Connection between Scandinavians, Basques, etc.

[M.O'Connor]

who's to say?

We can dream up all kinds of things. like trying to explain R1B's 393=12 in Scotland, Ireland.

Perhaps they are the most ancient people who were squeezed between the Norse I, the Irish-Scots R1B 393=13, and Romans from the south.

[NormanGalway]

I1b2 in Orkney and British isles

As Capelli's study makes clear,

http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/capelli2_CB.pdf

"Here, we note that another haplogroup (I1b2) is found almost ex-
clusively in British populations that have experienced
little or no continental genetic input (Tables 1 and S1).
Intriguingly, earlier studies have shown that it is present
in the Iberian Peninsula at low frequencies (5.4%)
The detailed sampling scheme used here identified other
and in Sardinia at a significant percentage (35.1%). This group might be another constituent of the European Paleolithic."

The point being that like R1B, I1b2 has been around for a very long time in Northwestern Europe.

[sterlingnotes]

I1c is part of I1b2

Recent SNP testing has resulted in re-classifying I1c as I1b2a.
See the new haplo-I chart here: Haplogroup I Tree

Chuck

[Eki]

Eki,

I1B2 is not found in the Middle East or Turkey. As for "Southern Europe," Latin Lover types, that is flattering but frankly you have no idea what you are talking about. I1B2 has been in Western Europe for millenia, and there is no reason to believe it hasn't been in Sweden for much if not most of that time. Just because something like I1B2 is found in very small concentrations (as it is in Ireland, Normandy, and yes -- Basque country -- where it is only 6%, does not make it "foreign.") At what point of population concentration does something become "foreign?" Native Americans (Indians) are now only found in small concentrations in the Continental US... does that make them foreign? How about in South America, where aboriginal Y-DNA signatures are almost absent?

Foreign is a loaded word, as I tried to point out earlier. Bear in mind that I1B2 is part of the same haplogroup (I) as the majority of Scandinavians!

I1B2 has been around for as LONG, LONG time -- many thousands of years. What makes you think it only traveled around in the last forty -- or four hundred? Nothing but supposition.

I do not believe you are not taking into account the immensity of time. The last few centuries are merely a drop in the bucket.

I didn't say I1b2 is found in Turkey or the Middle East. I said a large number of immigrant workers from Turkey arrived Sweden between the 1950s and 1970s, in addition to a large number of workers from Italy, Yugoslavia and Finland. I also suggested that the appearance of Turkish and Middle Eastern men often resemble the "Latin lover" appearance of some southern European men.

Why is I1a so commonly found in south Sweden (35.7%) and I1b2 so rarely (0.6%) if they have been there for the same period of time? I don't think they were so different that I1b2 had some serious disadvantage in reproducing.

I think ONE person or even 0.6% is a drop in the bucket. How do you explain the 1.5% of a I1a haplotype among Greenland Inuits? Are you saying Scandinavians had been there long before Erik the Red settled in Greenland in the 980s? You also mentioned how Native Americans have become a minority. That has happened in the last few centuries. See, a lot can happen in the last few centuries. About 60% of the Jews in Israel are foreign born (foreign here means they were born outside Israel, just to make it clear), so a lot can happen in the last 40 years as well.

[NormanGalway]

grasping at straws

Eki,

I1B2 is not found in the Middle East or Turkey. As for "Southern Europe," Latin Lover types, that is flattering but frankly you have no idea what you are talking about. I1B2 has been in Western Europe for millenia, and there is no reason to believe it hasn't been in Sweden for much if not most of that time. Just because something like I1B2 is found in very small concentrations (as it is in Ireland, Normandy, and yes -- Basque country -- where it is only 6%, does not make it "foreign.") At what point of population concentration does something become "foreign?" Native Americans (Indians) are now only found in small concentrations in the Continental US... does that make them foreign? How about in South America, where aboriginal Y-DNA signatures are almost absent?

Foreign is a loaded word, as I tried to point out earlier. Bear in mind that I1B2 is part of the same haplogroup (I) as the majority of Scandinavians!

I1B2 has been around for as LONG, LONG time -- many thousands of years. What makes you think it only traveled around in the last forty -- or four hundred? Nothing but supposition.

I do not believe you are not taking into account the immensity of time. The last few centuries are merely a drop in the bucket.

[Eki]

Yes, you'll have to search by haplotype (STRs), not SNPs to find them. I1b2 has a very clear haplotype.

