Steppe Ancestry in western Eurasia and the spread of the Germanic Languages

[Vinitharya]

Bayer? Is that a Bavarian? Yeah, technically I'm a Palatine but it was part of Bavaria when my great-great-great-grandfathers were born and when they left (Peter Seller-my male line great-great-great-grandfather, and Friedrich Appel, his son's father-in-law and whom my father was ultimately named for) so I am offended for their true Bavarian countrymen. I think L48's place of origin was along the west Holstein coast, in North Frisia, and spread with the Angles/Saxons/Jutes, with the more thorough replacement of the population in the northern Netherlands giving a higher number than England, where there was some Celtic continuity.

[Rodoorn]

Is it possible that the North Dutch settlers are different from the British Isles settlers? They don't seem to be saying anything about the former, only the latter.

Of course but I guess they are from the same source.

But of course may be the most stubborn ones went to Friesland  

But serious, Nicolay (2007) speaks about two phases:

The first phase about 375-450 AD is Anglo, Saxon- the Zealand IA ancestry!?- that went to England and Friesland.

The  second phase, about 450/500 AD> from Jutes and Norwegians- the North Gemanics (see paper, see Mitch's posting) that went to England and Friesland.

[Rodoorn]

Bayer?  Is that a Bavarian?  Yeah, technically I'm a Palatine but it was part of Bavaria when my great-great-great-grandfathers were born and when they left (Peter Seller-my male line great-great-great-grandfather, and Friedrich Appel, his son's father-in-law and whom my father was ultimately named for) so I am offended for their true Bavarian countrymen.  I think L48's place of origin was along the west Holstein coast, in North Frisia, and spread with the Angles/Saxons/Jutes, with the more thorough replacement of the population in the northern Netherlands giving a higher number than England, where there was some Celtic continuity.

North Friesland is an eighth century reflux of Frisians!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMzAssOr2zE

[NewEnglander]

Is it possible that the North Dutch settlers are different from the British Isles settlers? They don't seem to be saying anything about the former, only the latter.

Of course but I guess they are from the same source.

But of course may the most stubborn ones went to Friesland  

But serious, Nicolay (2007) speaks about two phases:

The first phase about 375-450 AD is Anglo, Saxon- the Zealand IA ancestry!?- that went to England and Friesland.

The  second phase, about 450/500 AD> from Jutes and Norwegians- the North Gemanics (see paper, see Mitch's posting) that went to England and Friesland.

Did this paper have any samples from that part of southern Norway? I think they have the highest R1b in Norway as well, so it would be interesting to see if they are any different from the more west coast Norwegians.

[NewEnglander]

That's the whole thing

"The Danish Isles ancestry (modelled as ~20% Southern and ~80% Eastern Scandinavian BA) that was widespread on Zealand from 2200 BP disappears from ~1600 BP."

400 AD>

They went to the North Sea area's as: Saxons (and Angles)!

Or not?

The question is when exactly this population change happened. 1600 BP actually means after 350 AD (with 1950 AD as reference point), in other words when the migration period started. In the graph below they also state that there was a stable population size till the various crises around 536-542 AD and we see archaeologically the hoard horizon around  550 AD. Around 550 AD Jordanes mentioned that the Danes drove out the Herulians from their homes without clear date. It is still all a bit murky...

This timing is perfect, the Danish Isles IA ancestry left to the North Sea 400>.

Their religious and power seat Gudme shrank in the fifth century, and 'closed the doors' in the first half of the sixth century.

Lerje was the upcoming seat in the sixth century, from then the  so called Danes! With the first Danish kings that belonged to the Scyldingas!

I always assumed that the islands, and Zealand in particular, were the center of the Danish realm. Perhaps it was really Jutland however, where you have centers like Jelling, Ribe, and Hedeby. Perhaps the rulers in Jelling may have had connections with Lerje back east, and unified Denmark from Jutland bringing with them a shift in ancestry.

[Rodoorn]

The question is when exactly this population change happened. 1600 BP actually means after 350 AD (with 1950 AD as reference point), in other words when the migration period started. In the graph below they also state that there was a stable population size till the various crises around 536-542 AD and we see archaeologically the hoard horizon around  550 AD. Around 550 AD Jordanes mentioned that the Danes drove out the Herulians from their homes without clear date. It is still all a bit murky...

