EAB
Regular Member
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 0
Hi,
I am new to the forum but I am curious about a lot of things that to me seem like broad guesses made in DNA (on good faith) about the European and in particular UK genetic make up. I was wondering the opinion of people on the board about how representative claims by Oppenheimer and others that the British population was mainly unchanged by various invasions or emigrations.
The method used by the welcome trust was to take the DNA of people with all four grandparents that had grown up in a similar area. This is interesting, and it reveals a map of Britain that kind of ties in with cultural regions. However, isn´t it basically measuring those less inclined to travel and not the majority of the population? My grandparents moved about and came from the following locations:
Maternal: GF Poole, GM Swansea, Paternal: GF Ipswich, GM Lincoln.
My Y chromosome is in the U106 clade which is typical of the Benelux and thus perhaps the Anglo Saxons. However, this is R1b along with the vast majority of those believed to live in the UK before the Saxons.
If the whole country was measured for an accurate database of what everyone actually was, would the regional map represent the majority of people or indeed the regions? In other words, are the people measured by the Wellcome Trust the fringe of UK genetics, rather than the norm?
I am curious about this for a few reasons, but such things as the A (Yorkshire) and K (Thomas Jefferson) Y Chromosomes being found made me wonder what else we don´t know about Britian that would be revealed if this happened. I am also really interested in what genetic information could be enveloped within the way the Y chromosome is only paternal. For example, if we could work out a way of finding out the Y Chromosome of a woman´s father, what could this reveal about any past vanquished males from the island if the theory that men traveled alone and took local wives is indeed true.
I am new to the forum but I am curious about a lot of things that to me seem like broad guesses made in DNA (on good faith) about the European and in particular UK genetic make up. I was wondering the opinion of people on the board about how representative claims by Oppenheimer and others that the British population was mainly unchanged by various invasions or emigrations.
The method used by the welcome trust was to take the DNA of people with all four grandparents that had grown up in a similar area. This is interesting, and it reveals a map of Britain that kind of ties in with cultural regions. However, isn´t it basically measuring those less inclined to travel and not the majority of the population? My grandparents moved about and came from the following locations:
Maternal: GF Poole, GM Swansea, Paternal: GF Ipswich, GM Lincoln.
My Y chromosome is in the U106 clade which is typical of the Benelux and thus perhaps the Anglo Saxons. However, this is R1b along with the vast majority of those believed to live in the UK before the Saxons.
If the whole country was measured for an accurate database of what everyone actually was, would the regional map represent the majority of people or indeed the regions? In other words, are the people measured by the Wellcome Trust the fringe of UK genetics, rather than the norm?
I am curious about this for a few reasons, but such things as the A (Yorkshire) and K (Thomas Jefferson) Y Chromosomes being found made me wonder what else we don´t know about Britian that would be revealed if this happened. I am also really interested in what genetic information could be enveloped within the way the Y chromosome is only paternal. For example, if we could work out a way of finding out the Y Chromosome of a woman´s father, what could this reveal about any past vanquished males from the island if the theory that men traveled alone and took local wives is indeed true.