# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups > I1 >  New I1 map

## Maciamo

I have revised my map of haplogroup I1, adding a new category of colour for regions with 1 to 5% of I1, so as to distinguish them clearly from those with under 1% of I1. I have also added the hotspots around Slovenia, Macedonia, Central Ukraine, and northern Sicily. 

I was able to give a more accurate representation for Sicily and Crete thanks to the more detailed studies of these islands by Di Gaetano et al. 2009 (Sicily) and Martinez et al. 2007 (Crete). The eastern part of both islands completely lacked I1.

Iberia is one of the most difficult part of the map. Whereas the Asturias, Galicia, Portugal and Extremadura have undeniably more than 1% of I1, and the Basque country, northern Castilla, Murcia and Andalusia less than 1%, I have conflicting data for Castilla-La-Mancha, Valencia and Aragon. Adams et al. give about 5% of I1 in Aragon (n=34), but Iberianroots gives 0% (n=74). In Valencia, Adams et al. reported 2.2% (n=73) of I1, but Iberianroots still has 0% (n=77). In Castilla La Mancha, Adams et al. has 0% (n=63), while Iberianroots has 2.6% (n=77). 

Please let me know if you notice any possible errors (and please provide link to studies that contradict the data, not just hearsay or personal opinions). Keep in mind that the map remains quite approximate.

----------


## Frank

Well, Northern Portugal has 4-5% and Asturias about 4% :

http://iberianroots.com/statistics/i...peninsula.html

----------


## Maciamo

> Well, Northern Portugal has 4-5% and Asturias about 4% :
> 
> http://iberianroots.com/statistics/i...peninsula.html


That's what the map says too. +1% means "more than 1%" (and as much as 5%).

----------


## Frank

> That's what the map says too. +1% means "more than 1%" (and as much as 5%).


 Some spot areas of Northern Portugal and Galicia have reported 6-12% of I1, i'll try to find later.

----------


## sparkey

Where are you getting your data for I1 frequencies in different regions of Britain? It seems unexpected, for example, that Kent is as low as Devon in its I1 levels, considering that Devonians cluster closely with the Cornish and Kent not so much in studies like Oppenheimer. I would expect Kent to be consistent with the rest of East England, especially because they are thought to be descendants of Jutes, but I don't have any studies on hand that would contradict you right now.

----------


## LeBrok

It is an interesting situation for Poland, specially for a region of Pomerania, north-west Poland. After WW2 most Germans from Pomerania were resettled to Germany, most new population in this region came from Poles from west Ukraine, west Belarus, and south Lithuania. Looking at the map one wouldn't be able to conclude this.
Is your map showing situation before WW2 or recent?

----------


## LeBrok

The 5% by Black Sea might be footprint of Goths, same as on I2b map.
Interesting is that I1 doesn't show on east coast of Greece like on I2b map, supposedly associated with Goths.
Another interesting thing is the trail and a spot in Macedonia. 
Maybe Macedonians were mostly I1 proto Germanic tribe?
I wonder if we get more precise map of R1b, if R1b will correlates with Macedonian I1 hot spot?

----------


## Maciamo

> It is an interesting situation for Poland, specially for a region of Pomerania, north-west Poland. After WW2 most Germans from Pomerania were resettled to Germany, most new population in this region came from Poles from west Ukraine, west Belarus, and south Lithuania. Looking at the map one wouldn't be able to conclude this.
> Is your map showing situation before WW2 or recent?


That's a good question. I didn't collect the data nor meet the people whose DNA was tested, so I don't know whether they were chosen because they lived there now or because their ancestors came from there. As there are many studies involved, it might be a bit of both. Then if you look at the situation 500 years ago (as mentioned on the maps on 23andMe), or 1000 years ago, it wouldn't be that different than after the Germans left Poland after WWII, as the German Duchy of Pomerania was only founded in the 12th century and Germans moved little by little to the region over the centuries.

Even if German speaking people left Poland and the Baltic, their genetic influence is still surely around. Hybrid couples (German + local) would have had children who could have remained German speakers or turned native. If they married locals, there is a good chance that they would have become locals themselves, especially after many centuries. That's probably why many Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians have a minority of German haplogroups among them, even if autosomally they are not really German.

----------


## Maciamo

> The 5% by Black Sea might be footprint of Goths, same as on I2b map.
> Interesting is that I1 doesn't show on east coast of Greece like on I2b map, supposedly associated with Goths.
> Another interesting thing is the trail and a spot in Macedonia. 
> Maybe Macedonians were mostly I1 proto Germanic tribe?
> I wonder if we get more precise map of R1b, if R1b will correlates with Macedonian I1 hot spot?


I wouldn't think too hard about this one. I think that discrepancy between the I1 hotspot and the I2b hotspot around Epirus-Albania-Macedonia is just due to small sampling size (especially in Epirus). Actually I don't have the study showing that Epirus has 3-4% of I2b. It's solely based on an older I2b map. But Thessaly had 3.5% of I2b in King et al. 2008.

----------


## Emi

My father's an I1*, and he is from the Black Sea Coast of Turkey. We always thought he was Pontus, aka "Rum" (Roman), even though my grandfather never spoke Greek or the Rum dialect, and he was a Muslim. Now I'm thinking the rare occurrence of I1 in Turkey might be related to Alexander the Great. Any thoughts?

----------


## sparkey

> My father's an I1*, and he is from the Black Sea Coast of Turkey. We always thought he was Pontus, aka "Rum" (Roman), even though my grandfather never spoke Greek or the Rum dialect, and he was a Muslim. Now I'm thinking the rare occurrence of I1 in Turkey might be related to Alexander the Great. Any thoughts?


