Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Was R1b-U106 in Scandinavia&Frisia caused by Tumulus Culture proto-Celtic migrations?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    Was R1b-U106 in Scandinavia&Frisia caused by Tumulus Culture proto-Celtic migrations?


    It has been proposed that R1b-U106 was diffused during the Iron Age Hallstatt Culture. I think it may have been earlier, in the Bronze Age, more specifically with the expansion of the Tumulus Culture.
    Here's what the Celtic Encyclopedia has to say about the Tumulus Culture:
    The Tumulus Culture was recognized for its use of the single grave with a covering mound. The warriors of the Tumulus Culture were highland horse-riding cattle-herders and lived in fortified villages. Like their predecessors the Unetice, the Tumulus Culture was well-situated to receive stimuli from other regions via the established overland trade routes.
    Between BC 1800 to BC 1200, Unetice-Tumulus, highland warriors began to appear in the west of Europe. They were well-armed and they spread the use of the tumulus from Bohemia to the Rhine north of the Main, then into Switzerland, Belgium, Britain and Ireland. The tumulus was in vogue for most of Europe during the Middle Bronze Age.
    The tumuli of the Tumulus Culture were very similar to those of the Goidel, Unetice, Wessex and Aremorican in form but in content and number they were quite different. Grave evidence has shown that the four groups were different cultures practising a similar Burial style.
    The Bavarian group was recognized for its long swords with solid hilts. Excavation of the tumuli of Hungary exposed battle axes, while the Danube groups were noted for sickle-shaped dress pins and baked clay altars with decorations of horn, boats and triangles. the tumuli of eastern France revealed bodies lying in their back in an east-west direction with the head toward the rising sun. Grave goods included pottery with designs reminiscent of the older wooden cups. Boars were an important part of the grave goods in France. In the north, objects of sun worship have been found.
    The early tumulus graves contained inhumed bodies but later graves contained cremated bodies as the transition to the Urnfield Culture began. The gods were shown as symbols rather than abstracted images. The sun god was represented by the sun wheel or the left-facing swastika of the Kurgan culture, which was used by the Celts and others from India to Ireland. The fire goddess was represented by the triangle or the right-facing swastika.
    The people of the Tumulus Culture developed a profitable bronze industry in weapons, jewelry and tools. During BC 15th-12th centuries, Tumulus-Urnfield warriors raided east through Thrace and Illyria, crossed the Strait of Bosporus to Anatolia, then wreaked havoc in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt.
    The Egyptians referred to this group as the Sea Peoples and many of them worked as mercenaries for the Phoenicians who were developing their commercial trade route throughout the Mediterranean and into the Atlantic. They were described as ferocious warriors who wore their hair in a very stiff style.
    Alright, so, ¿why have the Tumulus culture as a canditate for the northern spread of U106? There are many reasons. First of all, there are archaeological reasons: R1b1a, a haplogroup sometimes assumed to have gotten to W. Europe more from the southwest than the northwest, probably thus entered Northern Europe from the south. The northern expansion of the Tumulus culture could be seen as just that (it could have had a Founder Effect in those areas), as the earlier Unetice Culture was more localized around Bohemia. The Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures also saw expansions to the north, but what I believe is a telling point against these cultures is that if theirs was the expansion, it would also have brought R-S28 to the mix, and that haplogroup is meagre in Scandinavia and almost absent in Frisia:

    There is also linguistic evidence: The placing of the Germanic branch within Indo-European has been something of a headache among linguists, as says the Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture:
    The position of Germanic is difficult to determine. Any
    tree with Germanic included has many characters that do
    not fit. Excluding Germanic allows trees (...) where the overwhelming majority of characters do fit.
    It is also noteworthy that the lexical data from Germanic points
    in a different direction, as it were, than the morphological
    data. They attribute this "dual allegiance" as evidence that
    pre-Germanic began to develop with the "Satem Core" (more particularly
    paired with Balto-Slavic) but moved away from
    that group early on (before many of the special innovations
    defining that core group had developed) and into contact
    with the western groups of ltalic and Celtic from which it
    borrowed a number of distinctive vocabulary items sufficiently
    early that these borrowings cannot be distinguished from true
    cognates. (They recognize that these "undetectable borrowings"
    are worrisome for their model, and of course any other
    that relies on lexical equations.)
    Seeing the Tumulus Culture as proto-Italo-Celtic, or as proto-Celtic that only very recently broke with Italic, would solve this problem.
    What do you think?

