I2b2-L38 and La-Tene?

May be the small size of I2b2-IL38 makes it easier to reconstruct it's dwellings.

The genetic relationship between the Rhineland and the British Isles must mean something.
 
Is this HG in Eastern Europe associated with the Normans?

By far the best study of Eastern European I2-L38 is by Hans De Beule here. He does not associate it with the Normans, but rather with the Saxons, although he also considers some other possibilities.
 
Is this HG in Eastern Europe associated with the Normans?

For a while there's no I1 or I2 clades in the Eastern Europe that could be associated with migrations of the Normans from Scandinavia.:useless:
 
By far the best study of Eastern European I2-L38 is by Hans De Beule here. He does not associate it with the Normans, but rather with the Saxons, although he also considers some other possibilities.

Is this only for L2-L38 or all of I2A2A in England? Because it would seem odd to me that the Saxons should represent such a small proportion of English Y-chromosomal inheritance if the Saxons, which came in droves and drove the Celts to the fringes, and ought to have had a very succesful time in becoming the majority paternal influence.

Or are they counting all of the British Isles in this study? As Scotland, Ireland, and even Wales have a pretty different history in terms of their relation to the Saxons.
 
Is this only for L2-L38 or all of I2A2A in England? Because it would seem odd to me that the Saxons should represent such a small proportion of English Y-chromosomal inheritance if the Saxons, which came in droves and drove the Celts to the fringes, and ought to have had a very succesful time in becoming the majority paternal influence.

Or are they counting all of the British Isles in this study? As Scotland, Ireland, and even Wales have a pretty different history in terms of their relation to the Saxons.

I think you're misinterpreting De Beule's conclusions a bit. First of all, his study is about only I2-L38, which is actually I2a2b in ISOGG terminology, not within I2a2a. Secondly, while he associates the Eastern European presence of I2-L38 with the Saxons, it's clear that he thinks that these I2-L38 Saxons are basically the patrilineal descendants of Germanicized Celts... which isn't a problem, considering that the expansion of the Saxons on Eastern Europe took place after the Germanicization of much of Central and Western Europe.

He offers a different opinion for the presence of I2-L38 in the British Isles, placing it as largely (although not necessarily entirely) the result of the Iron Age La Tene expansion.
 
I think you're misinterpreting De Beule's conclusions a bit. First of all, his study is about only I2-L38, which is actually I2a2b in ISOGG terminology, not within I2a2a. Secondly, while he associates the Eastern European presence of I2-L38 with the Saxons, it's clear that he thinks that these I2-L38 Saxons are basically the patrilineal descendants of Germanicized Celts... which isn't a problem, considering that the expansion of the Saxons on Eastern Europe took place after the Germanicization of much of Central and Western Europe.

My mistake, I had thought it was a sub-clade of I2a2a. I read the data wrong. Thanks for that.

He offers a different opinion for the presence of I2-L38 in the British Isles, placing it as largely (although not necessarily entirely) the result of the Iron Age La Tene expansion.


Gotcha.
 
For a while there's no I1 or I2 clades in the Eastern Europe that could be associated with migrations of the Normans from Scandinavia.:useless:

Normans weren't just Scandinavian to begin with and with what basis do you claim that?
 

This thread has been viewed 13831 times.

Back
Top