Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anthropology website

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Noaide
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    The biggest expert on Norwegian Ydna, Ken Nordtvedt, doesn't think that R1b arrived later than the other y-dna haplogroups. Still you and Noaide continue to claim that it did, without coming up with any real evidence to back up your claim. Why?
    I am not a "haplonazi" as Stevo once put it. If scientists manage to give a good explanation why R1b stayed put in southern Scandinavia while I1a is seen without much companionship with R1b in northern Scandinaiva, Finland and northern Russia I have no problems to accept that R1b was among the first haplogroups to arrive in Scandinavia. My point of view is not based on haplogroup hostility but on what I see in different scientific litterature.

    Nordtvedt is probably a expert on the subject but his conclusions is not final truth and his statistical analysis is based on population data of today.

    Noaide

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    The Icelandic sagas are open to interpretations. The most logical is that Norwegians didn't cross over to Finland. Norwegians are a coastal people. They don't have a history of traveling inland. I my view if any people went back and forth in any substantial number it would probably have been the Saami.
    Also St Olaf and Harald Hardråde are said to have later used the land route from Trøndelag through Jämtland and Helsingland to the Gulf of Bothnia:

    http://www.heimskringla.no/artikler/jamtland1.php

    "I Olav den Helliges saga kap. 54 fortelles det om Olav den Helliges fiende Svein jarl at han er i Svitjod og planlegger med sveakongen å ta makta fra Olav den Hellige. Svenskekongen vil hjelpe jarlen med menn, og disse skal så dra gjennom Helsingland og Jämtland til fots for å angripe kongen i Trøndelag. Men først vil jarlen herje litt i austerveg, så han drar av gårde dit; men jarlen dør på ferden. Jarlens menn drar tilbake til Trøndelag gjennom før nevnte rute og informerer trønderne om jarlens død.I Olav den Helliges saga kap. 200 er det den landsforviste Olav selv som kommer gjennom det samme området for å vinne tilbake Norge. I Magnus den Godes saga hører vi igjen at han kommer gjennom samme område for å kreve sin arv; Norges rike.
    I Harald Hardrådes saga får vi høre at Harald selv, som var Olav den Helliges halvbror; flykter fra slaget ved Stiklestad over kjølen, gjennom Jämtland og Helsingland for å komme seg til Svitjod. "
    Last edited by Eki; 29 October 2006, 05:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    I haven't seen any detailed autosomal study that has concluded that Finns are closer to Norwegians than the Swedes.
    OK, here I'm talking about my own DNA Tribes scores: Finland 9.5, Iceland 8.8 and Norway 7.8, no Sweden detected.

    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    What archeological finds are you talking about?
    First the petty kingdoms of early Iron Age in central Sweden exemplified by Gene and Högom that had links to Trøndelag:

    http://194.165.231.32/hemma/pramqvist/hogom.html
    http://194.165.231.32/hemma/pramqvist/gene.html

    Then the so called "bird needles" from around 500 AD. They were first found
    only in Norway and in Satakunta and Ostrobothnia in Finland. Later they
    were also found in Sweden but not as many as in Norway and Finland (sorry the link in Finnish only):

    http://www.kokemaki.fi/matkailija/na...en_lintuneula/

    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    The Icelandic sagas are open to interpretations. The most logical is that Norwegians didn't cross over to Finland. Norwegians are a coastal people. They don't have a history of traveling inland. I my view if any people went back and forth in any substantial number it would probably have been the Saami.
    Norr, the founder of Norway is said to have been the son of Thorri who ruled Gotland, Kaenland and Finland:

    http://www.northvegr.org/lore/oldheathen/073.php
    http://www.stavacademy.co.uk/mimir/norway.htm

    Then there were Norwegian Thorolf and the Kvenish Faravid who fought Karelians together:

    http://www.northvegr.org/lore/egils_saga/014.php

    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    As for the so called linguistics evidence I think it is worth remembering the important fact that Finns don't even speak a Germanic languge.
    Jämtland and Ostrobothnian dialects appear to be related:

    http://web.telia.com/~u63501054/Austerbottn.html

    and Jämtland and Trøndelag dialects seem to be related:

    http://www.sprakrad.no/templates/Page.aspx?id=7973

    Logically, if Ostrrobothnian dialect is related to Jämtland dialect that is related to Trøndelag dialect, then Ostrobothnian dialect must also be related to Trøndelag dialect.