  2. #2
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Let me say this, I personally always had the idea that U106 originated in the Nordic Bronze Age.

    Regarding the linguistic position of Germanic, I absolutely agree about the 'hybrid' nature: you have a very old connection with the Balto-Slavic languages (which predates the Centum-Satem split), but beyond that it is a Centum language just like Celtic and Italic. You also have a sizable share of Celtic loanwords into Proto-Germanic probably stemming from iron age contact with (the probably Proto-Gaulish speaking) Celts of Hallstatt. The question is, what happened in between?

    What I find peculiar about R1b-U106 is the "hole" around the Harz mountains, which in turn corresponds with the highest concentrations of I2b. We interestingly see such a makeup there in the vicinity of the Harz mountains in the samples from Lichtenstein Cave from circa 1000 BC (Urnfield Culture): mostly I2b, and one sample of R1b-U106 and one of R1a, respectively. I always thought such a makeup would be totally non-representative of the actual makeup, but what if not?

  3. #3
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Regarding the linguistic position of Germanic, I absolutely agree about the 'hybrid' nature: you have a very old connection with the Balto-Slavic languages (which predates the Centum-Satem split), but beyond that it is a Centum language just like Celtic and Italic. You also have a sizable share of Celtic loanwords into Proto-Germanic probably stemming from iron age contact with (the probably Proto-Gaulish speaking) Celts of Hallstatt. The question is, what happened in between?
    Very true. First of all, one has to note the dispute currently lurking on whether PIE was Centum or Satem. I would say Centum, due to Tocharian being Centum. Satem in Balto-Slavic may possibly (possibly) be due to Iranian influence, for example. Now then, the relationship of Germanic with Italic and Celtic is basically lexical, which probably confirms it as a superstrate rather than a genetic relationship. Also note that if these Germanic borrowings are purely from the Hallstatt period, it would be hard to also explain its relationship with Italic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    What I find peculiar about R1b-U106 is the "hole" around the Harz mountains, which in turn corresponds with the highest concentrations of I2b. We interestingly see such a makeup there in the vicinity of the Harz mountains in the samples from Lichtenstein Cave from circa 1000 BC (Urnfield Culture): mostly I2b, and one sample of R1b-U106 and one of R1a, respectively. I always thought such a makeup would be totally non-representative of the actual makeup, but what if not?
    Indeed, the I2b concentration around the Harz mountains may have been even higher earlier, before Hallstatt Celts probably "filled" the R1b "hole" with R-S28.
    Edit: I did some further research on the cave you mentioned, and I think we should also take into account that those buried there were related.

  4. #4
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    Very true. First of all, one has to note the dispute currently lurking on whether PIE was Centum or Satem. I would say Centum, due to Tocharian being Centum. Satem in Balto-Slavic may possibly (possibly) be due to Iranian influence, for example.
    I would argue that technically, PIE was neither. Proto-Indo-European had a total of 15 different stop sounds, which are usually displayed as shown below:

    *t, *d, *dh
    *p, *b, *bh
    *k, *g, *gh
    *k´, *g´, *g´h
    *kw, *gw, *gwh

    What the Centum-Satem split is all is the treatment of the sounds *k´, *g´, *g´h (also called 'palatovelars'). In the centum languages (Celtic, Germanic, Italic, Greek, Tocharian) these are merged with *k, *g and *gh (the so-called 'plain' velars). In the Satem languages (Armenian, Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranic) these are turned into s-like sounds. It is obvious though that the original state cannot have been *k, *g and *gh or *s/*z-like sounds, because both Centum and Satem languages have words that all correspond to *k, *g, *gh and *s in Proto-Indo-European. The general dating for this sound shift is usually in the late 3rd to early 2nd millennium BC. This is because the oldst attested Centum language (Mycenean Greek) is attested from the mid-2nd millennium BC and it obviously has already merged *k´, *g´, *g´h with *k, *g, *gh (this must have obviously been a development the predated Proto-Celtic, Proto-Germanic, Proto-Italic and Proto-Greek or happened at a very early stage).

    I should also mentioned a quick word on the Anatolian languages. They are in my opinion the first branch of IE to diverge, and they probably predate the Centum-Satem split, and as a result should be technically considered neither Centum nor Satem.

