New phylogenetic tree of Haplogroup I1

That's a good point Moesan. It isn't lost on the Canon of English Literature either. From the "Beauty and the Beast" all the way to "Finnigan's Wake", the issue of the I1 invader brutality is addressed. But, when you consider the fact that R1b steam-rolled through Europe (genetically speaking) and now has all the royal lineages... Is haplogroup I1 to blame for not curling into a ball and ceasing to exist?
 
Last edited:
I have an interesting question, why did R1b and R1a move into Scandanavia in the first place? Why would two different strains of haplogroup R move into territories populated by large, animal skin wearing, technologically disadvantaged brutes and then also have to deal with long, cold winters? If you see the answer, you have solved the key to much of European history.Why do most people visit Sweden and Norway today?
 
nordicwarrior said:
I have an interesting question, why did R1b and R1a move into Scandanavia in the first place? Why would two different strains of haplogroup R move into territories populated by large, animal skin wearing, technologically disadvantaged brutes and then also have to deal with long, cold winters? If you see the answer, you have solved the key to much of European history.Why do most people visit Sweden and Norway today?
Click to expand...
interesting question, I guess the answer is "for the women". That's what they took at least, when they got there. Made it a patriarchal society so they could have a whole bunch of them at the same time. Kinda crazy isn't it.
 
Kamani, you are correct sir. When R1b does it, it is "civilizing the barbarians". When I1 does it, it's something else... But let's look at the bright side--the Anglo-Saxon/Viking/Norman genetic contributions saved the British from all looking like Frodo Baggins (kidding!-I kid because I love.)So yes I1 gave the world Humphred Chimpden Earwicker and Warren Buffet. But then R1b gave us Prince Charles and Fred Phelps the infamous preacher. Um, let's call it a draw?
 
nordicwarrior said:
Kamani, you are correct sir. When R1b does it, it is "civilizing the barbarians". When I1 does it, it's something else... But let's look at the bright side--the Anglo-Saxon/Viking/Norman genetic contributions saved the British from all looking like Frodo Baggins (kidding!-I kid because I love.)So yes I1 gave the world Humphred Chimpden Earwicker and Warren Buffet. But then R1b gave us Prince Charles and Fred Phelps the infamous preacher. Um, let's call it a draw?
Click to expand...
ahahaha damn I can not post even an icon. so instead of frodo they all become Sam and king Theoden looking like? poor Shire thats why Frodo went West, to escape from Nords? so Celts of islands looked like Frodo? BTW nice joke,
 
Last edited:
Yetos, glad you like my humor, although I think I was a bid rough on Prince Charles earlier. He seems like a pleasant enough fellow actually.

And speaking of Tolkein, I've been doing some research regarding his approaches to haplogroups. When I get enough info together, I will start a thread on it.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Z 140 was Frankish. It has a wide area of dispersal which indicates they stayed on the water for a longer period of time.
 
For any I1 members out there (actually for anyone who's a fan of well made documentaries) I highly recommend the three part series by BBC called Vikings. The presenter is Neil Oliver (who always does a good job) and the host channel on youtube is Douglas Allen. If you search for "BBC Vikings" it should pop right up.
 
Oops, before I get a bunch of messages... I should clarify that Vikings were also made up of R1b, R1a, I2, and probably a few more. Also the term Viking was more of a job description (or a term for violent wandering) than anything else.
 
nordicwarrior said:
Oops, before I get a bunch of messages... I should clarify that Vikings were also made up of R1b, R1a, I2, and probably a few more. Also the term Viking was more of a job description (or a term for violent wandering) than anything else.
Click to expand...
Good recovery :grin: It's so nice when you're inclusive.
 
Maciamo said:
Yes, it's true that so far, with the limited amount of data available, L573 looks primarily Frankish.

As for the Saxons, their presence was not limited to North Germany and England either. They were a more important influence than the Franks in coastal Flanders, as suggested by the frequency of place names ending in -gem, ghem, ingem, and inghem between Boulogne-sur-Mer and Brussels via Lille, Bruges and Ghent (see map) mirroring the -gham and ingham in East England. Those names contrast sharply with the more typical Frankish names found in Limburg (e.g. in -hoven and -ingen) and along the Sambre-Meuse axis (Hainaut to Liège), which were also predominantly in -ingen (though Frenchified to -ange, -agne, -gnée, -gny and -gnies).
Click to expand...