I1 is a relatively young haplogroup in terms of its MRCA (about 4200 years old) and probably didn't spread significantly throughout Europe until the Migration Period. Its highest concentrations are definitely among North Germanic peoples, followed by West Germanic peoples and descendants of East Germanic peoples. You'll probably see a pattern there, and it's not Macedonian. There is an interesting concentration of I1 in northern Greece (more than 5%) but my guess is that most of it got there around the same time as most of it got to Anatolia. There are multiple ways your particular line could have gotten to Anatolia, but the most common case is probably descent from the Goths.

----------


## Emi

I don't think I'm convinced yet about the extent of long-term Goth influence in the Black Sea area of Turkey. Just because a certain group of people has conducted campaigns in a region, does it necessarily indicate they settled in the area for long enough to pass on their DNAs, for thousands of more years? I suppose it depends on whether they wanted to "populate" the local population, just expand territory, or reach another destination. So, their admixture would really depend on their original intent to spread. Please bear in mind, I'm by no means well versed in this subject.

As far as the Black Sea goes, I do not consider the region as Anatolia, ethnically nor historically. The region has a distinctive climate, geography [little arable/grazing land], making it more suitable to seafarers. Any major port on the Black Sea, you'll find Genoan (Genoese?) forts for instance. Here's a map I found that shows where they spread and established commercial/military relationships. Looks like they did settle in Crimea. 

http://www.turkcebilgi.com/cenevizli...i-genova#resim

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> I have revised my map of haplogroup I1, adding a new category of colour for regions with 1 to 5% of I1, so as to distinguish them clearly from those with under 1% of I1. I have also added the hotspots around Slovenia, Macedonia,Central Ukraine, and northern Sicily. 
> 
> I was able to give a more accurate representation for Sicily and Crete thanks to the more detailed studies of these islands by Di Gaetano et al. 2009 (Sicily) and Martinez et al. 2007 (Crete). The eastern part of both islands completely lacked I1.
> 
> Iberia is one of the most difficult part of the map. Whereas the Asturias, Galicia, Portugal and Extremadura have undeniably more than 1% of I1, and the Basque country, northern Castilla, Murcia and Andalusia less than 1%, I have conflicting data for Castilla-La-Mancha, Valencia and Aragon. Adams et al. give about 5% of I1 in Aragon (n=34), but Iberianroots gives 0% (n=74). In Valencia, Adams et al. reported 2.2% (n=73) of I1, but Iberianroots still has 0% (n=77). In Castilla La Mancha, Adams et al. has 0% (n=63), while Iberianroots has 2.6% (n=77). 
> 
> Please let me know if you notice any possible errors (and please provide link to studies that contradict the data, not just hearsay or personal opinions). Keep in mind that the map remains quite approximate.



According to Beleza et al. (2005-2006) your I1 averges for Portugal appear substantially off.

Here are the Beleza et al. figures based on over 650 samples:

AVERAGE NATIONWIDE I1b = 6.1%

AVERAGE NATIONWIDE I1b2 = 1.5%

The regional figures are:

NORTH (Minho and Entre Douro) I1b = 7.5% and I1b2 = 0.9%.

NORTH (Tras-os-Montes) I1b = 9.4% and I1b2 = 4.7%.

CENTRAL-NORTH (Beira Litoral) I1b = 3.4% and I1b2 = 0.9%.

CENTRAL-NORTH (Beira Interior) I1b = 3.5% and I1b2 = 0.

CENTRAL (Extremadura) I1b = 9.3 and I1b2 = 4.7%

CENTRAL-SOUTH (Lisbon and Setubal) I1b = 1.6% and I1b2 = 0

SOUTH (Alentejo) I1b = 7.7% and I1b2 = 3.1%.

SOUTH (Algarve) I1b = 4.8% and I1b2 = 0%.

Based on this research - which I believe is the latest comprehensive Y-DNA halogroup study for Portugal - your Y-DNA tables may require some revision.

The highest frequencies of I1b and I1b2 combined were found in the Braga region (17.7%) and Braganca (16.0%).

Ref: 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...05.00221.x/pdf

----------


## Knovas

Good post. Probably Galicia show very similar proportions, it's bad not to have information about it.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

I would say much of north-western, central and northern Spain may have similar frequencies. In fact, there is a I (Y-DNA) hotspot in Castilla.

----------


## Wilhelm

But isn't I1b the old nomenclature for I2 ?

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

Don't know. Still, according to the Beleza et al. results, the I (Y-DNA) frequencies for Portugal on Eupedia are not correct.

I1b is associated with Slavic peoples, among others.

----------


## Maciamo

> According to Beleza et al. (2005-2006) your I1 averges for Portugal appear substantially off.
> 
> Here are the Beleza et al. figures based on over 650 samples:
> 
> AVERAGE NATIONWIDE I1b = 6.1%
> 
> AVERAGE NATIONWIDE I1b2 = 1.5%
> 
> The regional figures are:
> ...


Don't waste your time, I don't use tiny samples for one province. I make averages for wider regions (e.g. North Portugal) using all data for all studies.

----------


## Taranis

> I1 is a relatively young haplogroup in terms of its MRCA (about 4200 years old) and probably didn't spread significantly throughout Europe until the Migration Period. Its highest concentrations are definitely among North Germanic peoples, followed by West Germanic peoples and descendants of East Germanic peoples. You'll probably see a pattern there, and it's not Macedonian. There is an interesting concentration of I1 in northern Greece (more than 5%) but my guess is that most of it got there around the same time as most of it got to Anatolia. There are multiple ways your particular line could have gotten to Anatolia, but the most common case is probably descent from the Goths.


