Updated phylogenetic trees of R1b-L21, R1b-DF27 and R1b-U152

[Maciamo]

Time for an annual update of the R1b phylogeny. I have made 3 separate trees for these ever-growing subclades of the Celtic and Italic branches of R1b. I hope it's clearer than the older version.

You can see larger versions here.

 

[Fire Haired]

Since there is a Nordic and Anglo saxon branch of Italo Celtic R1b S116. Could that mean that 3,000-4,500ybp early Germanic speakers inter married with Italo Celts. I put the haplotype of a 3,000 year old Urnfield R1b from central Germany into Y DNA haplogroup predictors all said it was for sure Germanic R1b S21. Urnfield i think is suppose to be Italo Celtic only. Since Proto German speakers migrated from Germany to Denmark and south Scandnavia why would all German speakers or people who spoke a related language leave Germany why couldn't there be some left who mixed with Italo Celts.

 

[ebAmerican]

No - it means PIE U106 moved up along the Rhine and integrated (commercially) at the same time with I1 and R1a people who eventually became Germanic. P312 and U106 TMRCA are almost identical in age. Also, U152 is close in age as well. These haplotypes probably mutated from L11 in the Yamna period and territory when everybody was speaking PIE. These haplogroups are about 4000-6000BP. Extended families of P312, U106, U152, and others probably traveled in different waves of migration across the Danube and up the Rhine. Their ancestors were dominated through the Elite Dominance Model by other haplogroups along the migration path (why we don't see U152 outside of France, Italy, and Switzerland). The areas where we witness high diversity and concentration are areas where these men were the dominate tribe and multiplied. You have to be cautious in saying P312 founder was Celtic-Italo.

Maciamo - is the Bashkortostan U152 of a European variety, or is it a completely different subclade of U152 that is not related to European U152 subclades?

From what I can dig up it seems most of all the Germanic P312 >DF27 subclades are very recent migrations between Britain and Scandinavia. MRCA for L165 is 500YBP (1500AD). Z196 is 1800YBP (200AD). I don't think you can say that there really is a P312 Germanic marker going back before the Germanic migration. Before the Germanic migrations the P312 and all it's subclades were probably situated south of the Rhine and Britain. The modern distribution of P312 (Subclades) and L11* in Scandinavia is probably due to recent migration. So, the Germanic invaders Germanized the P312 people during the 4th and 5th century AD.

 

[Maciamo]

Since there is a Nordic and Anglo saxon branch of Italo Celtic R1b S116. Could that mean that 3,000-4,500ybp early Germanic speakers inter married with Italo Celts. I put the haplotype of a 3,000 year old Urnfield R1b from central Germany into Y DNA haplogroup predictors all said it was for sure Germanic R1b S21. Urnfield i think is suppose to be Italo Celtic only. Since Proto German speakers migrated from Germany to Denmark and south Scandnavia why would all German speakers or people who spoke a related language leave Germany why couldn't there be some left who mixed with Italo Celts.

Absolutely not. There were no Germanic speakers 4500 years ago. The earliest Proto-Germanic could possible be as old as 3500 years old, but actual Germanic languages are only 2500 years old.

It's still hard to say when each R1b subclade reached Scandinavia, but chances are that S21, DF19, DF27, L21, and L238 all ended up Scandinavia during the Nordic Bronze Age (1600-500 BCE), and a bit before that in northern Germany.

 

[Maciamo]

Maciamo - is the Bashkortostan U152 of a European variety, or is it a completely different subclade of U152 that is not related to European U152 subclades?

Do you know to which subclades they belong ? I believe they are descendants of the La Tène Celts that went into Ukraine around 200 BCE, then got lost by history after reaching Russia. Another possibility is that they descend from the earlier migration of Hallstatt Celts that ended up in the Tarim basin circa 1000 BCE (see this thread).

From what I can dig up it seems most of all the Germanic P312 >DF27 subclades are very recent migrations between Britain and Scandinavia. MRCA for L165 is 500YBP (1500AD). Z196 is 1800YBP (200AD). I don't think you can say that there really is a P312 Germanic marker going back before the Germanic migration. Before the Germanic migrations the P312 and all it's subclades were probably situated south of the Rhine and Britain. The modern distribution of P312 (Subclades) and L11* in Scandinavia is probably due to recent migration. So, the Germanic invaders Germanized the P312 people during the 4th and 5th century AD.

That's interesting. I haven't really looked into the TMRCA of P312 in Scandinavia yet. I knew that Norwegian Vikings brought back Irish and Scottish slaves, which explains the peak of L21 in western Norway. I don't have much information about DF27 in Scandinavia and Germany. What do you think about DF19 and L238 ? These look more Germanic than Celtic despite being downstream of P312.

 

[Mikewww]

... From what I can dig up it seems most of all the Germanic P312 >DF27 subclades are very recent migrations between Britain and Scandinavia. MRCA for L165 is 500YBP (1500AD). Z196 is 1800YBP (200AD). I don't think you can say that there really is a P312 Germanic marker going back before the Germanic migration.

I don't see how you are getting that almost all P312 in Scandinavia are the result of recent migrations from Britain. What is your reasoning? An age for a subclade is not in and of itself an indicator of an origin elsewhere.

I would also be surprised if Z196 is that age. We are discovering more pieces to it as we go so it might be quite a bit older. How old do you think the R1b-North-South cluster is?

... Before the Germanic migrations the P312 and all it's subclades were probably situated south of the Rhine and Britain. The modern distribution of P312 (Subclades) and L11* in Scandinavia is probably due to recent migration. So, the Germanic invaders Germanized the P312 people during the 4th and 5th century AD.

You are using the word "all". That's indicating an assertive position.

Which recent migrations from Britain to Scandinavia account for the greatest share of the P312 population now in Scandinavia?

 

[ebAmerican]

Do you know to which subclades they belong ? I believe they are descendants of the La Tène Celts that went into Ukraine around 200 BCE, then got lost by history after reaching Russia. Another possibility is that they descend from the earlier migration of Hallstatt Celts that ended up in the Tarim basin circa 1000 BCE (see this thread).



That's interesting. I haven't really looked into the TMRCA of P312 in Scandinavia yet. I knew that Norwegian Vikings brought back Irish and Scottish slaves, which explains the peak of L21 in western Norway. I don't have much information about DF27 in Scandinavia and Germany. What do you think about DF19 and L238 ? These look more Germanic than Celtic despite being downstream of P312.

DF19 looks like a new subclade under P312 parallel to U152. It looks like another British marker like L21. Most participants in FTDNA projects have British surnames. The P312* continuum is getting crazy. L238 looks to be related to Scandinavian lineages. People in Britain who live in the old Danelaw seem to test positive for L238. L238 pops up in Viking raided areas (France, Britain, and Sweden). One tested positive in Hamburg Germany. I can't find any data on it's origins or age.

 

[ebAmerican]

I don't see how you are getting that almost all P312 in Scandinavia are the result of recent migrations from Britain. What is your reasoning? An age for a subclade is not in and of itself an indicator of an origin elsewhere.

I would also be surprised if Z196 is that age. We are discovering more pieces to it as we go so it might be quite a bit older. How old do you think the R1b-North-South cluster is?



You are using the word "all". That's indicating an assertive position.

Which recent migrations from Britain to Scandinavia account for the greatest share of the P312 population now in Scandinavia?

Because almost all P312 diversity is outside of Scandinavia. The few particular subclades that have strong concentrations in Scandinavia have tighter connection to Britain (particularly Scotland and Ireland), then anywhere else. To me, it makes more sense that current P312>L238 and L165 come from migration or slave trade of Brits into Scandinavia and Iceland (possibly Iceland to Norway and Sweden). It could have been a rare genetic marker in the Isles that prospered in Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. I don't think that the invading Vikings always killed every man and stole the women. They probably recruited locals willing to cooperate. I don't know, this is just a guess.

 

[Mikewww]

Because almost all P312 diversity is outside of Scandinavia.

I don't see where you are getting that P312 diversity does not occur in Scandinavia.
They have several types of DF27, including the L165 that you cite. They also have several types of L21. There is some limited U152 also. U152 is not all that common in Britain so that I would think that it would have had to come from Britain.

The few particular subclades that have strong concentrations in Scandinavia have tighter connection to Britain (particularly Scotland and Ireland), then anywhere else.

I guess I'm not saying I see the same thing. There are some tight correlations but there are also many that aren't. You cite Scotland and Ireland in particular, but that is M222 rich country. M222's proportion's L21 in Scotland and Ireland are greater than in Scandinavia. That implies to me that the L21 in Scandinavia, at least a good portion of it, may have come from some where else.

To me, it makes more sense that current P312>L238 and L165 come from migration or slave trade of Brits into Scandinavia and Iceland (possibly Iceland to Norway and Sweden). It could have been a rare genetic marker in the Isles that prospered in Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. I don't think that the invading Vikings always killed every man and stole the women. They probably recruited locals willing to cooperate. I don't know, this is just a guess.