YHRD has the most comprehensive data, followed by Sorenson.

The biggest genetic distance between those 7 individuals of I1b2 in the YSearch database is 9 (12 markers compared). Does that mean a very clear haplotype? What does the haplotype predictor at https://home.comcast.net/%7Ewhitathe...ictorinstr.htm say if you enter that haplotype data?

[YCCHgI]

Yes, you'll have to search by haplotype (STRs), not SNPs to find them. I1b2 has a very clear haplotype.

YHRD has the most comprehensive data, followed by Sorenson.

[Eki]

Eki,

I think you may be paying too much attention to a single study. Other online databases: Ysearch, THRD, Ybase, Sorenson, etc. show more than your "one person" with I1b2 in Sweden.

I checked Ysearch, "Search by Haplogroup" found only 7 I1b2s of 4 different surnames. They were from the USA, Italy, Spain and England. Ybase, YHRD and Sorenson don't allow searches by haplogroups, just by haplotypes (STR markers).

[Noaide]

After the black death, maybe only around 1/3 of the Norse population survived, making the country at the mercy of foreign rulers. This was followed by a massive migration from continental Europe. Thats why southern Norway, Nederlands and Germans is quite similar at the Y-DNA level.

Source: Dupuy 2005-

[QUOTE=YCCHgI]I wouldn't base your whole theory on the "one person" defense, because undoubtedly they will find more! And of course, surely one must explain why no descendants of "foreign mercenaries" are found in Norway, etc. if the mechanism which you cite is so obvious and credible.
QUOTE]

[Eki]

And of course, surely one must explain why no descendants of "foreign mercenaries" are found in Norway, etc. if the mechanism which you cite is so obvious and credible.

Simply because Norway wasn't a Great Power like Sweden around the 17th century. At that time, Norway was a northern periphery of the kingdom of Denmark, and it wasn't much of a war zone either for most of the time. Furthermore, Norway was rather poor compared to Sweden before they struck oil. They didn't have large scale industry that required a lot of immigrant workers, except maybe the fish industry in northern Norway, but I guess those jobs went mostly to Finns and not also to Italians, Yugoslavians, Turks, etc. like in the Swedish automobile industry. And it's a well known fact that many Nordic women are attracted to "Latin-lover" types from southern Europe and the Middle East. All that is needed is one passionate moment on the backseat of a Volvo

This doesn't mean there haven't been immigrants in Norway throughout the history. There have, but not as many as in Sweden and maybe not so many I1b2s, or maybe they just haven't been found yet.

[YCCHgI]

Eki,

I think you may be paying too much attention to a single study. Other online databases: Ysearch, THRD, Ybase, Sorenson, etc. show more than your "one person" with I1b2 in Sweden.

I wouldn't base your whole theory on the "one person" defense, because undoubtedly they will find more! And of course, surely one must explain why no descendants of "foreign mercenaries" are found in Norway, etc. if the mechanism which you cite is so obvious and credible.

In fact, the clade is found in North Germany and along the Belgium coast too. The Megalithic Mariner hypothesis is sounding more credible daily.

[Eki]

To Eki: you have so confused the concept of "mechanism," it is almost not worth mentioning. In your African-American example, it is clear that some I1a Norse settled in England, and some English settled in America, and some English were slaveowners, and some slaveowners had children with their slaves. That is the mechanism for I1a among African-Americans.

Pray tell, what is the mechanism for a clade present in tiny numbers, but existing in measurable size only in Spain, France, Portugal, England, Ireland, France, Italy, Sweden and arguably Belgium and Germany? It is not found elsewhere, so careful what you say! And genetic drift cannot be an acceptable explanation, because of the vast and often isolated distances involved.

School us please. We're listening.

Duh. I think I already did. Several times. It's only ONE person among 168 people from southern Sweden who were sampled. That ONE person could have his roots in stoneage Sweden OR his ancestor could have been a foreign mercenary, merchant, craftsman, etc. in the 17th century Sweden OR he could be offspring of an immigrant worker who arrived Sweden in the 1950s to assemble Saab Scania trucks in Södertälje.

And those are just few of the many possible mechanisms of how that ONE individual could have ended up in southern Sweden.

I1a has left a far greater impact on for example Greenland and parts of America, although European immigration to those parts of the World started relatively late.

[Mikey]

The fallacy is to try to connect particular genes with particular names and to whole cultures, for Scandinavia especially because the frequency of the genes is so small in and only for south Sweden. Everyone understands that the persons on Sardinia with I1b2 must have played a major part of the construction of culture, but their I1b2 genes are found in 40% of the total population.

