL warriors/protectors of the people, so capturing or taking them prisoner was far less likely than say a pig farmer or cowboy unless it was children or clergy.

M222 were supposed to be from the upper class of N Ui Niall (also possibly Connacht kinsmen) so they are located in Ireland where those clans/tribes were known to be i.e. the Northwest, west. This spread is said to have happened from their being preferable mates because of status (Gaelic marriage practices also would have played a large role). Since today they are up to (IIRC) 20% or so of N Ui Niall names it is likely they were far less in previous generations. In Scotland they would be located initially in the western coast/isles in the form of allies, mercenaries, of Dal Riata, ( The kinel Connaill kings were generally allies of Dal Riata, so intermarriages, mercenary work, military assistance etc are quite probable avenues for M222 spread). There would also be clergy n laymen connected to Columba/Columcille abbeys. These would later move inland to Athol because of raids.. Eventually this branch would give the Scots their kings from 1030’s to late 1200’s. At that time branches of the family were said to have spread far an wide as upper class noblemen from the very N (McKay rulers) to Cumbria (Washington’s for instance). So you would not expect to see many as prisoners except, initially clergy such as from attacks on Iona or children and M222 would have been a very minor portion of Scots until the 1000’s so you would not expect them to pop up in large numbers among prisoners taken to Norway.

Also keep in mind L21 can come from S Britain or elsewhere as well where there would likely be very little M222 (try telling the percentage genes of Anglo Saxons taken as slaves apart from Dane or Norse genes)

Very interesting post - I regret it's not me that wrote it!
yes L21(-222) could have been picked up in other lands than Ireland (England, Scotland, North France, Brittany) on a long span of time - But even taking that in account, I believe yet L21 was in Scandinavia before Vikings (surely not in big proportions) -