Do we have any good medieval Norman samples?
Do we have any good medieval Norman samples?
NO3423, Anglo-Saxon from Northumbria dated to 650-910 AD (so already Middle AS period) is still not similar to modern English, but much more Germanic:Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
^^^ G25 scaled coordinates.Code:England_Saxon:NO3423,0.129758,0.13405,0.068259,0.062339,0.0397,0.017012,0.004465,0.002077,0.001227,-0.007107,-0.007795,0.001499,-0.010852,-0.010459,0.027823,0.005569,-0.014212,0.004561,-0.000126,0.005002,0.009982,0.002473,0.002465,0.015183,0.001916
Maybe there was a large spread in the Northumbrian society at that time with some people still being almost 100% autosomally Briton (even if culturally already Anglo-Saxon), while some others being like NO3423. And everything in-between.
Cranial studies of the oldies show that the Anglo-Saxons were still largely "Anglo-Saxon" as late as the 9th century AD, so I'm inclined to believe that the Vikings still encountered very Germanic individuals in their early raids. Could the Viking invasions have stimulated the union of Saxons and natives? Dunno, but it is possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotraschke
Yes it is possible. BTW I'm surprised that the Welsh did not unite with the Vikings in order to reconquer at least some of formerly Briton lands from the Anglo-Saxons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Token
The Britons seem to have lost their impetus after tasting the niceties of Roman civilization, like all other Roman provincials. No wonder western Europe turned into a Germanic battlefield in the early Middle Ages, with the rest being not much more than onlookers and food producers for their successive Germanic lords.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotraschke
Yes, I'd expect there to be more ancestral variance until later in the Middle Ages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotraschke
Eastern English are seemingly not much more Brittonic drifted than those Anglo-Saxon era samples, just more Southern.
https://i.postimg.cc/S4Tny5kc/cassiyfig4-6.jpgQuote:
The homogenisation of British population structure through admixture
In contrast to the gentle gradient of ancient Irish variation, British and continental individuals show a
more punctuated distribution along PC2 (Fig. 4.6B-C), forming two clear clusters at both ends of modern
British variation. Anglo-Saxons fall with southeastern English variation in this and all other PCs
considered, alongside a Nordic Iron Age sample, reflecting the large genetic contribution of Germanic
migrations to this part of the island (Leslie et al. 2015; Schiffels et al. 2016). Iron Age Britons comprise
another tight grouping at the opposite end of British variation, emphasising the admixed nature of the
modern population (Leslie et al. 2015; Martiniano et al. 2016; Schiffels et al. 2016). Early snapshots of
continental introgression events may be represented by two samples that fall midway between the two
groups, one from an Anglo-Saxon context (O3), which was reported as admixed in the original study
(Schiffels et al. 2016), and the second from a Roman British population (6DT23), another member of
which was demonstrated to be of likely Middle Eastern origin (Martiniano et al. 2016). Notably, no Irish
Iron Age samples are seen to fall into this region of the PC space
They did at Brunanburh (modern Cheshire), but they failed, and the Kingdom of England was solidified.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotraschke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brunanburh
Thanks for the info, but Strathclyde was not located in present-day Wales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
It seems that kingdoms from present-day Wales did not participate.
Edit:
Actually maybe the Kingdom of Gwent participated too.
They were Welsh though, those distinctions didn't exist yet, not to the English anyway. The King of Strathclyde was Owain ap Dyfnwal, couldn't get any more Welsh than that. Wales is simply the Brythonic lands that weren't conquered (until later).Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotraschke
The main reason the Welsh in Wales didn't bother the English much was because of Offa's Dyke, built in the 8th century, separating Wales from Mercia.
I'm not sure how Romanised/'Civilised' most of the Britons were though, it surprised me before how small a percentage of the population of Roman Britain was urban, and they would have been demographically hardest hit by Roman withdrawal. Actually it's remarkable how un-Romanised the known sub-Roman Britons were and what little legacy there was from 300+ years of colonisation, almost as remarkable as how un-Celtic the early English were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Token
Some of the samples we currently have from the Viking and Anglo-Saxon eras definitely shift out of modern populations. I wonder if this is "real" or an artifact of the PCA.
https://i.imgur.com/W3a3EZ2.png
I remember there was a kit of a 14th century Plague Victim from London, who was very Southern-shifted/French-like. Do you still have the gedmatch scores for him Peterski?