Yes, Haplogroup I1 _itself_ appears to be Chalcolithic in age, even though Haplogroup I _as a whole_ is probably Mesolithic in age (we know that I2a was present in the Neolithic in the Atlantic region, thereby making Haplogoup I a probably candidate for a Mesolithic European haplogroup). From this perspective, it would seem most plausible that I1 is essentially a single surviving male lineage that coincidentially survived inside a population of otherwise Chalcolithic newcomers. The case for this discontinuity can also be made elsewhere.

The question is, can the spread of Haplogroup I be solely explained by the migrations period and by the spread of the Germanic peoples? Even though without a doubt the Haplogroup was spread by the Germanic peoples, I'm not quite convinced that the distribution pattern we see can be solely explained by this. In particular, there is a significant percentage amongst the Finnic peoples which in my opinion can not be explained solely through interaction with the Vikings (we are talking about some of the highest frequencies of the Haplogroup here, after all). Another issue is the surprisingly high concentrations in the Atlantic region, especially in Ireland, Wales and on the Iberian pennsula. While it would be possible to attribute this to the Vikings (in Ireland) and the Suebi (in Galicia), I would ask the question if it is possible that there a _small_ Celtic component to Haplogroup I1 as well. Specifically, if Haplogroup I1 was already present in Central Europe by the start of the iron age, and subsequently spread with the Hallstatt and La-Tene Cultures, this would better explain some of the distribution patterns we see in the Atlantic region (as well as in some other areas, such as along the Danube), rather than if we solely assume a spread by the Germanic peoples during the Migration Period.

The reason I ask this is because the distribution in Iberia corresponds better with the maximum extend of Celtic influence on the Iberian penninsula (3rd century BC) than it does with Germanic influence (the Suebi are often cited as the source of I1 in Iberia). However, what about the Visigoths, why were they not such significant bearers of I1 if the Suebi were?

----------


## sparkey

Good post as usual, Taranis. Naturally, I'm not going to defend a 100% Migration Period spread of I1, I think that even though it is very young and its spread is quite recent in the grand scheme of things, it must have had some sort of an earlier spread as well. 4200 years ago predates the Nordic Bronze Age, which I suspect is where it was confined to at one point, but you obviously can't keep it all in one place. I don't think that it was a major haplogroup among proto-Celtic peoples, although it must have been a minor one after some point; similarly, it looks like it could have been a significant contributing population to modern Finnic peoples. Probably, whatever original I1 among them is representative of the contribution of the Nordic Bronze Age diaspora within them (I really have trouble imagining that the contribution could have come earlier than the Nordic Bronze Age--although I suppose that it is possible).

Still, the correlation between I1 and Germanic peoples remains one of the better correlations between Y-DNA haplogroups and language families. And it still seems to me that Anatolian and Black Sea I1 maps best to East Germanic peoples. There could be earlier I1 there as well, but if we're talking the most likely origin of a given I1 sample, that seems to me to be it.

----------


## LeBrok

> The reason I ask this is because the distribution in Iberia corresponds better with the maximum extend of Celtic influence on the Iberian penninsula (3rd century BC) than it does with Germanic influence (the Suebi are often cited as the source of I1 in Iberia). However, what about the Visigoths, why were they not such significant bearers of I1 if the Suebi were?


I've asked myself the same question too. One of the options is that Suebi came directly and quickly from Germania to Portugal, and Goths were wondering around Europe for almost one thousand years. Possibly long enough to get their I1 substantially deluded. Also most Visigoths left for Africa, but Suebi stayed in Portugal for ever, completely giving their I1 to locals.

----------


## Taranis

> Good post as usual, Taranis. Naturally, I'm not going to defend a 100% Migration Period spread of I1, I think that even though it is very young and its spread is quite recent in the grand scheme of things, it must have had some sort of an earlier spread as well. 4200 years ago predates the Nordic Bronze Age, which I suspect is where it was confined to at one point, but you obviously can't keep it all in one place. I don't think that it was a major haplogroup among proto-Celtic peoples, although it must have been a minor one after some point; similarly, it looks like it could have been a significant contributing population to modern Finnic peoples. Probably, whatever original I1 among them is representative of the contribution of the Nordic Bronze Age diaspora within them (I really have trouble imagining that the contribution could have come earlier than the Nordic Bronze Age--although I suppose that it is possible).


Thank you.  :Smile: 

My point with the Atlantic region is that it would not have needed to ever have been any major component, nor that it would necessarily have arrived with the Proto-Celts in the Atlantic region, it would have been sufficient if I1 arrived in Central Europe by the Bronze Age and spread from there subsequently. I just noted that there _may_ be a small Celtic component to I1, which would explain the approximately 1-5% of I1 we find in certain areas that saw considerable Celtic but negligible Germanic influence.




> Still, the correlation between I1 and Germanic peoples remains one of the better correlations between Y-DNA haplogroups and language families. And it still seems to me that Anatolian and Black Sea I1 maps best to East Germanic peoples. There could be earlier I1 there as well, but if we're talking the most likely origin of a given I1 sample, that seems to me to be it.


Otherwise, I absolutely I agree that the main correlation is between I1 and the Germanic peoples, and that this explains the bulk of the patterns we see.




> I've asked myself the same question too. One of the options is that Suebi came directly and quickly from Germania to Portugal, and Goths were wondering around Europe for almost one thousand years. Possibly long enough to get their I1 substantially deluded. Also most Visigoths left for Africa, but Suebi stayed in Portugal for ever, completely giving their I1 to locals.


This is also a possibility, especially considering the intermingling of the Goths already before the migration period. Just a small nitpick though, the Visigoths didn't leave for Africa, it was the Vandals who did that. The Visigoths were the ones who ended up controlling virtually the entire Iberian penninsula at the eve of the invasion by the Umayyad Caliphate.