I hate to get too far ahead as this is all still speculative, but are there any subclades that so far seem to be linked to the Visigoths, Burgundians, and Normans? I understand quite well that none of these tribes are limited to I1 or any other (haplogroup for that matter) but now I find myself curiously wondering: "Who left the biggest genetic footprint in modern-day France out of the Burgundians, Visigoths, Normans, or Franks?"
 
St Delcambre said:
I hate to get too far ahead as this is all still speculative, but are there any subclades that so far seem to be linked to the Visigoths, Burgundians, and Normans? I understand quite well that none of these tribes are limited to I1 or any other (haplogroup for that matter) but now I find myself curiously wondering: "Who left the biggest genetic footprint in modern-day France out of the Burgundians, Visigoths, Normans, or Franks?"
Click to expand...

I1-P109 would be Norman, or Danish + Norwegian Viking in general.

I1-Z63 would have been present among the Visigoths, though not only among them.

Too little data from France at present to say anything about the Burgundians.
 
St Delcambre said:
I hate to get too far ahead as this is all still speculative, but are there any subclades that so far seem to be linked to the Visigoths, Burgundians, and Normans? I understand quite well that none of these tribes are limited to I1 or any other (haplogroup for that matter) but now I find myself curiously wondering: "Who left the biggest genetic footprint in modern-day France out of the Burgundians, Visigoths, Normans, or Franks?"
Click to expand...

The latest additions to modern-day France - Nord Pas de Calais (Noord-Nauw van Calais) and Elsass Lothringen would outstandingly hold the biggest Germanicness/footmark. Thus it would be best if these two lastmost additions to France were left out of things otherwise they might befuddle and aslant any answer you seek.
 
Reply

Are the various I1 branches now specific enough to start attaching y-DNA time frames to tribal groups? That might help determine gene flow. For example, if you have TMRCA from familytreedna (that goes far back) or a famous relative in ancient history that you can link to--that would enable us to start producing a collective genetic time/place matrix for each tribe.
 
I guess something else to factor is the privacy issue. We are able to get so detailed that we will be dealing with individual surnames. This is an evolving field that has incredible benefits, but also a few pitfalls. I don't know the answer here...
 
zanipolo said:
thats a good point, but I favour the goths originating in pomerania, migrating to sweden and then back again and finally to the black sea.
Click to expand...
Nah, Mostly like the Goths originated in Southern Denmark/Northern Germany during the Jastolf culture.

I don't necessarily agree with the Swedish origin for the Goths, but nor do I dismiss it. My guess is that the truth lies somewhere in between, that is some kind of 'Swedish origin' but that much was happening then and that the Goths who fought against the Romans probably did not have much to do with Götaland, perhaps they had heard stories of an origin from there.

East Germanic Goths derives from the same ancient proto-Germanic word as Swedish Gaets (Götar in Swedish), Swedish Gutar (who did inhabits island of Gotland) and Danish Jütar/Jyder (Jutes) in (Jutland, Jylland).

Pre-Goths moved from what is now northern Germany and Jutland, Denmark to Sweden possibly during the pre period run-up to of the Vendel Era, to what is today Sweden. With Götaland, south Sweden, with the island of Gotland in the east, a possible 'colony' of the pre-Goths and Goths.


Gautr, Gauti, Guti, Gothus and Geat are name forms based on the same Proto-Germanic root, *ǥud*
Click to expand...

Another modern hypothesis (the so-called "Jutish hypothesis"), accepted by the Oxford English Dictionary, states that the Jutes are identical with the Geats, a people who once lived in southern Sweden. In primary sources the Geats are referred to as Eotas, Iótas, Iútan, and Geátas.
Click to expand...

Götaland
Gotland
Jylland
Goth


Hence the mix up. And that's why the whole origin of the Goths originated in Sweden is debated. They mostly could have originated in southern Denmark (Jutland)/North Germany (Holsten).
 
Balder said:
Nah, Mostly like the Goths originated in Southern Denmark/Northern Germany during the Jastolf culture.

I don't necessarily agree with the Swedish origin for the Goths, but nor do I dismiss it. My guess is that the truth lies somewhere in between, that is some kind of 'Swedish origin' but that much was happening then and that the Goths who fought against the Romans probably did not have much to do with Götaland, perhaps they had heard stories of an origin from there.

East Germanic Goths derives from the same ancient proto-Germanic word as Swedish Gaets (Götar in Swedish), Swedish Gutar (who did inhabits island of Gotland) and Danish Jütar/Jyder (Jutes) in (Jutland, Jylland).