Target: Paleolithic_scaled Distance: 5.6495% / 0.05649474
89.6 England_Saxon
9.4 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna
1.0 England_Roman
Distance to: Paleolithic_scaled
0.05662887 England_Saxon:I0769
0.06493732 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_84001
0.06545302 England_Saxon:I0159
0.06555991 England_Saxon:I0773
0.06668266 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_grt035
0.06682187 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_kls001
0.06796331 England_Saxon:I0161
0.06813097 England_Saxon:I0157
0.06941985 England_Saxon:I0777
0.07004397 England_Saxon:NO3423
0.07089416 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_stg026
0.07201973 England_Roman:6DT18
0.07352973 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_stg021
0.07356575 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_gtm021
0.07410970 England_Roman:6DT3
0.07445717 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_urm035
0.07492253 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_urm160
0.07509126 England_Roman:3DT16
0.07809393 England_Saxon:I0774
0.07829500 England_Roman:6DT21
0.07925876 England_Roman:6DT22
0.08167477 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_grt036
0.08380381 England_Roman:6DT23
0.08570145 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_84005
0.08700848 SWE_Viking_Age_Sigtuna:vik_97002
Target: Paleolithic_scaled Distance: 6.9600% / 0.06959978
100.0 Germanic
it generally depends on the region. this guy is from Coastal Nofolk in east anglia and he seems to be very Germanic/Saxon.
Norfolk,47.39,23.79,15.66,1.42,7.84,1.05,0.61,0,0, 1.45,0.58,0.21,0
while this person is a mix from different parts of the West midlands and seems very Celtic.
west_midlands,53.77,22.21,11.57,4.45,4.32,0.64,0.0 6,0.27,0.6,1.17,0.95,0,0
Individuals can vary a lot, but these are averages for different regions of England:Quote:
Originally Posted by Arzanene
Code:English_Midlands(n=65),49.46,23.56,13.75,5.58,4.09,0.63,1.09,0.19,0.23,0.49,0.41,0.24,0.20
English_North(n=107),50.43,23.89,13.25,5.51,3.41,0.67,1.00,0.11,0.29,0.60,0.40,0.19,0.18
English_Southeast(n=83),48.87,23.39,13.79,5.65,4.52,0.76,1.11,0.19,0.31,0.56,0.42,0.22,0.13
English_Southwest(n=38),50.08,22.98,14.31,5.42,3.64,0.62,1.08,0.14,0.22,0.66,0.46,0.17,0.16
English_East(n=19),48.53,23.36,13.76,5.38,5.07,0.89,1.01,0.28,0.38,0.57,0.27,0.29,0.14
English_East_Midlands(n=25),49.1,23.71,14.03,5.77,3.89,0.79,1.03,0.15,0.15,0.46,0.42,0.23,0.22
English_Northeast(n=13),49.73,24.59,13.25,5.66,3.38,0.79,0.91,0.04,0.36,0.62,0.31,0.18,0.11
English_Northwest(n=52),50.70,23.63,13.36,5.42,3.46,0.61,0.96,0.16,0.28,0.58,0.36,0.20,0.22
English_South_East(n=56),48.98,23.53,13.71,5.73,4.28,0.76,1.14,0.16,0.26,0.57,0.46,0.21,0.14
English_West_Midlands(n=41),49.80,23.41,13.60,5.44,4.18,0.54,1.14,0.21,0.28,0.52,0.39,0.24,0.18
English_Yorkshire(n=26),50.99,23.55,13.20,5.60,2.92,0.77,1.07,0.11,0.21,0.68,0.54,0.16,0.15
English_Lancashire(n=30),50.70,23.72,13.27,5.50,3.38,0.67,0.91,0.08,0.20,0.67,0.38,0.24,0.21
Code:Distance to: English_East(n=19)
0.74853190 English_Southeast
1.42902064 English_Midlands
1.58177116 English
2.25341962 English_Southwest
2.65299830 English_North
2.77771489 Dutch
2.87097544 Cornish
2.92579904 Dutch_South
3.26651190 Welsh
3.41027858 French_Brittany
3.49161854 Dutch_Central
3.85438711 Flemish
3.89916658 Scottish_East
4.00842862 German_Westphalia
4.03313774 German_Lower_Saxony_South
4.07155990 Scottish_North-Highlands
4.11141095 Scottish_Northeast
4.21557825 Scottish
4.49468575 German_Rhineland-Palatinate_East_of_Rhine
4.54739486 Scottish_Southwest
4.58652374 Belgian
4.66335716 Irish_Leinster
4.93850180 German_Schleswig-Holstein
5.05313764 Dutch_North
5.18830415 French_Normandy
West Midlands is actually closer by distance to Saxons etc, because SE England/East Anglia has more Celtic/Southern blood. SE Eng/East Anglia is shifted heavily towards South Dutch (Celto-Germanics).Code:Distance to: English_West_Midlands(n=41)
0.38961519 English
0.45110974 English_Midlands
1.05247328 English_Southwest
1.05692952 English_Southeast
1.18456743 English_North
1.69319225 Cornish
1.82534928 Welsh
2.41878068 Scottish_East
2.57416006 Dutch
2.60578203 Scottish_Northeast
2.61044058 Scottish_North-Highlands
2.71950363 Scottish
3.00512895 Dutch_Central
3.05872522 Scottish_Southwest
3.19895295 Irish_Leinster
3.67922546 German_Westphalia
3.79180696 German_Lower_Saxony_South
3.96706441 French_Brittany
3.97502201 Scottish_Gaidhealtachd
4.20622158 Irish
4.32647663 German_Schleswig-Holstein
4.32952653 Dutch_North
4.37706523 Dutch_South
4.61557147 Irish_Connacht
4.66507235 Irish_Munster
Quotes from the conclusions of Beddoe's The Races of Britain
So according to him English are about halfway between Frisians/Lower Saxons and the most Celtic parts of Britain (Sth Wales, Cornwall) in hair/eye pigmentation. So much for 'Brits' all being the same.Quote:
That a comparison of the Indices of Nigrescence in the continental regions whence these last-named invaders came with those found in the parts of the British Isles where they settled, and those of the purest Gaelic and so-called Celtic stocks, leads towards the conclusion that in some parts of the east and north Anglo-Saxon or Scandinavian blood predominates, and that in the greater part of England it amounts to something like a half. For example, if we put the index of Friesland and Lower Saxony at about - 20, and that of West Cornwall and of Carmarthenshire (neither of which districts is free from Anglo-Saxon intermixture), at + 60, the mean, + 20, may be expected to represent a mixed population, in which these two stocks are of nearly equal potency. On examination of the coloured map, constructed from personal observation, it will be found that a very large part of England, and almost the entire east of Scotland, yield indices lower than + 20, and, by hypothesis, should have a larger proportion of the Saxon than of the Welsh element in the blood of the people.
Earlier in the book he speculated a 15-20% Norman French input based on name frequency in the Middle Ages, which coincides with 18% 'Italian' signal in modern English that the Viking paper authors speculated was Norman-related.Quote:
That the French immigration, subsequent to the Norman Conquest, was large enough to produce a definite ethnological effect in some of the eastern and southern parts of England. That this effect was greater in North and East Yorkshire, and less in most parts of Kent, than the respective positions of these counties would have led one to expect.
Quote:
The proportion of Norman or French blood in southern and eastern England in the time of Edward I. may have equalled 15, or even approached 20 per cent. It was greater than this in the south-midland counties, but less in East Anglia, and in the western and northern counties, especially where free sokemen abounded. It was perhaps rather small in Kent, taken as a whole, owing to the nature- of the land- tenures there, which gave little opportunity to foreigners to get on the land. It was greater in Yorkshire, or at least the north and east of Yorkshire, than in other counties equally remote, owing to the devastation of Deira by the Conqueror having left openings for colonisation
Quote:
Was any permanent change in physical type effected by the results of the Conquest ? and if so, where, and in what direction ? The addition of fifteen or twenty per cent, of a foreign element, or, more correctly, the addition of fifteen or twenty of a foreign to eighty-five or eighty of a native one, might be expected to produce a distinct and lasting effect if such new element were homogeneous; but homogeneous it was not. The prevailing types among the Galato-Merovingian military aristocracy of France, as well as among the mostly Scandinavian aristocracy of Normandy, were still, we have reason to believe, blond and long-headed ; and the remains of the Anglo-Danish one, with which they certainly mixed to a considerable extent, were a purer breed of the same type, which is still the prevailing one among the upper classes of England. The bulk of the immigrants, however, especially of the portion of them who filtered in gradually and peacefully in later times, would doubtless more resemble the majority of the modern inhabitants of the north of France ; that is to say, they would be in the main a mixture of the square-browed long-faced type which the French ethnologists call Kimric, with the short swarthy round-headed type of Broca's Kelts or Kelto-ligurians. This last, being rather feebly represented here previously, would not easily merge. I think it continues pretty common in the districts where my name-tables lead me to think the most French- men settled. Short, dark, blunt-featured people are commoner, I think, in the South- Midlands than in most other parts ; and the small, swarthy, round-faced people whom Phillips met with so frequently along the Yorkshire Ouse, and who struck him by their contrast to the prevailing Yorkshire types, may as well be traced to this immigration as to any early Iberian or Ugrian strain
While diverse, England's homogeneity is high compared to other European countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
https://i.imgur.com/bPRq9c7.png
You are right, but ones need to compare England with another country of similar size. England is just 130 395 km2 without natural barrier, as far as i know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajeje Brazorf
Distance to: CDG
1.83711731 English_Northeast(n=13)
2.31205536 English_North(n=107)
2.54994118 English_Lancashire(n=30)
2.62786986 English_Northwest(n=52)
2.74444894 English_Yorkshire(n=26)
2.92620915 English_Midlands(n=65)
2.94271983 English_West_Midlands(n=41)
3.04886864 English_East_Midlands(n=25)
3.11358314 English_South_East(n=56)
3.36569458 English_Southeast(n=83)
3.55177420 English_Southwest(n=38)
3.81308274 English_East(n=19)
Target: CDG
Distance: 1.8371% / 1.83711731
100.0 English_Northeast(n=13)
What CDG stands for?Quote:
Originally Posted by celticdragongod
What CDG stands for?Quote:
Originally Posted by celticdragongod
Really wild guess:Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy
Celtic
Dragon
God
This weird website claims that English has a prehistoric presence in Britain:
http://web.archive.org/web/201705232...o-english.org/
"Linguistic situation at the time of Julius Caesar" (a map from this website):
http://web.archive.org/web/201704290.../map_engl2.jpg
The author of this website and this theory is Michael Goormachtigh.
Fresh off the presses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hps4bM2mZ2E
I'm guessing we will get to know what is happening soon? :thumb001:
https://medievalarchaeology.co.uk/wp...ceBooklet3.pdf
The Anglo-Saxon migration and formation of the early English gene pool
Stephan Schiffels and Joscha Gretzinger
Quote:
The Anglo-Saxon migration and formation of the early English gene pool
Stephan Schiffels and Joscha Gretzinger
A series of migrations and accompanied cultural changes has formed the peoples of Britain and still represents the foundations of the English national identity. For the most prominent of these, the Anglo-Saxon migration, the traditional view outlined that the local Romanised British population was forcibly replaced by invading Germanic tribes, starting in the fifth century AD. However, to which extent this historic event coincided with factual immigration that affected the genetic composition of the British population was focus of generations of scientific and social controversy.
Quote:
To better understand this key period, we have generated genome-wide sequences from 280 individuals from 22 early medieval cemeteries in England and from 195 additional individuals from contemporaneous sites in continental north-western Europe and Ireland. We combined this data with previously published genome-wide data to a total dataset of more than 750 ancient British genomes spanning from the Early Bronze Age to the Early Middle Ages, allowing us to investigate shifts and affinities in British finescale population structure during this phase of transformation.
Quote:
Here we present two results: First, we detect a substantial increase in continental northern European ancestry in England during the Early Anglo-Saxon period, replacing approximately 75% of the local British ancestry. Second, we highlight the yet continuous presence of ancestry identified in Iron Age and Roman individuals during the Early and Middle Anglo-Saxon period. Our observation of a culturally homogenous but genetically diverse Anglo-Saxon population demonstrates that admixture between Britons and continental immigrants was not a geographically restricted or exceptional phenomenon.
Quote:
Early Anglo-Saxon cemeteries and the implications of new ancient DNA data
Duncan Sayer
There is no genetic signature for an early Anglo-Saxon person. Ancient genetic information has been highly anticipated for decades, but it is only now that we are in the midst of the archaeo-genetic revolution that the wider implications of the evidence are becoming apparent for our understanding of the early Middle Ages. On its own, DNA data cannot tell us who was a migrant, and who was not. But it can tell us about the biological impact of migration. The results of 210 individuals from 9 cemeteries will change the narrative, at the very least it moves the conversation from if there was a migration, to what was the impact of migration. But what has been less anticipated is what DNA deviance can tell us about the people themselves. About gender difference and migration, who was related to who, and how the cultural impact played out at a national, regional, and local level.
https://i.ibb.co/W64McPv/image.png
^One of the preprints is claiming based on isotopic evidence that Anglo-Saxon migration was only slightly more male-mediated than female-mediated (as opposed to the heavily male Viking migration), which would be big news if true, not what many expected. Would change the stereotype about the Anglo-Saxon invasion.
Here:
https://www.academia.edu/81150902/La..._c_AD_400_1100
Always thought of the Saxons as settling into farming which would involve the family. As opposed to the later North Sea Vikings. The Saxons correlate well with arable land in Britain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
Posted today on Anthrogenica by JonikW:
The first of the aDNA presentations now: “The Anglo-Saxon migration and formation of the early English gene pool”, Stefan Schiffels and Joscha Gretzinger.
Gretzinger (speaking very quickly throughout) started by saying about 80 people have been working on this since 2018 (including Schiffels as a PhD student). Gretzinger started off by looking at earlier studies including POBI. Then he turned to their own work. This is a map of sites the study looked at to find out the true picture:
https://i.imgur.com/Ftq9RPU.png
England forms a cline between Wales and Scotlands and the Netherlands and Germany on a PCA. In the Bronze and Iron Age, England clusters with other Brits. But the 285 new samples sit with the northern Germans and Danes. The Early Medieval English are genetically closest related to northern Germans, Danes and Dutch. Most sites in England have majority ancestry from the Continent at this time.
Y chromosomes: haplogroup I1 is the big development. Around 76 percent of the paternal ancestry in the study comes from the continent. They also arrive at a level of 76 percent using the autosomal data alone.
https://i.imgur.com/bcEAgC9.png
Mitochondrial dna. Women were also involved in the migration.
Where did the continental incomers come from?: Nearly exclusively Northern Germany and Denmark. There is a “nice cline from the northern Netherlands to southern Sweden”, but mainly concentrated northern Germany and Denmark.
Impact of the migrations on the modern population: It’s not possible to model English as a simple two way mixture between the iron age population and northern Europeans. We think a better model for modern England involves a mixture between the IA Brits, early English and some French ancestry.
A three-way admixture model for the present day population has to include French. French ancestry 43 per cent in east Anglia and also strong in Kent.
Conclusions in bullet points:
We detect 76 percent ancestry replacement during the Early Middle Ages in England
We find no evidence for sex bias in the admixture process
We identify Lower Saxony and Denmark as the most plausible geographic homeland of those immigrants.
Admixture was heterogenous across England and follows an East to West cline
Continental ancestry was later diluted by southwestern European ancestry.
They now want to understand how this later French ancestry entered England (he mentioned David Reich is working with them).
Points from the questions and answers at the end: they have 30 early Medieval and 10 Iron Age samples from the Netherlands (I’m not sure whether those all belong specifically to the study because he mentioned they don’t have English IA samples of their own). Norway was not sampled specifically for the study but it looks different from the key areas discussed here including Denmark. Samples were mostly taken by archaeologists. Next they need to sample the west of England more and be careful to avoid bias of sites. They admit that “one of the major issues” is that they have is that they don’t have Roman samples from Britain. But this large-scale change that we see in the Early Medieval Period in England is NOT Roman Period”. They know this from studies that they have access to but that are not published yet.
How did this French ancestry enter England? Gauls or Normans?
I noticed some south-eastern English can be very southern shifted like user Norb for example, who looks very Germanic (and he probably has lot of Germanic ancestry being from east).
Such people can't be modeled as Iron Age English + Anglo Saxon indeed.
there is something else pulling them south. If it's not Roman, what it is?
Still, I think there was limited Roman impact in southern UK. That could explain why exotic branches of E-V13 and J2b2 and similar pop up in England from time to time.
It may be from multiple sources, not necessarily just one, but I'd bet the bulk comes from the Normans. Apparently they are working in a paper with David Reich which will try to answer this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
A lot of what I've been saying for a while. A decent amount of Norman French mediated influence is needed to explain England's current position in PCAs, not just Briton + Germanic, although 43% in parts of the Southeast :icon_eek: That sounds like a bit much based on my modelling, but I speculated up to 20%. I assume some of that must be Flemish, who've had a decent amount of influence in England since the middle ages, or perhaps earlier undetected ancestry from Belgae or Romans in SE Britain that is different from the other Iron Age British references.Quote:
Originally Posted by Token
Huge news though, proves the decades of mainstream non-migrationist revisionism to be full of crap. And proves again that 'Brits' are not all the same despite what some people seem to think, English and Insular Celts have quite different ancestry.
Norb plots like a Fleming, which in light of this study makes sense, as SE England like Flanders/South Dutch looks more Germanic + Gaulish than Germanic + Brittonic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feiichy
But much of that Gaulish blood has to be pre Anglo-Saxon IMO, even though there's not much evidence of it yet. I believe the Belgae replaced the earlier Celtic Southern Britons to some extent.
Admixture proportions for modern-day British. The "Anglo-Saxon" detected among Irish and northern Scots must be largely Viking. Anglo-Saxon ancestry is as low as 25% in Cornwall and as high 50% in eastern England. By the way, let's all laugh at the vast majority of archaeologists who thought that the Anglo-Saxons were just a minority in England compared to native Britons.
https://i.imgur.com/ReEHOaA.png
Oh, didn't see that you had posted it already :picard1:Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
I missed this quote earlier from JonikW:
Not sure what to make of calling them Franks, but the French IA types existing alongside Anglo-Saxons and Celtic Britons? That's a surprise, and perplexing.Quote:
Conclusion bullet points:
Significant numbers of graves with CNE (Anglo-Saxon) ancestry;
No sex bias to ancestry;
But post-mortem treatment seems to emphasise female artifacts and brooches;
There are significant regional and local patterns;
A significant factor in this migration is the family, providing a vehicle for integration or separation.
Question and answers: Question: are the “French IA” signals actually from the Franks? Response: the only category that really matters is the WBI (British) women. They are the lower status with a “slightly lesser place” in society. But the individuals are not thinking of themselves as AS. However, the IA French ancestry “exists alongside the CNE and WBI” and you’re just as likely to have it in a WBI sample. But “probably, yes” the IA French signal is from the Franks.
Or if it exists equally in WBI (Celtic Briton) and CNE (Anglo-Saxon) then it's just a part of sub-Roman British ancestry?
https://i.postimg.cc/RZSRnDV1/k3623.png
This thread has been interested to read, given my own ancestry.
Spread of CNE ancestry (Anglo-Saxon like) in Europe during and after the Roman Empire, courtesy of JonikW again.
https://i.postimg.cc/g0fKmR14/Screen...py-606x308.png
Thoughts?
CNE seems to peak in the Jastorf-Kultur area in the Iron Age, which was probably Proto-Germanic. The arrow from the continent to southern Sweden is intriguing, I'd tend to think it was the other way around based on the evidence of "Proto-Danes" coming from Sweden to fill the empty space left by the Anglo-Saxons after the great migration. Northern Italy with more Germanic ancestry than northern France also looks weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by Creoda
That's what the Viking paper concluded but I don't know how much sense that makes as there was obviously English in both Ireland and Scotland. It would have been interesting if they sampled Dublin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Token
Here's the quote from the Viking paper.
The French component is really interesting as well. It looks like southeast England has had a high amount of immigration from the Continent even after the Anglo-Saxons arrival. Really looking forward to this paper coming out in a few weeks' time.Quote:
From this, we can see the spread of ancestry during and around the Viking era:
● UK populations have all received high ‘Denmark’ ancestry. Although Anglo-Saxon and Danish Viking ancestry are hard to distinguish, Viking-era Danes have too much “Sweden” ancestry to have contributed more than around 6% ancestry into England, whereas they could plausibly have contributed all (up to 16%) of the Scottish and Irish signal. Anglo-Saxon samples are needed to explore this further.
● The ‘Norway’ ancestry signal in the UK cannot be explained via the Danish or Anglo-Saxon contribution. These fractions (4% in England, Scotland, and Ireland, 3% in Wales) likely correspond to the Norwegian Viking legacy in Britain