You've GOT to be kidding me.

The whole point of this forum, te entire point of the Genographic project, the entire goal of many genealogists, is to see which cultures and which ethnic groups are connected to, and can be revealed by, the spread of a DNA signature!

When they discovered that J2, G2 and E3b came to Europe around the time agriculture did - AND that the spread of those clades mirrors EXACTLY the spread of agriculture - we ALL learned a great deal about European prehistory and European ethnicity.

As for names: names for important things, mentioned daily, rarely change. This is why "king" is similar to "konig" in German and "rex" is similar to "raja" in Sanskrit.

Finding similar names for nations themselves - located very very far away (like the non-Indo-European Basques, aka Euskadi and the pre-Indo-European Scands, aka Skadi) is significant.

Finding a genetic link between the lands (Spain & Sweden) which because of their isolation, have retained SOME pre-IE roots is also significant.

One must explain it.

I appreciate everyone's input. But I still have not heard from you a mechanism for why a Southern Italian, a Sardinian and a Spaniard share a rare clade with a Swede. You seem like a very intelligent guy, but so far you just criticize other people's theories, which is too easy.

Others have proposed mechanisms.

They include: a prehistoric seafaring people who originated near the Pyrenees and sailed from the Atlantic side of France to Ireland, England, Normandy and Sweden -- and sailed from the Mediterranean side of France to Sardinia and Italy. This is my favorite.

Perhaps plausible would be a tiny population of people from any of the lands, including Sweden, who conquered or ruled the other lands during historical times. From South Sweden came the Visigoths. They ruled all of the lands where I1b2 exists. So this is NOT an impossible theory, albeit unlikely. I think more testing needs to be done. Either way, due to the high presence of Hg I in Scandinavia, I understand how one could latch on to this theory.

It is also possible that an I* population lived somewhere and half mutated to I1b2 and half to I1c. My understanding is that these clades both stem from a common ancestor. Just a thought.

To Eki: you have so confused the concept of "mechanism," it is almost not worth mentioning. In your African-American example, it is clear that some I1a Norse settled in England, and some English settled in America, and some English were slaveowners, and some slaveowners had children with their slaves. That is the mechanism for I1a among African-Americans.

Pray tell, what is the mechanism for a clade present in tiny numbers, but existing in measurable size only in Spain, France, Portugal, England, Ireland, France, Italy, Sweden and arguably Belgium and Germany? It is not found elsewhere, so careful what you say! And genetic drift cannot be an acceptable explanation, because of the vast and often isolated distances involved.

School us please. We're listening.

[Noaide]

Saami and the Basque

YCCHgI,

There exist a possible linguistic connection between the Saami and a unknown language, possible some kind of ancient basque but for sure not indo-european or uralic. The Saami do speak a Finnic-Uralic language, but there is believed to exist a substantial substrata of an unknown language that make it impossible for lingustic to construct a proto Finnic-Saami common language.

http://lepo.it.da.ut.ee/~lillekas/mainlanguage.html

Quote:

"In accordance with this, it may be concluded that whichever the language – a Finno-Ugric or non-Finno-Ugric –, brought behind the ice field by the Lapps’ ancestors, it certainly preserved well under the conditions of isolation. After the icecap had conclusively thawed, the Lapp and Finnic language forms came into contact and a language shift actually took place – the transition of the Lapps to the Finnic language form with a strong substratum from their own earlier language form, preserved in their new language form. This supposition is backed up by the whole picture showing what happens if we observe the hopeless attempts to take Finnic and Lapp languages back to a common proto-language."

My little theory on the connection between the non-Indo-European people of Europe is far from new. Many have attempted to connect the Basques to Scands and others. The link between the Aquitani and the Basques has been conclusively established.

[Eki]

I also note the only people upset about the I1b2 in Sweden theory are Scandinavians. It's always a little hard to discuss objectively your own people, no?

I'm not upset either. I just say that one person is not hard evidence. People didn't stop migrating and reproducing in pre-historic times, they still happen. According to another statistics, 0.4% of Afro-Carribean in London and 1.5% of European-American in Pennsylvania share my I1a haplotype. Yet I don't make the conclusion that Finland was settled by Afro-Carribeans and by people from Pennsylvania. BTW, people can sometimes know more about the history of their own people because they know the local language, culture and geography, no?