    Now then, the relationship of Germanic with Italic and Celtic is basically lexical, which probably confirms it as a superstrate rather than a genetic relationship. Also note that if these Germanic borrowings are purely from the Hallstatt period, it would be hard to also explain its relationship with Italic.
    The problem is that the "bottom end" of Proto-Germanic is very hard to grasp, unlike with Proto-Celtic or Proto-Italic. The problem is that the First Germanic Sound Shift (also called Grimm's Law) which is the unifying feature of all Germanic languages, occurs relatively late. The traditional approach was after 500 BC, but modern estimates put even later, into the 1st century BC. This means it is very hard to grasp what innovations Proto-Germanic did between it's divergence from PIE (and Centumization) and the occurence of Grimm's Law.

    What I can tell you with certainty is that Proto-Germanic did not do the *p > *kw before *kw shift that occured in both Celtic and Italic (otherwise the English word for 'five' wouldn't be 'five').

    My opinion is that this suggests some kind of very long isolation (possibly during the bronze age).

    I'm not sure if the Nordic Bronze Age culture matches this condition, however. And I am not quite convinced that R1b-U106 matches the Nordic Bronze Age, either.

  5. #5
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    What I can tell you with certainty is that Proto-Germanic did not do the *p > *kw before *kw shift that occured in both Celtic and Italic (otherwise the English word for 'five' wouldn't be 'five').
    *p> *kw in Italic only occurred in the second syllable, this suggests to me that it was either by Celtic influence or an independent change, and thus the hypothetical Proto-Italo-Celtic language would still probably maintain the PIE *p (see also the maintaining of *p in Lusitanian)

  6. #6
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    *p> *kw in Italic only occurred in the second syllable, this suggests to me that it was either by Celtic influence or an independent change, and thus the hypothetical Proto-Italo-Celtic language would still probably maintain the PIE *p (see also the maintaining of *p in Lusitanian)
    Umm, no. I admit that may have been confusing, but look closely what I said: *p > *kw before *kw (ie, another *kw in the same word, for example *penkwe > *kwenkwe ). I agree however that *p in Proto-Italic was otherwise untouched.

    Regarding Lusitanian, I unfortunately don't know if it is attested if Lusitanian did execute this "Italo-Celtic" sound law because I cannot think of a single attested Lusitanian word that would show this. What is clear however is that Lusitanian retained the *p of Proto-Indo-European (unlike the Celtic languages).

    In the Germanic languages, *p was completely untouched until the First Germanic Sound Shift took place, when it was shifted to *f.

    Anyways, I'm not sure you saw this earlier, but I added this:

    I'm not sure if the Nordic Bronze Age culture matches this condition, however. And I am not quite convinced that R1b-U106 matches the Nordic Bronze Age, either.

  7. #7
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,438
    Points
    41,095
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,095, Level: 62
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 18.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    *p> *kw in Italic only occurred in the second syllable, this suggests to me that it was either by Celtic influence or an independent change, and thus the hypothetical Proto-Italo-Celtic language would still probably maintain the PIE *p (see also the maintaining of *p in Lusitanian)
    sorry, I'm lost:
    some of yours speak about a shift like: *p- >> *kw- ; was it not the contrary: *kw- >> *p- ??? (the contrary semas not so evident

    germanic languages seam to me being *kw- languages, isn't it? (*hw- after the first germanic shift) -
    some people said that numerals was not the most reliable elements in the languages genealogy: for their commercial use? just a question, I'm not a specialist...
    thank for answer

  8. #8
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    And I am not quite convinced that R1b-U106 matches the Nordic Bronze Age, either.
    In my opinion, no. Look at the very high amount of U106 around Austria. If this were due to a later Germanic migration, then there would be a much greater amount of I2b. The same applies for Belgium and Frisia.
    Edit: I meant I1, not I1b

  9. #9
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    Ah, but such a specific sound shift was much less probable to happen (be aware that in any case we would only be talking of a somewhat superficial superstrate). But do note that the proposed relationship is based on lexical terms, not phonology.
    Oh, yes. Lexical items is a good point. They would obviously predate the First Germanic Sound Shift (also easily by long time) so this would be absolutely viable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    In my opinion, no. Look at the very high amount of U106 around Austria. If this were due to a later Germanic migration, then there would be a much greater amount of I2b. The same applies for Belgium and Frisia.
    I've always been bugged up if you will by the Austrian U106 peak. As of lately I have been pondering on a connection with the Migrations Period as you said, but before I favoured that it actually is older. Of course, I must add that the situation with U106 raises a question in regard for Britain: is all British U106 of Germanic origin (this is something that one must ask as a consequence)? If U106 isn't wholly Germanic, then at least some of it could have arrived together with U152, which would explain why U152 and U106 correlate so well. Conversely, the problem is that U152 can obviously NOT have arrived with the Anglo-Saxon invasions because it is extremely rare in the original Anglo-Saxon homelands. However, as Dubhthach pointed out, the geography of Britain would have promoted a similar dispersal pattern for U152 and for U106 if they arrived separately with the Hallstatt Celts and the Anglo-Saxon invasion, respectively.

  10. #10
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by zanipolo View Post
    I was wrong, vienna was in Pannonia and not in Noricum. pannonia in the bronze age was all Illyrian tribes.
    Vienna was called Vindobona
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindobona

    Since Perego ( archeologist) in 2010 found the earliest veneti around the adriatic area to be not earlier than 1025BC , and the veneti gathered amber from the aestiii in Carnuntum to bring to ateste ( este) where it was sailed to Meleda ( Mljet) or Stagno ( Ston ) and there sold to the Phoenicians, then your time of 1400BC can only be Illyrian people in the centre of U106 in Vienna area.
    Sorry, but the town name 'Vindobonna' is not Illyrian but Celtic('Windo-' = white, an 'Bonn-' = foundation/basis/footing/sole, compare the town 'Bonn').

    Granted next came the celts , then the germanic Macromanni, Cotini and Quadi tribes.

    So, my guess is to only look at these germanic tribes for the Vienna area to gather this info on U106. I cannot see who else stayed there for such a long time to ensure this high percentage of U106.
    The Marcomanni and Quadi were Germanic, yes, but the Cotini were Celtic. Tacitus refers to them explicitly as Gaulish.

    As for the Venetic language, I would refer to their language as 'Para-Italic' too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    But the Veneti were, in my opinion, an Illyrianized para-Italic population, and I think it could be possible that some U106 was indigenous to Italy (ie. not brought by Germanic peoples)... Anyway, I insist, U106 could not be purely Germanic; look at Britain, for example: It's found in the same frequencies as in the homeland of the Angles and Saxons, but they obviously did not completely replace the earlier populations.
    This is a very good point, in my opinion.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    zanipolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-11
    Posts
    2,073
    Points
    22,792
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,792, Level: 46
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 758
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1a4o

    Ethnic group
    Down Under
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Sorry, but the town name 'Vindobonna' is not Illyrian but Celtic('Windo-' = white, an 'Bonn-' = foundation/basis/footing/sole, compare the town 'Bonn').
    I agree with you. I was trying to point out that Vienna began after the celts arrived ( I read it was the Vinid celtic tribe ) and not while the illyrians where there in 1400BC

    The Marcomanni and Quadi were Germanic, yes, but the Cotini were Celtic. Tacitus refers to them explicitly as Gaulish.
    Ok, correct the cotini was gallic tribe , I must be thinking about the Osi tribe instead.

    As for the Venetic language, I would refer to their language as 'Para-Italic' too.
    Agree, especially since its ( veneti) neighbours used it as well, like the carni and Histri tribe ( carni where gallic celts)
    Father's Mtdna H95a1
    Grandfather Mtdna T2b24
    Great Grandfather Mtdna T1a1e
    GMother paternal side YDna R1b-S8172
    Mother's YDna R1a-Z282

  12. #12
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    According to wikipedia there's for about 9.40% of R-U106 in Ukraine! Is this a typo?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogr...a_.28R-U106.29

  13. #13
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    According to wikipedia there's for about 9.40% of R-U106 in Ukraine! Is this a typo?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogr...a_.28R-U106.29
    I think 0.94 seems more likely, so most probably a typo.

  14. #14
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Asturrulumbo View Post
    I think 0.94 seems more likely, so most probably a typo.
    According to this study - "Y-chromosome Short Tandem Repeat DYS458.2 Non-consensus Alleles Occur Independently in Both Binary Haplogroups J1-M267 and R1b3-M405" - Ukraine has 9.4% of it. M405 = U106. If this is true it will change all my theories.
    A little adaption of some data can cause very big changes in human migration theories!



    here is the link: http://www.cmj.hr/2007/48/4/17696299.htm

  15. #15
    Elite member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    Asturrulumbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-09-11
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    210