This timing is perfect, the Danish Isles IA ancestry left to the North Sea 400>.

Their religious and power seat Gudme shrank in the fifth century, and 'closed the doors' in the first half of the sixth century.

Lerje was the upcoming seat in the sixth century, from then the  so called Danes! With the first Danish kings that belonged to the Scyldingas!

I always assumed that the islands, and Zealand in particular, were the center of the Danish realm. Perhaps it was really Jutland however, where you have centers like Jelling, Ribe, and Hedeby. Perhaps the rulers in Jelling may have had connections with Lerje back east, and unified Denmark from Jutland bringing with them a shift in ancestry.

Imo this is the essence of the shift of the paper.

About 400> the Danish Isles IA ancestry went to the North Sea., the old structure around Gudme (a realy big central place) declined, it left a gap. In this gap there came new influxes from Continental Euro (NW and NE). The powershift went to the Scyldingas @ Lejre!

[Rodoorn]

Is it possible that the North Dutch settlers are different from the British Isles settlers? They don't seem to be saying anything about the former, only the latter.

Of course but I guess they are from the same source.

But of course may the most stubborn ones went to Friesland  

But serious, Nicolay (2007) speaks about two phases:

The first phase about 375-450 AD is Anglo, Saxon- the Zealand IA ancestry!?- that went to England and Friesland.

The  second phase, about 450/500 AD> from Jutes and Norwegians- the North Gemanics (see paper, see Mitch's posting) that went to England and Friesland.

Did this paper have any samples from that part of southern Norway? I think they have the highest R1b in Norway as well, so it would be interesting to see if they are any different from the more west coast Norwegians.

This paper was pretty pre genetic results area, I guess it was the time in which R1b U106 was called the Frisian marker

[NewEnglander]

Of course but I guess they are from the same source.

But of course may the most stubborn ones went to Friesland  

But serious, Nicolay (2007) speaks about two phases:

The first phase about 375-450 AD is Anglo, Saxon- the Zealand IA ancestry!?- that went to England and Friesland.

The  second phase, about 450/500 AD> from Jutes and Norwegians- the North Gemanics (see paper, see Mitch's posting) that went to England and Friesland.

Did this paper have any samples from that part of southern Norway? I think they have the highest R1b in Norway as well, so it would be interesting to see if they are any different from the more west coast Norwegians.

This paper was pretty pre genetic results area, I guess it was the time in which R1b U106 was called the Frisian marker

I meant in the most recent paper, I think there may have been one or two but most of the samples came from western Norway. I'd be interested in seeing if southern Norway was an R1a hotspot still dominated by Western Scandinavian, or if we already were seeing differentiation in the south and east. I would really like to see those parts of Norway, and essentially all of Sweden, in any new papers.

[Rodoorn]

I'm not intelligent enough to understand or comment on any of these calculations and admixture models. All I am able to do is a plausibility check looking on Y-haplogroup distributions. North Holland is rich in R1b-U106-L48 therefore their source population should be also rich in it. Is this the case for the Danish isles and Zealand before 400 AD?

and euhm Orentil do me a favour don't call me Hollander, that is like calling an East- Frisian a Bayer

Correction with pleasure: Noord-Holland, Friesland and Groningen are esp. rich in R1b-U106-L48

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7029002/

Ok but there are more subclades, make some smart choclat out of it Orentil!





And Zugabe R1a

[NewEnglander]

That's the whole thing

"The Danish Isles ancestry (modelled as ~20% Southern and ~80% Eastern Scandinavian BA) that was widespread on Zealand from 2200 BP disappears from ~1600 BP."

400 AD>

They went to the North Sea area's as: Saxons (and Angles)!

Or not?

The question is when exactly this population change happened. 1600 BP actually means after 350 AD (with 1950 AD as reference point), in other words when the migration period started. In the graph below they also state that there was a stable population size till the various crises around 536-542 AD and we see archaeologically the hoard horizon around  550 AD. Around 550 AD Jordanes mentioned that the Danes drove out the Herulians from their homes without clear date. It is still all a bit murky...

