Why Vikings did not bring any N1c in Great Britain?

arvistro said:
Btw - did vikings bring their steretypical (non-N1C) set of haplos to Russia/Baltics?

Another interesting piece on wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnveden
quote:
Based on some medieval sources, Rurik was born on the Roslagen seashore, north of Stockholm in the modern-day Sweden. At the time of Rurik's birth,[6] the rule of the Norse, Sveas, Geats, Gutes and Danes covered only the southernmost parts of Scandinavia.
Thus, Rurik's DNA would be explained by the view of the historians who claim that the rest of Scandinavia – including Haalogaland with Nor's Kvens and their descendants – was inhabited only by the Kvens and the Sami.


Another thing. Reading on first Sweddish viking centers something happened to them. This is from wiki about Birka city:
"Birka was abandoned during the later half of the 10th century. Based on the coin finds, the city seems to have silenced around 960." and later in text "The Varangian trade stations in Russia suffered a serious decline at roughly the same date.".

Birka was replaced by Sigtuna as new center..
Click to expand...


Sigtuna was also attacked and burned by Baltic Finns after that.
 
I speculate decline of N1C1 varyag clans coincided with Birka's and Varangian trade stations decline. Power changed and other folk took over. Probably those were events which made Sweden less N1C1.. Just speculating.

In 1187 Sigtuna was attacked and pillaged by raiders from across the Baltic Sea, possibly Karelians,[2][3] Curonian and/or Oeselian raiders (c)wiki. My first idea was Sigtuna's attack was retaliation, but then it was 200 years later, so probably unrelated.
 
arvistro said:
I speculate decline of N1C1 varyag clans coincided with Birka's and Varangian trade stations decline. Power changed and other folk took over. Probably those were events which made Sweden less N1C1.. Just speculating.

In 1187 Sigtuna was attacked and pillaged by raiders from across the Baltic Sea, possibly Karelians,[2][3] Curonian and/or Oeselian raiders (c)wiki. My first idea was Sigtuna's attack was retaliation, but then it was 200 years later, so probably unrelated.
Click to expand...


Or not, Svea was taken over by Geats, there was a civil war and just after that they landed in Finland.
Karelians used to call West Finns Ruotsi, as in Swedes, where some claim the word Rus comes from.
There might have been a hybrid culture in Svea proper, Gotland also has a lot of N1c, Gotland had always good relations with Finns and Oselians.
 
Ukko said:
Or not, Svea was taken over by Geats, there was a civil war and just after that they landed in Finland.
Karelians used to call West Finns Ruotsi, as in Swedes, where some claim the word Rus comes from.
There might have been a hybrid culture in Svea proper, Gotland also has a lot of N1c, Gotland had always good relations with Finns and Oselians.
Click to expand...
Can you give me a good source to read on Geat vs Svea civil war?
 
arvistro said:
Can you give me a good source to read on Geat vs Svea civil war?
Click to expand...

Dont know in english but you can find the basics on internet. The time when Svea and Geats where united is not confirmed and the power struggle continued to the historical times.

Birger Jarl is a Geat that took power in Svea proper and attacked Finland after that.
He got the support of the pope and and german merchants so he had money to buy mercenaries, especially heavy cavalry.
 
mihaitzateo said:
I am very curios why Vikings who raided and settled in Great Britain did not brought any N1C there.
Also If I am looking at Iceland,N1C is very few there.
Took a look now at the page:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml
And there is very few N in Denmark - 1% and few in Norway - 2.5% while Sweden got 7%.
So as a possibility,maybe Vikings raiding in Britain were mostly Norwegian and Danes Vikings.
And Swedish Vikings did not raided in Great Britain.
I have seen some genetic testing of Swedes and the percentage of N1C is raising,as you move towards North Sweden.
I think is same in Norway,but those people did not went raiding in Great Britain,I guess only those from South Norway and from near shores raided in Great Britain or even settled there.
Click to expand...


A very simple explanation. Bottleneck-effect. If N1c is only 3% of the overall Scando_Germanic Haplogroups. There is only a chance of 1/33 that N* could have been carried with Vikings to Britain because it is very unlikely, even impossible that Vikings immigrated from all Scandinavian regions/villages to Britain.

Slightly out of topic.
I assume Bottleneck is how some Indo European groups ended up with beeing dominant in only 1 or 2 Haplogroups while some other Indo European groups appear more "diverse". Instead of always assuming that some Indo Europeans might have absorbed additional Haplogroups we should consider the possibility that other more "homogenous" appearing Indo Europeans might have gone through population bottleneck.
 
Alan said:
A very simple explanation. Bottleneck-effect. If N1c is only 3% of the overall Scando_Germanic Haplogroups. There is only a chance of 1/33 that N* could have been carried with Vikings to Britain because it is very unlikely, even impossible that Vikings immigrated from all Scandinavian regions/villages to Britain.
Click to expand...
It is also mainstream that (presumably N1C1 richer) vikings from modern Sweden territory operated in Baltic Sea and Norges/Danes operated in Western Europe. That is what we learn at school. When I check online sources it seems that with some exceptions this is correct.
 
They did not bring it because apparently they did not have any of it yet - at that time when they travelled to Britain.

They absorbed it only later (after the end of their expeditions to Britain) - either from Kvens, or Balts, or Finns, or Slavs, or Saami.

BTW - here are haplogroups identified among the descendants of the Rurikid dynasty (from A. Bajor's Rurikid DNA Project):

- N1c1
- R1a L260
- R1a P278
- R1a Z92
- R1a M458
- R1a Z280
- I2a1

OTOH, not a single I1, not a single R1a Z284, and not a single R1b U106 were found among Rurikid descendants.

It means that you guys need to expand your list of "originally Germanic haplogroups" by a whole lot of new markers! :grin:

Because otherwise it will turn out that not a single of the Rurikids was genetically Germanic... and this is unacceptable! :angry:
 
Ukko said:
So they have to speak Norse to do Viking..., like playing pirate in boats?
Click to expand...

Celts did this too - cf. the raid that kidnapped St. Patrick, which may have been done by members of my own R1b-M222 haplogroup (if M222 really is Ui Neill etc.). And as mentioned before, some languages did become lingua francas that would have been learned by many people from different ethnic groups. Latin and Greek were also big ones - speaking Latin and/or Greek in addition to your village's language could help immensely in terms of getting along economically and politically with the Romans. This is still the case with respect to some of the languages that came out of Latin - Spanish and French are both immensely useful languages to speak if you are interested in traveling the world.
 
In Palermo I have a contact of N1c and the only explanation is Viking/Norman heritage but it's the only case.
 
Hauteville said:
In Palermo I have a contact of N1c and the only explanation is Viking/Norman heritage but it's the only case.
Click to expand...

How do you know that the only explanation is Viking/Norman heritage? Wouldn't a Uralic origin (e.g. perhaps a stray Hungarian speaker who wandered too far off and was assimilated) also be possible?
 
RobertColumbia said:
How do you know that the only explanation is Viking/Norman heritage? Wouldn't a Uralic origin (e.g. perhaps a stray Hungarian speaker who wandered too far off and was assimilated) also be possible?
Click to expand...

Easy to find out from the haplo tree.
 
Any idea about Y DNA of rzucewo culture ppl? Perhaps this could shed some light on origin of western balts?
 
F117stealth said:
Any idea about Y DNA of rzucewo culture ppl? Perhaps this could shed some light on origin of western balts?
Click to expand...
It is end of Neolithic culture, mixed with beginning of Corded Ware, 2,700 BC. A bit too soon to draw any parallel to modern cultures at time when there was no diversification between Germans, Balts or Slavs yet, and this diversification probably happened after 1,000 BC. Also the way of life and material culture was different way back than at time of Balts, as we know them 3,000 years later.
Having said that, I'm expecting a bit of cultural, and a lot of genetic continuity. There is big affinity of Corded Ware genome to modern residents of same area.
 
wikipedia./Rzucewo_culture

Traditionally Rzucewo was identified as a variation of Corded Ware culture; however newest research suggests that the culture formed before Corded Ware.
Formerly, this culture was interpreted as the earliest detection of the Balts. Tracing formation of the Balts to Rzucewo culture would explain differences between Western and Eastern Balts and their languages.

en.wikipedia.Old_Prussians

The Old Prussians or Baltic Prussians (German: Pruzzen or Prußen; Latin: Pruteni; Latvian: Prūši; Lithuanian: Prūsai; Polish: Prusowie; Kashubian: Prësowié) were an ethnic group of indigenous Baltic tribes that inhabited Prussia, the lands of the southeastern Baltic Sea in the area around the Vistula and Curonian Lagoons. They spoke a language now known as Old Prussian and followed pagan Prussian mythology.

I am not talking about who constrained their culture, location and existence. That is pretty much known (at least in AD times). I was referring to their source. Is the proto baltic group related to rzucewo culture? Are the proto balts direct survivors of such a culture? Are the data too scarce yet to dare making such suppositions?
 
I was thinking about Rzucewo lately, and this is how I see it:
1) linguistically IE languages, including (proto-) Baltic are believed to arrive with Corded. If Rzucewo formed before Corded it could not be proto Baltic or proto IE.
2) genetically modern Balts are the most WHG population on the planet. So, when Corded arrived to Baltics it did not replace much genes, and this would fit with Rzucewo (WHG heavy?) and Corded paralel cohabitation. Rzucewo were amber gatherers and therefore probably could compete with Corded economy.
3) some believe that Rzucewo was initial stage of West-Baltic, some believe West Balts arrived (much) later. I have no idea yet :)

So, in two words. Linguistically Rzucewo most likely was not ancestors of proto or modern Balts. Genetically most likely Rzucewo were (one of) ancestors of modern Balts and more likely is the reason why modern Balts have so much WHG.
 
:) I agree with your genetic theory.

1. linguistically IE languages, including (proto-) Baltic are believed to arrive with Corded. If Rzucewo formed before Corded it could not be proto Baltic or proto IE.
How are the languages spoken on European lands prior to proto IE called? Where is the lower boundary of proto IE languages?
2. Yes, corded culture mainly belonged to R1a while WHG rather to I haplogroup. Current balts belong to N1c and R1a. Western balts belong to N - Z16981. It would be useful any DNA analysis of rzucewo culture. Now it is placed under N - L 1015 haplogroup so cohabitation is plausible.
3. If rzucewo were N guys then it is quite clear that they were (some of) the ancestors of western balts.


How was established & proved that current balts carry the most western european hunter-gatheres genes? - "Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present -day Europeans" is of any use to figure out an answer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top