----------


## zanipolo

> Thank you. 
> 
> My point with the Atlantic region is that it would not have needed to ever have been any major component, nor that it would necessarily have arrived with the Proto-Celts in the Atlantic region, it would have been sufficient if I1 arrived in Central Europe by the Bronze Age and spread from there subsequently. I just noted that there _may_ be a small Celtic component to I1, which would explain the approximately 1-5% of I1 we find in certain areas that saw considerable Celtic but negligible Germanic influence.
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise, I absolutely I agree that the main correlation is between I1 and the Germanic peoples, and that this explains the bulk of the patterns we see.
> 
> 
> ...


vandal haplogroup was I2a1. Sardinians have a very high HG I in them, and it was related with Germanics/Vandals or other northern europeans.
Since we can work backwards from Sardinia, then we can confirm that the I2 is eastern germanic, while I1 is western germanic ( I excluded nordic at this time) .
The vandals would have been the Vendenae ( swedish word for vandal is Vendel) , which comprised of the east germanic Lugii tribe and bastarnae tribe, while the Goths once eliminating the Aestii, Venedi and Rugii , baltic tribes ( these became known as the Vidivarii in 200AD ) would be I1 ( same as nordic and western germanic tribes.)

http://www.duerinck.com/goths.html

----------


## Jacker22

> vandal haplogroup was I2a1. Sardinians have a very high HG I in them, and it was related with Germanics/Vandals or other northern europeans.
> Since we can work backwards from Sardinia, then we can confirm that the I2 is eastern germanic, while I1 is western germanic ( I excluded nordic at this time) .


Are you saying that Sardinians are Germanic people ? They have the darkest hair in Europe, darker even than North Africa. Not an ounce of Germanicity.

----------


## zanipolo

> Are you saying that Sardinians are Germanic people ? They have the darkest hair in Europe, darker even than North Africa. Not an ounce of Germanicity.


I am saying that vandals ( east germanic ) inhabited sardinia, later it was the Aragonese ( catalans) , Spaniards, italians and before all of that, it was the phoenicians/carthagians and romans. The I haplo mark is the vandal mark. Thats what I am saying.

Besides, the aragonese associated with navarra people in the pyrennes, a basque people would have mixed and settled with the aragonese in sardinia in the early middle ages.

This colour hair issue is a joke, I see black haired germans, red haired, so what

----------


## Taranis

> vandal haplogroup was I2a1. Sardinians have a very high HG I in them, and it was related with Germanics/Vandals or other northern europeans.
> Since we can work backwards from Sardinia, then we can confirm that the I2 is eastern germanic, while I1 is western germanic ( I excluded nordic at this time) .
> The vandals would have been the Vendenae ( swedish word for vandal is Vendel) , which comprised of the east germanic Lugii tribe and bastarnae tribe, while the Goths once eliminating the Aestii, Venedi and Rugii , baltic tribes ( these became known as the Vidivarii in 200AD ) would be I1 ( same as nordic and western germanic tribes.)
> 
> http://www.duerinck.com/goths.html


Sorry, just no. There is no reason what so ever to assume that I2a is associated with Germanic peoples. Certainly not in Sardinia.

----------


## zanipolo

> Sorry, just no. There is no reason what so ever to assume that I2a is associated with Germanic peoples. Certainly not in Sardinia.


If its not a vandal mark, then I2a P-37 which is in sardinia is the most common mark for the illyrians.

It cannot be phoenician, greek or levant.

The only other is goth but they have no P-37

----------


## Knovas

Sardinians are really rare. Even in admixture analysis there's nothing clear on them, except for the fact they appear to hold the largest Southern European genetic in average (although the proportions are truly unknown).

Acording to Eupedia I2a1 originated in Sardinia. However, I think that the Pyrenees are the most likely place to explain its origin and expansion. The high presence in Sardinia is the result of an ancient bottleneck in my opinion, nothing else. There must be sources talking about this, since the information showed at 23andme clearly opts for the origin in the Pyrenees.

----------


## Taranis

> If its not a vandal mark, then I2a P-37 which is in sardinia is the most common mark for the illyrians.
> 
> It cannot be phoenician, greek or levant.
> 
> The only other is goth but they have no P-37


What? Why should it be now Illyrian? That's just making it worse. The Vandals were in Sardinia at least for a (short) while, while the Illyrians never were there. I think the obvious solution is that Sardinian I is a leftover from the island's "aboriginal" population (I know the term is problematic, but in the context of Sardinian I am thinking of the Nuraghic Civilization).

----------


## sparkey

The type of haplogroup I in Sardinia (I2a1a) would almost certainly have been the most common type of haplogroup I during the Neolithic, considering that it has the oldest TMRCA of any of the major haplogroup I branches, and that it has been found significantly in ancient DNA samples together with G2a. Its apparent correlation with G2a in some cases, combined with the high G2a in Sardinia (15%, the highest in Europe), make me think that it spread as early as the Neolithic into Sardinia alongside G2a with the expansion of farming into the region. A slightly later migration corresponding with the Nuragic civilization is also possible.

----------


## Maciamo

> Sorry, just no. There is no reason what so ever to assume that I2a is associated with Germanic peoples. Certainly not in Sardinia.


I completely agree. Besides, haplogroup I2a1, the type found in Sardinia, was already in south-west Europe during the Neolithic, as the ancient DNA from Treilles in Languedoc attests.

----------


## Maciamo

> Where are you getting your data for I1 frequencies in different regions of Britain? It seems unexpected, for example, that Kent is as low as Devon in its I1 levels, considering that Devonians cluster closely with the Cornish and Kent not so much in studies like Oppenheimer. I would expect Kent to be consistent with the rest of East England, especially because they are thought to be descendants of Jutes, but I don't have any studies on hand that would contradict you right now.