Why do you think that people who came by way of the slave traded would have prospered relative to the other inhabitants in Scandinavia? I would think they would have had a tougher go at it, particularly at men's input to reproduction and family survival rates.

I'm not saying there was no Viking slave trade or they didn't bring some back home. My understanding is they sold a lot off abroad anyway, but I'm still not saying none came back to Scandinavia and survived. Some probably did but I don't really have any reason to think the majority weren't there long before there were such a thing as Vikings.

We also have merchants and other activities in historic timeframes that might have brought people from the British Isles to Norway in particular.

 

[ebAmerican]

Do you know to which subclades they belong ?

The only thing I can find is one individual from a Kipchaks tribe who was L2. Herodotus talks about Bashkirs and other Ural tribes, and their tradition of drinking from polished skulls. This is similar to what the Boii would do to enemies. Maybe the Boii were dominantly U152-L2 and their earliest migration around 500BC made it to the Steppe by way of old Hallstatt connections.

 

[Mikewww]

Because almost all P312 diversity is outside of Scandinavia. The few particular subclades that have strong concentrations in Scandinavia have tighter connection to Britain (particularly Scotland and Ireland), then anywhere else. To me, it makes more sense that current P312>L238 and L165 come from migration or slave trade of Brits into Scandinavia and Iceland (possibly Iceland to Norway and Sweden). It could have been a rare genetic marker in the Isles that prospered in Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. I don't think that the invading Vikings always killed every man and stole the women. They probably recruited locals willing to cooperate. I don't know, this is just a guess.

Dr Harding gave a lecture in 2011 on his Old Norway Project in Gothenburg. If you are interested in Scandinavia I think you'll find this presentation worth your time.
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/-sczsteve/Gothenburg_13Oct2011.pdf

I'm moving this post over to the Scandinavian analysis thread where it belongs. You can find it here: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...in-Scandinavia?p=413540&viewfull=1#post413540

 

[Goga]

Absolutely not. There were no Germanic speakers 4500 years ago. The earliest Proto-Germanic could possible be as old as 3500 years old, but actual Germanic languages are only 2500 years old.

How do we know that? Maybe they only didn’t have a writing system. Greek has been spoken already in South East Europe since around the late 3rd millennium BC. The earliest written evidence is dating back to 1400 BC. So that makes 3400 years old. We know that Vedic Sanskrit existed already 2nd millennium BC. Oldest Rigveda dating back to 1200 BC. That’s is 3200 years old. Ancient Iranic Avesta is maybe even older. The distance between Ancient Greek and Sanskrit is thousands of kilometers. Also we have Hittite/Anatolian languages. Hittite language is already attested in cuneiform in 1600 BC. The differences between those IE languages were already HUGE! IMHO the split occurred already even thousands years before, 6000-7000 years ago!

 

[Nobody1]

(why we don't see U152 outside of France, Italy, and Switzerland)

R1b-U152 also ranges across Germany and Tyrol (Austria)

Rebala et al 2012 -
http://bhusers.upf.edu/dcomas/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Rebala2013.pdf

Bavaria (S-Germany) = 10.09% U152 [218 samples]
Mecklenburg (N-Germany) = 6.87% U152 [131 samples]

the region with the highest frequency of U152 however is the upper Rhine area


Niederstätter et al 2012 -
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0041885

East Tyrol (Austria) = 12.59% U152 [270 samples]

 

[ebAmerican]

There is U152 and pretty much all the other P312 subclades distributed all over Europe. Question is when did they get there? Maybe Celtic migration, or Germanic migration or some Jewish line ejected from some country to another? My comment to Fire was directed at there not being an original P312 subclade that developed from a PIE dialect to a Proto Germanic with I1 and R1a. I believe that P312 was PIE to Italo-Celtic and it's subclades Italic and Celtic speakers. The Germanic P312 subclades were later Germanized. I question if the Nordwestblock languages weren't an Italo-Celtic. Is U106 associated with Nordwestblock, or is this to far north?

 

[Nobody1]

There is U152 and pretty much all the other P312 subclades distributed all over Europe. Question is when did they get there? Maybe Celtic migration, or Germanic migration or some Jewish line ejected from some country to another?

I view U152 in broader Indo-European context; an archaic context;
An archaic Indo-European stock that branched out into the proto-Keltic and proto-Italic;
Being the major lineage amongst the Italics and a substantial lineage amongst the proto-Keltic and Keltic;

A link (a common root) that is also given in Linguistics;

However the interesting part is that U152 remains also in other areas; such as Ukraine, North Germany, Urals etc. once again signalising the broader Indo-European context of this sub-clade;
With the greatest impact being amongst the Keltic and Italic - Indo-European realms;

The proto-Keltic and Italic split def. happened in the Bronze-age
with the Italic (Umbrian) Teremare culture emerging in the Po valley [~1500 BC]
and the proto-Keltic Tumuli expansion west [1600-1200 BC]

I believe that P312 was PIE to Italo-Celtic and it's subclades Italic and Celtic speakers.

I wouldnt throw all P312 onto the Indo-Europeans;
I (personally) consider P312 to be both non-Indo-European as well as Indo-European;
all depending on the sub-clades;

With the non-Indo-European (ancient)Iberians, Basques and Aquitani being the clearest indicator for this;

The Germanic P312 subclades were later Germanized. I question if the Nordwestblock languages weren't an Italo-Celtic. Is U106 associated with Nordwestblock, or is this to far north?

The language of the Nordwestblock is complex;
Its supposed to be a hybrid between Indo-European (not Keltic or Germanic) and non-Indo-European;

I dont know how substantial this theory is;
but U106 is def. one of the main dominant R1b sub-clades in all modern-day Germanic populations;
from Friesland to East Tyrol; I therefor view U106 associated with the Indo-European Germanic people;

Wirsching et al 2009 -
http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/7512/pdf/DissMaximilianWilhelmWirschingOnline.pdf

Niederstätter et al 2008 -
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187517680800187X

 

[Mikewww]

Absolutely not. There were no Germanic speakers 4500 years ago. The earliest Proto-Germanic could possible be as old as 3500 years old, but actual Germanic languages are only 2500 years old.

How do we know that? Maybe they only didn’t have a writing system. Greek has been spoken already in South East Europe since around the late 3rd millennium BC. The earliest written evidence is dating back to 1400 BC. So that makes 3400 years old. We know that Vedic Sanskrit existed already 2nd millennium BC. Oldest Rigveda dating back to 1200 BC. That’s is 3200 years old. Ancient Iranic Avesta is maybe even older. The distance between Ancient Greek and Sanskrit is thousands of kilometers. Also we have Hittite/Anatolian languages. Hittite language is already attested in cuneiform in 1600 BC. The differences between those IE languages were already HUGE! IMHO the split occurred already even thousands years before, 6000-7000 years ago!

I agree with Maciamo that Germanic is not attested to prior to that, but it is true the splitting from PIE for the forerunners for some of these languages occurred long ago.

There is a discipline called cladistic linguistics which is look at all of this. This is my understanding of the latest and greatest (best fitting) statistical run from earlier this year by Tandy Warnow.

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/tandy/papers.html

 

[Goga]

Great addition to this thread. Thank you very much. I've never seen this. Don't agree with everything, but it's very interesting to think about.

 

[Mikewww]

Great addition to this thread. Thank you very much. I've never seen this. Don't agree with everything, but it's very interesting to think about.

You may have seen the Ringe-Taylor language tree in David Anthony's "The Horse, the Wheel, and the Language..." book. That chart is simplified earlier version of some of the analysis they've done.

Warnow is their math whiz and seems to be doing a lot of analysis.. Univ of Texas, no less. Here is one of the original corroborations of the three linguists.
http://www.cs.rice.edu/~nakhleh/CPHL/RWT02.pdf

 

[Dubhthach]

Mike,

To avoid confusion references to "Northern Ireland" (a political construct of the 1920's) shouldn't be used when talking about the Viking age. Aside from that it's well know fact that the Vikings suffered several military defeats in both Ulster and Connacht. So much so that you find no long lasting Viking settlements north of Dublin and none what so ever in either Connacht or Ulster. All of the Viking settlements which later grew into towns are in Leinster and Munster. Namely:

• Dublin
• Wicklow (town)
• Arklow -- co. Wicklow
• Wexford (Town)
• Waterford City
• Cork City
• Limerick City

These are areas that are "thin" on M222. Munster at the time is probably dominated by CTS4466 (Eoghanacht) and L226 (Dál gCais) dynastically, whereas Z255/L159.2 looks like relevant dynastical lineage in Leinster. If we go on the research about M222 it appears linked to the Connachta and Uí Néill.

Dublin as a geographic location survived as a Viking settlement mainly as it was on locus of a boundary between two provincial Kingdoms. It's also probable that it was one of the biggest (if not the biggest) slave markets in Western Europe during the period.

-Paul
(DF41+)
(DF41+)

 

[Dubhthach]

As an aside the Icelandic version of Dubhthach is: Dufþakur -- the name of an Irish slave who led a group of run aways.
http://www.visitwestmanislands.com/sidur/general-information

The Vestmann islands in Iceland are named after these slaves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestmannaeyjar