Classify Ole Gabriel Ueland.

[Pallantides]

Ole Gabriel Ueland

Ole Gabriel Ueland (October 28, 1799 - January 9, 1870) was a Norwegian political leader and member of the Norwegian Parliament. Of humble origins, he is credited for having popularized politics in Norway, paving the way for individuals of underprivileged backgrounds to rise to positions of political importance.
Ueland was born into a peasant family on the farm of Skaaland, in the parish of Lunde, in the landscape of Dalane, on the southwest coast of Norway. The next oldest of four, he became an orphan in 1814. Although his formal education had been limited to random local lessons, he had proven an unusual aptitude for learning and a voracious appetite for reading. When he was 17, he was asked to teach the children in the area. By 1827, he had by way of marriage acquired the farm Ueland, and was installed as the sexton in the local church in Heskestad in the municipality of Lund.
He was elected to the Norwegian Parliament in 1833, representing the rural constituency of Stavanger Amt (today named Rogaland). He remained a parliament member until 1869, having been re-elected thirteen times. He became the leader for the peasant and farmer's movement in politics and earned respect for his deliberate and wise political outlook.

Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson wrote of him:
Though he is a farmer behind his plough
and a sailor in his boat
he thought as well as anyone
in all the King's council
When he met in parliament
to promote the cause of farmers
every word gave birth to a ray
in the people's young day.
http://www.snl.no/system/images/u/ueland_ole.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Ole_Gabriel_Ueland.jpg

[Arne]

He looks partly Sami for me..
Very reduced Face structure..

[Pallantides]

He looks partly Sami for me..

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Rogaland_kart.png
I have never heard of any Sámi's in Rogaland wich is one of the southern most counties in Norway, but the people there tend to be rather dark in complexion.
http://img3.custompublish.com/getfile.php/664407.1093.qbpcxfcdtf/Pia+Tjelta.jpg?return=www.filmfeber.no
http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/TV2/archive/00729/Vidar-Johnsen-1024_729553p.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_t_zKtyMDZLs/SXHwoD3dRdI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/39xXGTGWUto/s400/Jan_Ove_Ottesen_og__202061m.jpg

[Neanderthal]

Skando-Nordid + Paleo-Mongoloid (Straight dark Hair, cheeckbones, eyes shape, ect)

[Pallantides]

Paleo-Mongoloid

That is just far fetched...
You really have to explain how a paleo-mongoloid ended up in the south western part of Norway in 1799?

[Neanderthal]

That is just far fetched...
You really have to explain how a paleo-mongoloid ended up in the south western part of Norway in 1799?

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=26424

I dont know about Mongoloid subtypes in Scandinavia, but the guy look partially Paleo-Mongoloid/Amerid to me.

In that one picture kinda reminds me of Benito Juarez.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Ole_Gabriel_Ueland.jpg http://www.latinworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/benito_juarez_2.bmp

Hes an Unmixed Indigenous Zentral Amerid Native for your comparison; Denying the guy has Mongoloid admix is just to decive one self.

[Pallantides]

There are no mongoloid subtypes in South Norway, there is nothing in modern genetics that suggest there is any more mongoloid admixture in Southern Norwegians compared to other Western European populations, I might have been more open to the possibility of distant Lappid or Uralid(...Paleo-Mongoloid admixture would have been absurd even in a North Norwegian) ancestry if it was a person from Finnmark where there were communites of Sami, Russians and Kvens who intermarried with local Norwegians, but Ole Gabriel Ueland being a Rogaland man is as Norwegian as it gets and he has a distinctive Norwegian peasant look, if anything the resemblance is remote and collateral and don't signify actual mongoloid admixture.

You can find people with similar features in these threads:
Sætersdalen in Aust-Agder, Norway (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12322)

Telemark in Norway (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12367)

Rural life in south Norway at the dawn of the 20th Century. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12095)

[Bridie]

There are no mongoloid subtypes in South Norway, there is nothing in modern genetics that suggest there is any more mongoloid admixture in Southern Norwegians compared to other Western European populations, Yes there is... the presence of y-dna halogroup Q.

You know what they say, there's no smoke without fire.

[Pallantides]

Yes there is... the presence of y-dna halogroup Q.

You know what they say, there's no smoke without fire.


It's frequency is about 0,5% in Norway and it's present in other European poulations as well so it's not really proof that Norwegians are more "mongoloid". besides there is no correlation between phenotype and Haplogroups.

[Bridie]

It's frequency is about 0,5%. It's very rare, I'll grant you (about 1% actually). Any Mongoloid admix is obviously nowhere near as significant as the Lapp.



there is no correlation between phenotype and Haplogroups.I suppose Q y-dna migrated to Norway all by itself? :D

[Pallantides]

It's very rare, I'll grant you (about 1% actually). Any Mongoloid admix is obviously nowhere near as significant as the Lapp.


I suppose Q y-dna migrated to Norway all by itself? :D


There can be a number of explenations, maybe it was introduced to Norway by German and other Central Europeans that have Immigrated to Norway since the Middle Ages, I share with a guy who is of German descent at 23andMe who belong to Y-DNA Q1a3 and his Autosomal DNA is fully European.


Any Mongoloid admix is obviously nowhere near as significant as the Lapp.

I believe the right term would be Eurasian admixture since most of this is before there was any true distinction, then again a majority of Norwegian Samis have European mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups.

[Bridie]

There can be a number of explanations, maybe it was introduced to Norway by German and other Central European immigrants that Immigrated came here since the Middle Ages,Maybe yes. In which case the German or other Central Europeans were already mixed with East Asians.

But it doesn't matter how it got there really... it still indicates that there is some East Asian genetic influences in Norway (and Iceland and the Faroe Islands).



I share with a guy at 23andMe who belong to Y-DNA Q1a3 and his Autosomal DNA is fully European. I doubt this guy could say the same thing...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Ole_Gabriel_Ueland.jpg

:D

[Pallantides]

I doubt this guy could say the same thing...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Ole_Gabriel_Ueland.jpg

:D

He looks fully European after Norwegian standards, I guess if you travelled to Norway you'd be shocked at seeing all these Huns.


My great great great grandparents from Hallingdal also have this psuedo-Mongoloid looks.
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/stuff/skann_0045.jpg

my genetic profile:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12177

This pretty much from an expert in the field who have looked at my Raw Data.

These are indicative of all-Euro ancestry.

This means my great great great grandparents were also most likely fully European.

[Bridie]

I believe the right term would be Eurasian admixture since most of this is before there was any true distinction, then again a majority of Norwegian Samis have European mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups.Y-dna Q is an East Asian and South American native halogroup though. Not Eurasian. Although it is bound to be found in small frequencies in Eurasia due to historical migrations/invasions from the East.



then again a majority of Norwegian Samis have European mtDNA and Y-DNA Haplogroups.Not surprising, since they're a mixed bunch. :) No one would be silly enough to claim that the Saami are purely Siberian or anything.

[Guapo]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Ole_Gabriel_Ueland.jpg

:D

Must be the beard :confused:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PuZoLkvmBbc/SgnbnJrqMuI/AAAAAAAADmo/VY7kP6qBff8/s320/Dr.+Zaius.jpg

[Bridie]

My great great great grandparents from Hallingdal also have this psuedo-Mongoloid looks.
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/stuff/skann_0045.jpg

my genetic profile:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12177
pretty much from an expert in the field who have looked at my Raw Data.


This means my great great great grandparents were also most likely fully European.Not really, since it's quite possible that you just didn't inherit their (possible) East-of-Europe DNA.

For what it's worth (probably not much :p), I don't think that your 3x great Grandma shows "psuedo-Mongoloid" features.

[Pallantides]

Some of the people in these pictures have a similar phenotype.
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdal31.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdalmann5.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdal11.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdal17.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdal27.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdal18.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/setesdalmann.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdalfamilie4.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdalfamile3.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/setesdalpar.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/bykle4.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Setesdal/hornnes3.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Telemark/telemark75.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Telemark/telemark72.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Telemark/telemark65.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Telemark/telemarkkonedrakt.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Norge/jar1.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Norge/brudedrakt.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Norge/JohannesOnarheim.jpg
http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac316/Pallantides/Norge/setesdal4.jpg
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/169/kvinnedrakt.jpg
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/8241/hallingkvinner.jpg
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/7031/hallingdalkvinnedrakt.jpg

[Bridie]

What are we supposed to be looking for?

[Pallantides]

What are we supposed to be looking for?

The Huns or supposed psuedo-mongoloids.

[Bridie]

Oh ok. :)

Well there are quite a few there that look a bit "iffy" to me, if you know what I mean. Eh eh, do ye? *wink wink, nudge nudge*

[The Khagan]

DNA haplogroups are not indicators of phenotypes. Going by that way of thinking, one would imagine that the Kyrgyz people are primarily blonde, light eyed and generally European looking, seeing as 63% of their male population has the R1a1 gene. Reality couldn't be farther from the truth.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Kyrgyz_Manaschi,_Karakol.jpg

[Polako]

Yes there is... the presence of y-dna halogroup Q.

You know what they say, there's no smoke without fire.

I've got another awesome saying; you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Yes, it's true, Norwegians are a fraction more similar to East Asians than other western Europeans are. It's likely that various population movements from the Mesolithic to the Iron Age are responsible.

However, west of Norway, as East Eurasian influence falls, sub-Saharan African affinity rises. So, for example, native French and Brits are more similar to Africans than a whole load of countries in North and East Europe in terms of Fst (genetic distance)....

France to Nigeria: 0.1493
UK to Nigeria: 0.1513
Norway to Nigeria: 0.1531

We can speculate why this is so (ie. if this is ancient or more recent influence), but in the end these differences in Fst scores between European countries are small. This is also true when East Eurasian affinity is considered.

As for haplogroup Q, it's not a particularly useful marker of East Eurasian influence in Scandinavia, simply because no one has a clue who brought it there. Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups are only useful indicators of admix if we know who carried them. Indeed, it's more likely that some ethnic Norwegians harbor inflated levels of East Eurasian affinity thanks to a Sami great-grandma or grandpa carrying classic European haplogroups, than some distant Mesolithic or Neolithic ancestor with Q.

All of this might sound complex, but is actually quite simple. My advice to all those fascinated by this sort of stuff is to get a high density genome-wide scan. After a few months of digging through your own data, and that of others, you'll become something of an expert in the area. Apart from that, if you're gonna talk the talk, then be prepared to walk the walk, like myself and guys like Pallantides.

[Bridie]

DNA haplogroups are not indicators of phenotypes. Going by that way of thinking, one would imagine that the Kyrgyz people are primarily blonde, light eyed and generally European looking, seeing as 63% of their male population has the R1a1 gene. Reality couldn't be farther from the truth.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Kyrgyz_Manaschi,_Karakol.jpg
Y and mtDNA halogroups are useful in determining migrationary patterns of populations.

I don't know why people keep bringing up the fact that y-DNA is not linked to phenotypical traits (as far as science knows at this current time) as though this means that migrating populations don't bring with them distinctive physiological characteristics and as though they can't influence the physical appearance of native populations via interbreeding with them...

[Polako]

Y and mtDNA halogroups are useful in determining migrationary patterns of populations.

I don't know why people keep bringing up the fact that y-DNA is not linked to phenotypical traits (as far as science knows at this current time) as though this means that migrating populations don't bring with them distinctive physiological characteristics and as though they can't influence the physical appearance of native populations via interbreeding with them...

The fact that Y-DNA is not linked to phenotypic traits, or indeed that it doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on one's overall genome structure, and thus biogeographic classification, is a very important point.

We simply don't know who brought Q to Norway. If it was a group of people, or the odd individual, who were phenotypically and autosomally Northern European, then there's not much sense it using this marker as a sign of East Asian admixture.

[Bridie]

I've got another awesome saying; you can't have your cake and eat it too.Truly awesome, Polako.



Yes, it's true, Norwegians are a fraction more similar to East Asians than other western Europeans are.I don't ever recall saying that Norwegians are more similar to East Asians as such. What I said was that there is evidence to suggest migrations of peoples from East Asia to Norway at some point(s) in history.



It's likely that various population movements from the Mesolithic to the Iron Age are responsible.Correct Sherlock. ;)



However, west of Norway, as East Eurasian influence falls, sub-Saharan African affinity rises. So, for example, native French and Brits are more similar to Africans than a whole load of countries in North and East Europe in terms of Fst (genetic distance)....More similar to North Africans, sure. Not surprising when you consider that some of those who migrated south from more northerly regions of Europe at the onset of the last Ice Age traveled and settled as far as North Africa via the Gibraltar Straight.



We can speculate why this is so (ie. if this is ancient or more recent influence), but in the end these differences in Fst scores between European countries are small. This is also true when East Eurasian affinity is considered. The details are often lost in gross over-generalisations.


As for haplogroup Q, it's not a particularly useful marker of East Eurasian influence in Scandinavia, simply because no one has a clue who brought it there.
So all genetic evidence is forfeit if no one (currently) knows how it came to be? :D Sure thing.



Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups are only useful indicators of admix if we know who carried them. Indeed, it's more likely that some ethnic Norwegians harbor inflated levels of East Eurasian affinity thanks to a Sami great-grandma or grandpa carrying classic European haplogroups, than some distant Mesolithic or Neolithic ancestor with Q.Yes, it's so much more likely that Q y-DNA just appeared out of thin air in Lapp populations (Q not being a typical halogroup in the said peoples) than it is that it was carried to Europe via migrations from the far East by people who possessed this halogroup already.



All of this might sound complex, but is actually quite simple. My advice to all those fascinated by this sort of stuff is to get a high density genome-wide scan. After a few months of digging through your own data, and that of others, you'll become something of an expert in the area. Apart from that, if you're gonna talk the talk, then be prepared to walk the walk, like myself and guys like Pallantides.Actually, it doesn't sound complex at all. As with all areas of science and the natural world, it is people who complicate things. The thing is, I have no agenda... I would have to assume that you do... otherwise why would you be so unwilling to consider the possibility of truth in what is most reasonable?

[Bridie]

The fact that Y-DNA is not linked to phenotypic traits, or indeed that it doesn't have any bearing whatsoever on one's overall genome structure, and thus biogeographic classification, is a very important point.

We simply don't know who brought Q to Norway. If it was a group of people, or the odd individual, who were phenotypically and autosomally Northern European, then there's not much sense it using this marker as a sign of East Asian admixture.Only if you are obsessed to the point of blindness with phenotypical traits. Otherwise, it is of much interest to know from where the current populations of certain areas of Europe derived.

Fact is, if a genetic marker of East Asian origin is found in Europe, there has necessarily been admixture at some point.

[Polako]

More similar to North Africans, sure. Not surprising when you consider that some of those who migrated south from more northerly regions of Europe at the onset of the last Ice Age traveled and settled as far as North Africa via the Gibraltar Straight.

Last time I looked, Nigeria wasn't in North Africa.


Fact is, if a genetic marker of East Asian origin is found in Europe, there has necessarily been admixture at some point.

Sure, but where? It could've happened anywhere from Norway to the Urals and beyond.

All it would've taken was for one guy from the Volga area, who was no longer autosomally East Eurasian, to travel up to Norway and become "successful" there for whatever reason, maybe due to a population bottleneck in one valley? And voila, Q spreads out into other regions of Norway from this area, carried by people with no East Asian chromosome segments, or any such phenotypic traits.

So the point stands; Y-DNA is a terrible way of estimating biogeographic admix rates, unless we now exactly who carried the relevant haplogroups, when, and how many of them there were initially.

[Bridie]

Last time I looked, Nigeria wasn't in North Africa.
Nigeria is populated in part by North African Berbers who were driven South by conquering Arabs. These North African Berbers were Caucasians and likely to have at least some genetic input (if not more) from migrating Europeans at the last Ice Age.


The rest I'll have to reply to later.... I have to make dinner now! :p

[Polako]

Nigeria is populated in part by North African Berbers who were driven South by conquering Arabs. These North African Berbers were Caucasians and likely to have at least some genetic input (if not more) from migrating Europeans at the last Ice Age.

If this is indeed the reason for the figures I showed, then you'd expect Nigerians to pull towards Europeans on PCA plots, and not for some Europeans to pull towards Nigerians. Right?

What are some of those Spaniards, French, Belgians, Brits, and even Germans doing so far "south"?

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p217/dpwes/h1.jpg

Simon C Heath et al, Investigation of the fine structure of European populations with applications to disease association studies, European Journal of Human Genetics (2008) 16, 1413–1429; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2008.210

[Bridie]

Sure, but where? It could've happened anywhere from Norway to the Urals and beyond.Does it matter where the admix took place? It occurred, there is genetic evidence of it in Norway. End of story.



All it would've taken was for one guy from the Volga area, who was no longer autosomally East Eurasian,Why would it matter if he was autosomally East Asian any longer? He would still have the same ancestry(ies). It would still be of interest to know where his origins laid.

Once again, you are too obsessed with phenotypical traits and don't seem to have much interest in really understanding human migrations. I suppose that's the drawback of having pre-conceived agendas.



So the point stands; Y-DNA is a terrible way of estimating biogeographic admix rates,Who was trying to estimate admix rates? I simply said that there has been East Asian (well, more specifically Siberian) admix at some point... the rates of y-dna Q in Norway are low, but still significant/interesting... it seems that any "rate" of racial interbreeding that led to this halogroup being found in Norway must have been quite low.



If this is indeed the reason for the figures I showed, then you'd expect Nigerians to pull towards Europeans on PCA plots, and not for some Europeans to pull towards Nigerians. Right?

What are some of those Spaniards, French, Belgians, Brits, and even Germans doing so far "south"?

Click this bar to view the full image.


Simon C Heath et al, Investigation of the fine structure of European populations with applications to disease association studies, European Journal of Human Genetics (2008) 16, 1413–1429; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2008.210It's hard to analyse such a graph without additional information. Have you got a link to the full study?

[Thulsa Doom]

besides there is no correlation between phenotype and Haplogroups.

I have seen this statement a couple of times now and it is plain wrong. There is a strong correlation, but no causality, between haplotype and phenotype. Correlation is a mathematical term and should be used according to that. See (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation)

[National_Nord]

Alpinid