    Also Icelandic sagas tell that Jämtland was settled by Norwegians:

    http://web.telia.com/~u63501054/Saga.om.Jamtland.html

    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    The so called physical anthropology- links that you posted, all agree that the "Western Norwegian races" haven't changed.
    The most common phenotype in Norwegian coastal areas, Iceland and central Sweden is Trønder, unlike elsewhere in Sweden where it's Halstatt Nordid. There is also a Trønder Baltic approximation in Finland and Estonia:

    http://www.snpa.nordish.net/rg-tronder.htm
    Last edited by Eki; 29 October 2006, 04:50 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by Eki
    Because DNA (both Y-DNA and autosomal, and maybe even mtDNA), archeology, physical anthropology, Icelandic sagas, Finnish and Norwegian place names and linguistics seem to indicate that people from Norway migrated to western Finland through central Sweden in the Migration Period around 500 AD and they didn't have R1b among them. I think that's more reason than just Y-DNA.

    Noaide knows more about the Saami Y-DNA than I do, but I think he has said that the Saami have very little R1b but lots of I1a and R1a. I think the most likely reason for that is that R1b spread to northern Scandinavia later than I1a and R1a.
    I haven't seen any detailed autosomal study that has concluded that Finns are closer to Norwegians than the Swedes.

    What archeological finds are you talking about?

    The Icelandic sagas are open to interpretations. The most logical is that Norwegians didn't cross over to Finland. Norwegians are a coastal people. They don't have a history of traveling inland. I my view if any people went back and forth in any substantial number it would probably have been the Saami.

    As for the so called linguistics evidence I think it is worth remembering the important fact that Finns don't even speak a Germanic languge.

    The so called physical anthropology- links that you posted, all agree that the "Western Norwegian races" haven't changed.

    I have been looking at the ydna in ysearch. While it appears that some Norwegians I1a and Finns I1a may be somewhat similar at 12-marker. It appears that the similarities completely disappears at the 37-marker level. The closet match I could find (if I remember correctly) was 28/37, but most were much further off (there is btw only one 37-marker southern Indian R1a1 its closest match in Norway is 27/37). Also The Finnish I1a-un were actually much closer to finnish I1a-N than Norwegian I1a-UN at the 37-marker level, probably meaning that Finnish I1a-UN and Norwegian I1a-UN probably arose independently.

    Then there is the fact that Finns don't have much R1a1 either, and the R1a1 they do have from my experience aren't close to the Norwegian R1a1.

    Finally there isn't any evidence that lots of new people arrived in Western Norway. If you had know a little of the geography and the historical demographics of the area, you would have understood how difficult it would be to significantly change the genetic makeup of this area.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by Eki
    It's not so strange if you remember that in the Middle Ages western Norwegian towns like Bergen had a lots of Germans, Scotts, Danes and Swedes. It was the most important part of the country then. Oslo didn't become the capital until 1814 after the union with Denmark was dissolved.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo#History

    Swedes? I lived in Bergen for many years, but I never heard of Bergens Swedish quarter there. Where is that?

    It is worth remembering that Bergen only made up about 10%+ of the population, and foreigners in the city maybe about 10%+. Many of them didn't stay. Some of them had their own laws against marrying local women. And Bergen of course has a lower frequency of R1b than the nearby area...

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Stevo
    The R1bs spread centum Indo-European into North Germany and Denmark and from thence into Norway and Sweden.

    But that's still well before 500 A.D.
    Yes, but I think Old Norse preceded R1b in Norway. I think R1b came together with modern Norwegian. That's because Danish and Swedish developed straight from north Germanic but Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese went through Old Norse. Language influences can spread without exchanging genes or they can spread with mtDNA.

    http://www.danshort.com/ie/iecentum_c.shtml

    Leave a comment:


  • Stevo
    replied
    Originally posted by Eki
    Because DNA (both Y-DNA and autosomal, and maybe even mtDNA), archeology, physical anthropology, Icelandic sagas, Finnish and Norwegian place names and linguistics seem to indicate that people from Norway migrated to western Finland through central Sweden in the Migration Period around 500 AD and they didn't have R1b among them. I think that's more reason than just Y-DNA.

    Noaide knows more about the Saami Y-DNA than I do, but I think he has said that the Saami have very little R1b but lots of I1a and R1a. I think the most likely reason for that is that R1b spread to northern Scandinavia later than I1a and R1a.
    I think you may be right that R1b arrived later than I1a or N. That's probably why Finland speaks a non-Indo-European language: not enough R1b.

    The R1bs spread centum Indo-European into North Germany and Denmark and from thence into Norway and Sweden.

    But that's still well before 500 A.D.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    I find it strange that the East (Vika and the Eastern valleys that your are so concerned about) has only about 26% R1b, whereas the West + South that remaind independet has 40%+ R1b. Furthermore it has to be added that the frequency of R1b1c9 in Denmark is still unclear as far as I know (but I should think it will turn out to be high).
    It's not so strange if you remember that in the Middle Ages western Norwegian towns like Bergen had a lots of Germans, Scotts, Danes and Swedes. It was the most important part of the country then. Oslo didn't become the capital until 1814 after the union with Denmark was dissolved.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo#History

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen
    The biggest expert on Norwegian Ydna, Ken Nordtvedt, doesn't think that R1b arrived later than the other y-dna haplogroups. Still you and Noaide continue to claim that it did, without coming up with any real evidence to back up your claim. Why?
    Because DNA (both Y-DNA and autosomal, and maybe even mtDNA), archeology, physical anthropology, Icelandic sagas, Finnish and Norwegian place names and linguistics seem to indicate that people from Norway migrated to western Finland through central Sweden in the Migration Period around 500 AD and they didn't have R1b among them. I think that's more reason than just Y-DNA.

    Noaide knows more about the Saami Y-DNA than I do, but I think he has said that the Saami have very little R1b but lots of I1a and R1a. I think the most likely reason for that is that R1b spread to northern Scandinavia later than I1a and R1a.
    Last edited by Eki; 29 October 2006, 02:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by Eki
    The Cambridge History of Scandinavia says:

    "In Denmark a strong Jutish kingdom existed from eigth and into the ninth centuries. Little is known of the extent and nature of this kingdom, but at the beginning of the ninth century its rulers were overlords of Viken, the Oslofjord area of present-day Norway."

    I think this might be a good candidate for the time and place when R1b1c9 and the Halstatt Nordic phenotype arrived in Norway.

    It is a widely accepted historical truth that Vika was under Danish influence. However most historians I know about belive that the R1b-rich West and South were independent. The most realistic interpretation of the battle of Hafrsfjord I've read is that it wasn't a battle that united Norway as such, but rather a battle that helped preserve Western indepence from an invasion by the Danish puppets from the east.

    I find it strange that the East (Vika and the Eastern valleys that your are so concerned about) has only about 26% R1b, whereas the West + South that remaind independet has 40%+ R1b. Furthermore it has to be added that the frequency of R1b1c9 in Denmark is still unclear as far as I know (but I should think it will turn out to be high).

    Your entire theory is based on the websites assumption that the phenotypes arrived late, and your own assumption that R1b arrived late. As I said there isn't any correlation between the distribution of the phenotypes in Norway and distribution of R1b in Norway (quite the opposite in fact). You haven't presented any archaeological evidence that there were new arrival of settlers either (as far as I understand the Danes ruled by using local puppets, meaning few arrivals from Denmark).

    The biggest expert on Norwegian Ydna, Ken Nordtvedt, doesn't think that R1b arrived later than the other y-dna haplogroups. Still you and Noaide continue to claim that it did, without coming up with any real evidence to back up your claim. Why?

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Eki
    RootsWeb has a discussion on SNP S21, which if I've understood correctly, defines the R1bc9.

    One says it might have arrived in England with a "second Wave Neolithic arrival" after the "first wave" that brought the 3400 year old S222 (c. 1500 BC):

    http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1161830352

    Another one think it's a Danish or Anglo-Saxon subclade, although mentions Norwegian Vikings, I however believe it might have been the Danish Vikings who took it to Southern Norway, since it's not found in Ireland that was a domain of Norwegian Vikings:

    http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1161879641
    The Cambridge History of Scandinavia says:

    "In Denmark a strong Jutish kingdom existed from eigth and into the ninth centuries. Little is known of the extent and nature of this kingdom, but at the beginning of the ninth century its rulers were overlords of Viken, the Oslofjord area of present-day Norway."

    I think this might be a good candidate for the time and place when R1b1c9 and the Halstatt Nordic phenotype arrived in Norway.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    Originally posted by Noaide
    There is also some time estimates in J McWans pages.

    "R1bSTR22 aka Frisian or Germanic

    This cluster is exclusively associated with the S21+ SNP, although the SNP mutation itself is much older. It is thought to have originated in North Eastern Germany, although its centre of origin is disputed. Its estimated age of 5175 (SEM=813) yrs bp coincides best with the cultural changes that occurred around the time of the Kurgan expansion reached northern Europe."

    Noaide
    So, also according to McEwan, R1b1c9/S21 may well be Danish/Frisian/Anglo-Saxon. Then it seems to be in line with what was said about the Halstatt Nordic phenotype:

    http://www.sitesled.com/members/raci.../subraces.html

    "It has since been largely replaced in central Europe, but has found a refuge in Sweden and in the eastern valleys of southern Norway. In England this type is largely of Anglo-Saxon and Danish inspiration."

    Leave a comment:


  • Stevo
    replied
    The percentages of S21+ found for example in a Norfolk village (50%) is precisely what one might expect if there was a mixed aboriginal Celt (presumably in the R1b arena R1b1c*), Anglo - Saxon, and Danish Viking contribution.
    That sounds like a David Faux quote. Faux sometimes thinks of R1b1c* as its own subclade, which is ridiculous.

    That little asterisk simply means that its possessor has tested positive for M269 but negative for all the currently known R1b1c SNPs beyond it.

    That's all it means. Since it is a great unknown, IT CANNOT POSSIBLY be used as an indicator of "mixed aboriginal Celt" status or anything else that definite.

    A few years ago all the current R1b1c7s, R1b1c9s, and R1b1c10s were R1b1c* because no one yet knew about the SNPs that define those subclades.

    Likewise, the current crop of R1b1c*s are probably simply waiting for the discovery of the SNP that defines their subclades, and no one yet knows how many or how few of them there may be or with what populations and geographic locations they may be associated.

    Dr. Faux has a tendency to ueber-glorify his own subclade (R1b1c10) at the expense of all the rest. Thus far he has claimed R1b1c10s (S28+) are Cimbri and Charudes from Denmark, Cimmerians from the Eurasian Steppe, and Danish and Norwegian Vikings. Notice a kind of overly heroic trend there? I suspect they will turn up as Marvel Comics superheroes next.

    These are just my own observations, as well as the expression of a pet peeve and my annoyance at some of what Dr. Faux has posted recently on the Rootsweb DNA List.

    Leave a comment:


  • Noaide
    replied
    There is also some time estimates in J McWans pages.

    "R1bSTR22 aka Frisian or Germanic

    This cluster is exclusively associated with the S21+ SNP, although the SNP mutation itself is much older. It is thought to have originated in North Eastern Germany, although its centre of origin is disputed. Its estimated age of 5175 (SEM=813) yrs bp coincides best with the cultural changes that occurred around the time of the Kurgan expansion reached northern Europe."

    Noaide

    Leave a comment:


  • Eki
    replied
    RootsWeb has a discussion on SNP S21, which if I've understood correctly, defines the R1bc9.

    One says it might have arrived in England with a "second Wave Neolithic arrival" after the "first wave" that brought the 3400 year old S222 (c. 1500 BC):

    http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1161830352

    Another one think it's a Danish or Anglo-Saxon subclade, although mentions Norwegian Vikings, I however believe it might have been the Danish Vikings who took it to Southern Norway, since it's not found in Ireland that was a domain of Norwegian Vikings:

    http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1161879641

    "Based on the data we have including a lot of academic - published samples we have tested, I need to re-iterate that there is scant evidence that S21 was in the British Isles prior to the Anglo - Saxon invasions. The percentages of S21+ found for example in a Norfolk village (50%) is precisely what one might expect if there was a mixed aboriginal Celt (presumably in the R1b arena R1b1c*), Anglo - Saxon, and Danish Viking contribution. Don't forget that in the Anglo - Saxon surrogate communities in Friesland (their language being the closest to old English and this is a region documented to have contributed to the migrations of the 5th Century) are about 75% S21+. All this appears to add up to S21 being an Continental invasion marker. Although only seen to date in one Irish sample (which is very telling), when observed it is almost guaranteed to signal an Anglo - Saxon descendant or Norse Viking (S21 being about two thirds of R1b in Norway). There may however be some Belgae S21 pockets in Ireland yet to be discovered."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X