Pre-Goths moved from what is now northern Germany and Jutland, Denmark to Sweden possibly during the pre period run-up to of the Vendel Era, to what is today Sweden. With Götaland, south Sweden, with the island of Gotland in the east, a possible 'colony' of the pre-Goths and Goths.






Götaland
Gotland
Jylland
Goth


Hence the mix up. And that's why the whole origin of the Goths originated in Sweden is debated. They mostly could have originated in southern Denmark (Jutland)/North Germany (Holsten).
Click to expand...

without enter in the details of the discussion, I say I 've some difficulty to accept as a God's truth the links made by someones between Jut- (Jutland/Jylland), Geat and Got/Göt a.s.o. ... for phonetic reasons (at this stage of history):
ö << o -- # ea
G >> /j/ is swedish norse (and some german dialects of Eastern Germany)but among north Scandinavian it occurs only in a front-vowels environment (palatizing) and in danish it doesn't occur, by the way!!! so before knowing more (intermediary forms of proved same origin) in don't accept the link Goth/God or Gud with Jut, but the link Jut/Geat is more suitable even if my knowledge there is too scarce
 
Balder said:
Nah, Mostly like the Goths originated in Southern Denmark/Northern Germany during the Jastolf culture.

I don't necessarily agree with the Swedish origin for the Goths, but nor do I dismiss it. My guess is that the truth lies somewhere in between, that is some kind of 'Swedish origin' but that much was happening then and that the Goths who fought against the Romans probably did not have much to do with Götaland, perhaps they had heard stories of an origin from there.

East Germanic Goths derives from the same ancient proto-Germanic word as Swedish Gaets (Götar in Swedish), Swedish Gutar (who did inhabits island of Gotland) and Danish Jütar/Jyder (Jutes) in (Jutland, Jylland).

Pre-Goths moved from what is now northern Germany and Jutland, Denmark to Sweden possibly during the pre period run-up to of the Vendel Era, to what is today Sweden. With Götaland, south Sweden, with the island of Gotland in the east, a possible 'colony' of the pre-Goths and Goths.






Götaland
Gotland
Jylland
Goth


Hence the mix up. And that's why the whole origin of the Goths originated in Sweden is debated. They mostly could have originated in southern Denmark (Jutland)/North Germany (Holsten).
Click to expand...

historians are equally divided in respect to............ if the Geats are the Goths.....the Geats seem to have concentrated in invading jutland and future Frisian lands on the north sea. These south swedish Geats, maybe where germanic , but.....
The gu(a)ts are purely on gotland.

I am going with the historians who say goths where originally Baltic people who became linguistically Germanic over time due to the smallish "spit" of water called the Baltic sea........if the Phoenicians can sail from the levant to Spain in around 2000BC , then surely the Baltic people could sail ALL around the Baltic sea, which is only a quarter of the size of the Med.

In the end we already know the Germanic people claimed falsely the prussians as germans, there is all likelihood they did the same with the Goths
 
MOESAN said:
without enter in the details of the discussion, I say I 've some difficulty to accept as a God's truth the links made by someones between Jut- (Jutland/Jylland), Geat and Got/Göt a.s.o. ... for phonetic reasons (at this stage of history):
ö << o -- # ea
G >> /j/ is swedish norse (and some german dialects of Eastern Germany)but among north Scandinavian it occurs only in a front-vowels environment (palatizing) and in danish it doesn't occur, by the way!!! so before knowing more (intermediary forms of proved same origin) in don't accept the link Goth/God or Gud with Jut, but the link Jut/Geat is more suitable even if my knowledge there is too scarce
Click to expand...

I was referring to the proto-Germanic 'dialect' continuum emerged during Late-Nordic Bronze age and early Jastorf period.

The Swedish language is derived from dǫnsk tunga/dansk tunga ("Danish tongue").
http://www.sweden.se/upload/Sweden_se/otherlanguages/factsheets/SI/Svenska_spraket.pdf

A source in English:
http://www.academia.edu/1659454/The_Danish_Tongue_and_Scandinavian_Identity


MOESAN said:
the link Goth/God or Gud with Jut, but the link Jut/Geat is more suitable even if my knowledge there is too scarce
Click to expand...

Götar (Gaets), Goths and Jutes being the same people is the most accepted theory among modern Scandinavians historians , especially among Danes.

And academic Danish article on:
http://www.nomos-dk.dk/folket/olrik2.html
http://www.denstoredanske.dk/Danmar...dringstiden/Ringenes_herrer/Sangen_om_Bjovulf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 76218 times.

Back
Top