Jordanes already mentions the Herules at the Nedao river (mid 5th c.) so it prob wont fully align with the population decline ~500-550 but might deal with its run up to it (?)

at Holubice there are surprisingly two east Scands. among the Longobards who are otherwise mostly ascribed to the south Scand. cluster and Holubice/Moravia also overlaps with the 'Herulian period' ie vasslas and overthrowing of king Rodulf (early 6th c.); it is far out but maybe the two from Holubice indeed repr the Herules as an east Scand. population as they could be joiners post Rodulf

In which paper are the Holubice samples found? At Szólád from Amorim et al. there's an R-Z18 spearman with Scandinavian MTDNA, non-local and possibly Scandinavian isotopes, and very northern autosomal DNA among the Langobards there.

[Naudigastir]

Did this paper have any samples from that part of southern Norway? I think they have the highest R1b in Norway as well, so it would be interesting to see if they are any different from the more west coast Norwegians.

This paper was pretty pre genetic results area, I guess it was the time in which R1b U106 was called the Frisian marker

I meant in the most recent paper, I think there may have been one or two but most of the samples came from western Norway. I'd be interested in seeing if southern Norway was an R1a hotspot still dominated by Western Scandinavian, or if we already were seeing differentiation in the south and east. I would really like to see those parts of Norway, and essentially all of Sweden, in any new papers.

There are some IA-samples from Rogaland in the new paper. Mostly R1a and I1/I2 IIRC.  In the supplements they mention the seawards contact between Northern Jutland and Norway and there are some samples from the Roman period in Northern Jutland that confirm it. Looks like those were a mix of U106>Z18 and R1a-Z284.

[Orentil]

I'm not intelligent enough to understand or comment on any of these calculations and admixture models. All I am able to do is a plausibility check looking on Y-haplogroup distributions. North Holland is rich in R1b-U106-L48 therefore their source population should be also rich in it. Is this the case for the Danish isles and Zealand before 400 AD?

and euhm Orentil do me a favour don't call me Hollander, that is like calling an East- Frisian a Bayer

Correction with pleasure: Noord-Holland, Friesland and Groningen are esp. rich in R1b-U106-L48

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7029002/

Ok but there are more subclades, make some smart choclat out of it Orentil!





And Zugabe R1a

So, does this Y-haplogroup based fingerprint support more ‚Southern Scandinavian‘ or ‚Eastern Scandinavian‘ from the Danish isles?

[Rodoorn]

Correction with pleasure: Noord-Holland, Friesland and Groningen are esp. rich in R1b-U106-L48

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7029002/

Ok but there are more subclades, make some smart choclat out of it Orentil!





And Zugabe R1a

So, does this Y-haplogroup based fingerprint support more ‚Southern Scandinavian‘ or ‚Eastern Scandinavian‘ from the Danish isles?

You name it. Z18 can be both, I1 can be both, R1A can be both!   

So I reply to you for the clever answer  



I have the trust in the Qadm capacities of halber Friesenjung Angles!

[Orentil]

I'm not intelligent enough to understand or comment on any of these calculations and admixture models. All I am able to do is a plausibility check looking on Y-haplogroup distributions. North Holland is rich in R1b-U106-L48 therefore their source population should be also rich in it. Is this the case for the Danish isles and Zealand before 400 AD?

and euhm Orentil do me a favour don't call me Hollander, that is like calling an East- Frisian a Bayer

Ok but there are more subclades, make some smart choclat out of it Orentil!





And Zugabe R1a

So, does this Y-haplogroup based fingerprint support more ‚Southern Scandinavian‘ or ‚Eastern Scandinavian‘ from the Danish isles?

You name it. Z18 can be both, I1 can be both, R1A can be both!   

So I reply to you for the clever answer  



I have the trust in the Qadm capacities of halber Friesenjung Angles!

This is why I emphasize the high R1b-L48 (below R1b-S263) value for North-Holland/Friesland/Groningen). From the supplement:

"We found most of the individuals of the dataset positive for R1b-U106 to belong to two different downstream sublineages, which have starkly distinct distributions, particularly in the early Iron Age.
R1b1a1b1a1a1c (R1b-Z19) is found almost exclusively in Northern Europe (with the only exception being a Langobard from Hungary), and likely represents a local variant of R1b-U106 (Figure S7).
Instead, its sister lineage, R1b1a1b1a1a1b (R1b-S263), is absent in Scandinavia before the Iron Age (Figure S8), where it spreads, likely through an Eastern North Sea source, and becomes dominant in South Scandinavia during the Iron Age, before spreading through Northern Europe. This pattern strongly matches the one seen using autosomes, that detect gene flow back into Scandinavia related to the spread of Germanic languages."

If the people from Friesland/Groningen would stem from the Danish island Zealand, you would expect more R1b-Z19. In the excel-list in supplement 4 they report a ratio of R1b-Z19 to R1b-S263 of 8:2 for the Danish isles/eastscan cluster. I admit, for real statistics the overall numbers should be higher but it shows a trend.

[Rodoorn]

I'm not intelligent enough to understand or comment on any of these calculations and admixture models. All I am able to do is a plausibility check looking on Y-haplogroup distributions. North Holland is rich in R1b-U106-L48 therefore their source population should be also rich in it. Is this the case for the Danish isles and Zealand before 400 AD?

and euhm Orentil do me a favour don't call me Hollander, that is like calling an East- Frisian a Bayer

So, does this Y-haplogroup based fingerprint support more ‚Southern Scandinavian‘ or ‚Eastern Scandinavian‘ from the Danish isles?

You name it. Z18 can be both, I1 can be both, R1A can be both!   

So I reply to you for the clever answer  



I have the trust in the Qadm capacities of halber Friesenjung Angles!

This is why I emphasize the high R1b-L48 (below R1b-S263) value for North-Holland/Friesland/Groningen). From the supplement:

"We found most of the individuals of the dataset positive for R1b-U106 to belong to two different downstream sublineages, which have starkly distinct distributions, particularly in the early Iron Age.
R1b1a1b1a1a1c (R1b-Z19) is found almost exclusively in Northern Europe (with the only exception being a Langobard from Hungary), and likely represents a local variant of R1b-U106 (Figure S7).
Instead, its sister lineage, R1b1a1b1a1a1b (R1b-S263), is absent in Scandinavia before the Iron Age (Figure S8), where it spreads, likely through an Eastern North Sea source, and becomes dominant in South Scandinavia during the Iron Age, before spreading through Northern Europe. This pattern strongly matches the one seen using autosomes, that detect gene flow back into Scandinavia related to the spread of Germanic languages."

If the people from Friesland/Groningen would stem from the Danish island Zealand, you would expect more R1b-Z19. In the excel-list in supplement 4 they report a ratio of R1b-Z19 to R1b-S263 of 8:2 for the Danish isles/eastscan cluster. I admit, for real statistics the overall numbers should be higher but it shows a trend.

I think you can't draw much conclusions based on sec Y-DNA and this limited data.

What about this?

First the Qadm of my parents:

The p-values of the nested models are astronomic. According to this analysis Finn's (=Rodoorn) parents are "pure" Danish from the Iron Age. Btw Denmark_IA is for the three individuals from Margaryan.* Of course I used imputed genomes for Finn's parents (947035 SNPs). For the experts, I've taken the risk to keep the transitions.

*= Zealand IA samples. 

Then the genetic distances of my mother:
NEO857_A Denmark_BA 0.247068 East Jutland
RISE47_A Denmark_BA 0.251389 North Jutland
NEO815_A Denmark_BA 0.25159 Bornholm
VK213_A Denmark_IA 0.252031 Sealand
VK582_A Denmark_IA 0.252548 Mid Jutland
VK214_A Denmark_BA 0.254003 Sealand
NEO946_A Denmark_BA 0.255249 Sealand
NEO93_A Denmark_BA 0.255915 Sealand
NEO563_A Denmark_BA 0.256209 Sealand
VK532_A Denmark_IA 0.256718 Sealand
VK521_A Denmark_IA 0.25701 Sealand
NEO590_A Denmark_BA 0.25719 Sealand
NEO752_A Denmark_BA 0.257631 Sealand
NEO951_A Denmark_BA 0.260821 North Jutland

Is this BS Orentil?