Sorry for the late reply. The lower frequency of I1 in Kent comes from Capelli et al. 2003

----------


## zanipolo

> What? Why should it be now Illyrian? That's just making it worse. The Vandals were in Sardinia at least for a (short) while, while the Illyrians never were there. I think the obvious solution is that Sardinian I is a leftover from the island's "aboriginal" population (I know the term is problematic, but in the context of Sardinian I am thinking of the Nuraghic Civilization).


I read the Eupedia recommended book

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive.../t-26476.html?

which states , that the Illyrian ( messapic )and sardinian langauges are the same and that this was due to illyrian immigration into sardinia. The Illyrians as per Roman historians where the best mariners they encounted. The Romans even copied the Illyrian ships because they where so good.

----------


## Taranis

> I read the Eupedia recommended book
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive.../t-26476.html?
> 
> which states , that the Illyrian ( messapic )and sardinian langauges are the same and that this was due to illyrian immigration into sardinia. The Illyrians as per Roman historians where the best mariners they encounted. The Romans even copied the Illyrian ships because they where so good.


That book looks to me like complete fabrication and fantasy especially because the book makes the tentative connection between Albanians and Illyrians (which in my opinion, is not the case, because Albanian is a Satem language, and links should be sought towards Dacian or Thracian, and not Illyrian). Furthermoe, there is no evidence whatsoever for Illyrian names in Sardinia. Beside, it would make no sense from the geographic perspective: how could there be Illyrians in Sardinia if they never settled in Italy, either.

Maciamo brought up the very good point that I2a1 has also been found at the Neolithic site of Treilles. It is far more probable hence that Sardinian I2a1 is indeed of Neolithic origin, which in turn _also_ makes a connection between I2a1 and the Nuraghic civilization of Sardinia fairly probable.

----------


## zanipolo

> That book looks to me like complete fabrication and fantasy especially because the book makes the tentative connection between Albanians and Illyrians (which in my opinion, is not the case, because Albanian is a Satem language, and links should be sought towards Dacian or Thracian, and not Illyrian). Furthermoe, there is no evidence whatsoever for Illyrian names in Sardinia. Beside, it would make no sense from the geographic perspective: how could there be Illyrians in Sardinia if they never settled in Italy, either.
> 
> Maciamo brought up the very good point that I2a1 has also been found at the Neolithic site of Treilles. It is far more probable hence that Sardinian I2a1 is indeed of Neolithic origin, which in turn _also_ makes a connection between I2a1 and the Nuraghic civilization of Sardinia fairly probable.


what do you mean never settled in Italy - messapic are illyrian in apulia, North picene are illyrian and later celtic mix ( semones) in Romagna Italy. 
My theory that Veneti ( adriatic ) where originally Illyrian as per town names, carni in Friuli although later turned celtic .............anyway its irrelevant for the discussion if you think that book is a sham

----------


## Taranis

> what do you mean never settled in Italy - messapic are illyrian in apulia, North picene are illyrian and later celtic mix ( semones) in Romagna Italy. My theory that Veneti ( adriatic ) where originally Illyrian as per town names, carni in Friuli although later turned celtic


Sorry, but my statement that there is no evidence for Illyrian languages in Italy holds. Yes, Messapic clearly was a non-Italic language, yes, but I don't think a connection with the Illyrian languages is necessary. With North Picene, it is not even sure if the language was actually Indo-European. Likewise, the Veneti were distinct from the Illyrians as well.




> .............anyway its irrelevant for the discussion if you think that book is a sham


It should be pretty obvious that the book is sham, shouldn't it? I mean, the author explicitly uses the wording "_Albanian_". This only makes sense if the author has some kind of a weird nationalist agenda.

----------


## flupke

> I have revised my map of haplogroup I1, 
> 
> I


Dear Maciamo,
I would have expected Belgium and Northern France (Nord, pas de Calais: Saxons, Franks, Frisians + Danes) to be around 15% and Normandy (Danes+ Franks) + Picardy (Franks) to be around 10%.
Mertens even put 20% I1 in the flemish population
Journal of Genetic Genealogy, 3(2):19-25, 2007
Y-Haplogroup Frequencies in the Flemish Population
Gerhard Mertens

----------


## Eldritch

> It should be pretty obvious that the book is sham, shouldn't it? I mean, the author explicitly uses the wording "_Albanian_". This only makes sense if the author has some kind of a weird nationalist agenda.


How can this be true when the author itself is Sardinian?

----------


## MOESAN

> Dear Maciamo,
> I would have expected Belgium and Northern France (Nord, pas de Calais: Saxons, Franks, Frisians + Danes) to be around 15% and Normandy (Danes+ Franks) + Picardy (Franks) to be around 10%.
> Mertens even put 20% I1 in the flemish population
> Journal of Genetic Genealogy, 3(2):19-25, 2007
> Y-Haplogroup Frequencies in the Flemish Population
> Gerhard Mertens


_in a survey about Y DNA in germanic-sepaking Belgium, I red:
Y-I1: 
minimum: Limburg: 5,7% (small sample: nb: 70)
more often, between 11,2% in Western Antwerpen (nb: 80) and 21,2% in Oost-Antwerpen-Kempen (nb: 86) - in ~middle: 15,7% in West Vlanderen (nb: 141)
total dutch speaking Belgium: I1 = 13,3% (nb 695: serious enough)
I recall East England shows some regions about 25 to 33% of Y-I1
_

----------


## MOESAN

> That book looks to me like complete fabrication and fantasy especially because the book makes the tentative connection between Albanians and Illyrians (which in my opinion, is not the case, because Albanian is a Satem language, and links should be sought towards Dacian or Thracian, and not Illyrian). Furthermoe, there is no evidence whatsoever for Illyrian names in Sardinia. Beside, it would make no sense from the geographic perspective: how could there be Illyrians in Sardinia if they never settled in Italy, either.
> 
> Maciamo brought up the very good point that I2a1 has also been found at the Neolithic site of Treilles. It is far more probable hence that Sardinian I2a1 is indeed of Neolithic origin, which in turn _also_ makes a connection between I2a1 and the Nuraghic civilization of Sardinia fairly probable.


_
I think Bertrand said that illiryan is poorly known because of mixings with more northern W-balkanic languages more akin to venetic, he seams considering genuine S-Illyrian as a satem language - what is true? maybe I red in a wrong way?_

----------


## Jackson

> _in a survey about Y DNA in germanic-sepaking Belgium, I red:
> Y-I1: 
> minimum: Limburg: 5,7% (small sample: nb: 70)
> more often, between 11,2% in Western Antwerpen (nb: 80) and 21,2% in Oost-Antwerpen-Kempen (nb: 86) - in ~middle: 15,7% in West Vlanderen (nb: 141)
> total dutch speaking Belgium: I1 = 13,3% (nb 695: serious enough)
> I recall East England shows some regions about 25 to 33% of Y-I1
> _


There might be some more information on this after the y-dna results of the POBI project are all sorted out (which might be some time). They also used many mainland European samples too (a couple of thousand or more?) - including from France, Belgium and the Netherlands - so if they split it up by region as they probably will with the British samples, this will give even more figures to play with.

----------


## Taranis

> How can this be true when the author itself is Sardinian?


Well, it kind of suggests itself. The author makes incomprehensible claims that make only sense if one has the _foregone conclusion_ that the Nuragic civilization _must_ be originating from Illyria. The claim is additionally outlandish because there's plenty of genetic evidence linking Sardinia and the Neolithic:


- modern Sardinians have a mixture of mainly G2a and I2, a composition which has also been found at Treilles.


- Ötzi was a bearer of G2a, and amongst modern populations, he plots autosomally closest to Sardinians.


- Sardinian I2 is almost exclusively I2a1a (M26), which outside of Sardinian is chiefly found in continental western Europe (notably the Basques), and not I2a1b (M423), which is dominant on the Balkans.


In summary, from the genetic perspective, all of this traces back into the Neolithic, and nothing points towards a connection with the Balkans. This is complemented by archaeology (one should call to mind that the Talaiotic and Torrean cultures existed on the Balearic Isles and on Corsica, respectively, and this was contemporary to the Nuragic culture of Sardinia). Also, Albanian (regardless of wether it is descended from Illyrian or not) is an Indo-European language, whereas the Paleo-Sardinian language (or languages) certainly wasn't.

----------


## Greying Wanderer

> Yes, Haplogroup I1 _itself_ appears to be Chalcolithic in age, even though Haplogroup I _as a whole_ is probably Mesolithic in age (we know that I2a was present in the Neolithic in the Atlantic region, thereby making Haplogoup I a probably candidate for a Mesolithic European haplogroup). From this perspective, it would seem most plausible that I1 is essentially a single surviving male lineage that coincidentially survived inside a population of otherwise Chalcolithic newcomers. The case for this discontinuity can also be made elsewhere.
> 
> The question is, can the spread of Haplogroup I be solely explained by the migrations period and by the spread of the Germanic peoples? Even though without a doubt the Haplogroup was spread by the Germanic peoples, I'm not quite convinced that the distribution pattern we see can be solely explained by this. In particular, there is a significant percentage amongst the Finnic peoples which in my opinion can not be explained solely through interaction with the Vikings (we are talking about some of the highest frequencies of the Haplogroup here, after all). Another issue is the surprisingly high concentrations in the Atlantic region, especially in Ireland, Wales and on the Iberian pennsula. While it would be possible to attribute this to the Vikings (in Ireland) and the Suebi (in Galicia), I would ask the question if it is possible that there a _small_ Celtic component to Haplogroup I1 as well. Specifically, if Haplogroup I1 was already present in Central Europe by the start of the iron age, and subsequently spread with the Hallstatt and La-Tene Cultures, this would better explain some of the distribution patterns we see in the Atlantic region (as well as in some other areas, such as along the Danube), rather than if we solely assume a spread by the Germanic peoples during the Migration Period.
> 
> The reason I ask this is because the distribution in Iberia corresponds better with the maximum extend of Celtic influence on the Iberian penninsula (3rd century BC) than it does with Germanic influence (the Suebi are often cited as the source of I1 in Iberia). However, what about the Visigoths, why were they not such significant bearers of I1 if the Suebi were?


"The question is, can the spread of Haplogroup I be solely explained by the migrations period and by the spread of the Germanic peoples? ...Another issue is the surprisingly high concentrations in the Atlantic region, especially in Ireland, Wales and on the Iberian pennsula."

I don't think I1 is Germanic exactly. I think I represents people descended from those Mesolithic foragers who managed the transition to farming before being swamped by the farmers hence lots of small hotspots of I in remote and/or mountainous regions. I1 appears to correlate more with Germanic because the later German expansions spread one of those hotspots like a glacier taking stones from one region and moving them hundreds of miles away.

----------


## sparkey

> I don't think I1 is Germanic exactly. I think I represents people descended from those Mesolithic foragers who managed the transition to farming before being swamped by the farmers hence lots of small hotspots of I in remote and/or mountainous regions. I1 appears to correlate more with Germanic because the later German expansions spread one of those hotspots like a glacier taking stones from one region and moving them hundreds of miles away.


It's not mutually exclusive, though, that's the point. I think the consensus is that I1 is descended from Mesolithic foragers _and_ that it was spread mainly (but not quite exclusively) by Germanic language speakers later on. So you're agreeing with most other hypothesizers there.

One thing I disagree with is your idea that modern frequency distributions indicate much of anything about Haplogroup I's ancient past. It's tempting to see it as evidence of Haplogroup I being holdouts in places like Finland, Sardinia, and Dinaric Alps, but the fact is that the dominant subclade in many of these places show signs of expansion from elsewhere long after the introduction of farming. More useful is probably diversity analyses, but those tend to show high Haplogroup I diversity in places like the Rhine, which is not really a hideout. I think the closest we can come to hypothesizing about geographical hideouts is in how I2-M423, I2-M223, and probably I1 have apparently relatively northern affinities, and were more successful later on compared to Central/Southern European clades like I2-L38, I2b-L415, and I2c-L596. That could show that even though the greatest number of Haplogroup I descendants before expansions from the north lived in Central/Southern Europe, the northerners tended to have greater Haplogroup I frequencies.

----------


## epoch

> More useful is probably diversity analyses, but those tend to show high Haplogroup I diversity in places like the Rhine, which is not really a hideout. I think the closest we can come to hypothesizing about geographical hideouts is in how I2-M423, I2-M223, and probably I1 have apparently relatively northern affinities, and were more successful later on compared to Central/Southern European clades like I2-L38, I2b-L415, and I2c-L596. That could show that even though the greatest number of Haplogroup I descendants before expansions from the north lived in Central/Southern Europe, the northerners tended to have greater Haplogroup I frequencies.


Where exactly along the Rhine would that be? Do you have links to information about that?

----------


## epoch

> More useful is probably diversity analyses, but those tend to show high Haplogroup I diversity in places like the Rhine, which is not really a hideout.





> Where exactly along the Rhine would that be? Do you have links to information about that?


O. I already found something. This doesn't seem like a thoroughly peer reviewed paper, but hey... It's something. It would be colossally interesting since the region where haplogroup I is supposed to have originated according to this map is the same region we discussed before. Once with regard to this thread, where it already is explained that the region is a crossroads for Central and Northwest European cultures. One of my first posts here was because I noticed something odd on the map of I2b: That part of it's distribution seemed coincide with the Suevians. Also the area is where R1b is found in a Bell Beaker burial. And the area a paper (Brandt) saw a reflux coming from Scandinavia, as discussed here.

http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/

----------


## bicicleur

> It's not mutually exclusive, though, that's the point. I think the consensus is that I1 is descended from Mesolithic foragers _and_ that it was spread mainly (but not quite exclusively) by Germanic language speakers later on. So you're agreeing with most other hypothesizers there.
> 
> One thing I disagree with is your idea that modern frequency distributions indicate much of anything about Haplogroup I's ancient past. It's tempting to see it as evidence of Haplogroup I being holdouts in places like Finland, Sardinia, and Dinaric Alps, but the fact is that the dominant subclade in many of these places show signs of expansion from elsewhere long after the introduction of farming. More useful is probably diversity analyses, but those tend to show high Haplogroup I diversity in places like the Rhine, which is not really a hideout. I think the closest we can come to hypothesizing about geographical hideouts is in how I2-M423, I2-M223, and probably I1 have apparently relatively northern affinities, and were more successful later on compared to Central/Southern European clades like I2-L38, I2b-L415, and I2c-L596. That could show that even though the greatest number of Haplogroup I descendants before expansions from the north lived in Central/Southern Europe, the northerners tended to have greater Haplogroup I frequencies.


many subclades of I seem to have split just after the youngest dryas, when Europe was becoming forested again
their expansion times are often 4-6000 years ago, which is after the arrival of the first farmers, more the time IE folks started to expand from the Pontic steppe

----------


## sparkey

> Where exactly along the Rhine would that be? Do you have links to information about that?


That's an observation I made about Haplogroup I subclades back when I made my Paleolithic Remnants map. That map is now a bit outdated--for example, C-V20 has been shown to be a Paleolithic remnant as well, the location of I1 may be a bit east of where I have it, the location of I2a-Din may be a bit to the west, etc. But the cluster of Haplogroup I diversity close to the Rhine still seems to hold. I2-L38, I2c-PF3881, I2a1c, etc. are all old subclades having high diversity there. Where on the Rhine they tend to be depends on the subclade.

----------


## sparkey

> many subclades of I seem to have split just after the youngest dryas, when Europe was becoming forested again
> their expansion times are often 4-6000 years ago, which is after the arrival of the first farmers, more the time IE folks started to expand from the Pontic steppe


The range of expansion dates is sort of bizarre, and indicates multiple times over a long period when tiny minorities had major expansions. These range from the Neolithic expansion of I2-M26 to the barely 2000 year old clades like I2a-Din.

----------


## Aberdeen

> The range of expansion dates is sort of bizarre, and indicates multiple times over a long period when tiny minorities had major expansions. These range from the Neolithic expansion of I2-M26 to the barely 2000 year old clades like I2a-Din.


In terms of how old I1 is and how old any particular subclades are, I find it interesting (and a bit confusing) to look at the Sami. Their mtDNA is almost all U5b or V, also found among the Berbers and assumed to be Mesolithic, and I1 is the second most common Y haplotype. But the most common Y haplotype is N1c, which seems to be from Asia. So one would think that, if it's correct that the Sami first expanded northward and eventually into the northern parts of Scandinavia from a Franco-Iberian refugium they left just after the last glacial maximum, they would originally have consisted of mtDNA U5b and V and Y haplotype I1, with the N1c maybe arriving later from Asia. But it seems to me that I1 is just a bit too young to fit into that schedule if it's as recent as it appears to be. So, did I1 originally evolve from an isolated population of I* along the Rhine, arriving in Scandinavia some what later than has been assumed?

The alternative would seem to be that I1 isn't quite as young as it appears to be.

Edit: I should have said, for the sake of clarity, that the Sami are considered by archeologists to be connected to the Komsa culture that was in Scandinavia at least 10,000 years BP.

----------


## Greying Wanderer

> It's not mutually exclusive, though, that's the point. I think the consensus is that I1 is descended from Mesolithic foragers _and_ that it was spread mainly (but not quite exclusively) by Germanic language speakers later on. So you're agreeing with most other hypothesizers there.
> 
> One thing I disagree with is your idea that modern frequency distributions indicate much of anything about Haplogroup I's ancient past. It's tempting to see it as evidence of Haplogroup I being holdouts in places like Finland, Sardinia, and Dinaric Alps, but the fact is that the dominant subclade in many of these places show signs of expansion from elsewhere long after the introduction of farming. More useful is probably diversity analyses, but those tend to show high Haplogroup I diversity in places like the Rhine, which is not really a hideout. I think the closest we can come to hypothesizing about geographical hideouts is in how I2-M423, I2-M223, and probably I1 have apparently relatively northern affinities, and were more successful later on compared to Central/Southern European clades like I2-L38, I2b-L415, and I2c-L596. That could show that even though the greatest number of Haplogroup I descendants before expansions from the north lived in Central/Southern Europe, the northerners tended to have greater Haplogroup I frequencies.


Yes, I agree it's not exclusive. I'm thinking more if you could extract later expansions e.g. Germanic, you'd have a map of little clusters.

(edit: The reason I mentioned it is I've heard I=Germanic in various other places.)

"It's tempting to see it as evidence of Haplogroup I being holdouts in places like Finland, Sardinia, and Dinaric Alps"

Sure, it's just a thought and may not be exclusive for the same reason as above but some of the clusters might represent that.

"The range of expansion dates is sort of bizarre, and indicates multiple times over a long period when tiny minorities had major expansions. These range from the Neolithic expansion of I2-M26 to the barely 2000 year old clades like I2a-Din."

That's what makes me wonder. Could those dates represent first contact?

For example, from more recent history we know what can potentially happen when farmers with domesticated animals and the diseases they got from domesticated animals come into contact with foragers: a major bottleneck as the forager population is first flattened by disease and then rebuilds from the survivors.

If that is what happened then the age of these various I sub clades might represent the time that particular group came into contact.

----------


## truth_seeker

My haplogroup is I1, which matches genealogy, g grandfather from central Sweden. Three generations of I1 males before me had coal black hair.

----------


## Apsurdistan

I'm I1 from Bosnia and nice to see the eastern part of it is colored darker, that's where my grandfather is from.

----------


## Apsurdistan

I have really dark hair too. Although you being from Sweden obviously it's more unusual I guess.

----------


## mwauthy

> I have really dark hair too. Although you being from Sweden obviously it's more unusual I guess.


Your Y chromosome only accounts for about 2% of your DNA so if you have a Swedish Viking ancestor from 1000 years ago there is plenty of time for your hair to darken as your paternal ancestor mixed with the local population over 1000 years. How tall are you? I've read that haplogroup I tends to be the tallest in the world. I'm 6 foot 5 inches tall.

----------


## Apsurdistan

I'm pretty average height 5'10-5'11
Ironically my dad is shorter about the same height as my mom.
Don't know how tall my grandfather was, I never met him he died before I was born and my parents divorced when I was 2 so I don't really know much about my gf. But I heard he was a very respected man in the village/small town he came from. My dad also very intelligent guy, finished law school but was a major alcoholic.

----------


## I1a3_Young

> Your Y chromosome only accounts for about 2% of your DNA so if you have a Swedish Viking ancestor from 1000 years ago there is plenty of time for your hair to darken as your paternal ancestor mixed with the local population over 1000 years. How tall are you? I've read that haplogroup I tends to be the tallest in the world. I'm 6 foot 5 inches tall.


That's an interesting stat. I'm tall myself but the next few paternal ancestors back weren't, and a couple of my father's brothers were below average height.

----------


## Shetop

Swedish Haplogroup Database allows review by region and it shows a bit different distribution compared to the Eupedia map.
Namely the highest I1 frequencies in Sweden (and in the World) at approximately 55% are recorded in the *Eastern Götaland*.

Eupedia map shows highest frequencies around the lake Vänern and according to the SHD frequencies of I1 drop to 35-40% in that area. Also the highlighted area around Oslo in Norway should not have more than 40% of I1.

----------


## Maciamo

> Swedish Haplogroup Database allows review by region and it shows a bit different distribution compared to the Eupedia map.
> Namely the highest I1 frequencies in Sweden (and in the World) at approximately 55% are recorded in the *Eastern Götaland*.
> 
> Eupedia map shows highest frequencies around the lake Vänern and according to the SHD frequencies of I1 drop to 35-40% in that area. Also the highlighted area around Oslo in Norway should not have more than 40% of I1.


I didn't know this site. Note that their map is using only about 800 samples, against 2200 for Eupedia.

----------


## spruithean

> Your Y chromosome only accounts for about 2% of your DNA so if you have a Swedish Viking ancestor from 1000 years ago there is plenty of time for your hair to darken as your paternal ancestor mixed with the local population over 1000 years. How tall are you? I've read that haplogroup I tends to be the tallest in the world. I'm 6 foot 5 inches tall.


I highly doubt Y-DNA has much to do with height. I'm around the same height as my father (and my maternal grandfather), but anyone before my father was MUCH shorter than me. Height probably has more to do with the DNA that is not Y-DNA or mtDNA and more to do with the autosomal DNA.

----------


## mwauthy

> I highly doubt Y-DNA has much to do with height. I'm around the same height as my father (and my maternal grandfather), but anyone before my father was MUCH shorter than me. Height probably has more to do with the DNA that is not Y-DNA or mtDNA and more to do with the autosomal DNA.


You are probably right since my brother is only 5'11''.

----------