    Country: Mexico



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    According to this study - "Y-chromosome Short Tandem Repeat DYS458.2 Non-consensus Alleles Occur Independently in Both Binary Haplogroups J1-M267 and R1b3-M405" - Ukraine has 9.4% of it. M405 = U106. If this is true it will change all my theories.
    A little adaption of some data can cause very big changes in human migration theories!



    here is the link: http://www.cmj.hr/2007/48/4/17696299.htm
    Really? A sample size of 32 individuals wouldn't change my theories, considering it was done in 2007, and by now would have been taken into account if it weren't overridden by more ample studies. But if you have doubts, ask Maciamo, it is he who made the U106 distribution map I'm taking analyzing currently:

  16. #16
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    08-06-12
    Posts
    16

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    xz
    MtDNA haplogroup
    x

    Country: United States



    R1b U106 are the Romans. I have seen some things that allege this that are convincing.

  17. #17
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    08-06-12
    Posts
    16

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    xz
    MtDNA haplogroup
    x

    Country: United States



    R1b u106 has a prescence in england but true Scandanvians/germanics are r1b L-21 which is the dominant R1b in the Brtitish isles and norway. R1b u106 has a big prescence in Germany and Italy obviously under roman rule. R1B U106 threads always have inflated figures and a desire to erroneously tie this group to Nordic people. It's highest concentrantion is in Italy. People who have it germany or england are descendants of the romans.

  18. #18
    Great Adventurer Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Arm of Law
    sparkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-02-11
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,270
    Points
    71,013
    Level
    82
    Points: 71,013, Level: 82
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 437
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2c1 PF3892+ (Swiss)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U4a (Cornish)

    Ethnic group
    3/4 Colonial American, 1/8 Cornish, 1/8 Welsh
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by King Niall View Post
    R1b u106 has a prescence in england but true Scandanvians/germanics are r1b L-21 which is the dominant R1b in the Brtitish isles and norway. R1b u106 has a big prescence in Germany and Italy obviously under roman rule. R1B U106 threads always have inflated figures and a desire to erroneously tie this group to Nordic people. It's highest concentrantion is in Italy. People who have it germany or england are descendants of the romans.
    You seem to be wrong about, erm, everything. L21 is dominant in *parts of* the British Isles, but the parts it reaches its highest frequency are the least Germanic parts, like Ireland, Wales, and Cornwall. U106 is higher frequency in Norway than L21 is (unless you have a study that contradicts that?). U106 does not have an important presence in Italy outside of Northern Italy. Its highest concentration is in the Netherlands, not Italy. Maybe you're confusing U106 with U152?

  19. #19
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by King Niall View Post
    R1b U106 are the Romans. I have seen some things that allege this that are convincing.
    Hi!

    The Romans? I really wonder what sources that would be that do alledge this, because if you take a look at the distribution pattern of R1b-U106 and the (maximum) extend of the Roman Empire, there is virtually no similarity:




  20. #20
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    08-06-12
    Posts
    16

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    xz
    MtDNA haplogroup
    x

    Country: United States



    Yes U152. But I saw a study of Y dna of roman centurions being in a grave with J haplotypes. I could have sworn it was r1b u106. I can't find it now. Does anyone have Roman Centurion Y dna sample articles? I know they are testing them? The Saxe Coburgs are r1b u106 I believe.

  21. #21
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    08-06-12
    Posts
    16

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    xz
    MtDNA haplogroup
    x

    Country: United States



    The roman emperors always had the German Guards protect them. I would not be suprised at German-Roman connection r1b u106.

  22. #22
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,438
    Points
    41,095
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,095, Level: 62
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 18.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    King Niall, yo do very surprising guesses! U106 is almost absent from Italy, and is found for the most of it in Northern Italy where German tribes are attested by History - (I have no detailed data for Sicily and a Normans link) -
    the "germanic" distribution of U106 is so obvious, in every part of Europe! (there is not cultural Y-HG but there are populations and their culture where an HG is very well represented since a long time and others where it is almost or totally absent...)
    R-L21 seams for the most of it linked to Celts or early celtized people of N-w Europe -

Similar Threads

  1. The original Proto-Semitic marker
    By Semitic Duwa in forum Y-DNA Haplogroups
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-09-16, 00:02
  2. 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe
    By Maciamo in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-11-15, 02:55
  3. was Spanish culture more influenced by Arab or Celtic civilization ?
    By spongetaro in forum History & Civilisations
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 27-04-13, 01:51
  4. Germanic and Proto-Slavic
    By Taranis in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 29-05-12, 14:42

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •