I've just added an ancient sample from Hinxton, England, to my burgeoning ancient genomes collection. It's a pre-publication release freely available here as ERS389795. Thanks to Felix C. for breaking the news. We've both called this sample Hinxton1.
Unfortunately, its archeological context is a mystery to me, but it's possibly one of the ancient genomes mentioned in the recent Schiffels et al. ASHG abstract (see here).
In terms of genome-wide genetic structure, Hinxton1 is most similar to present-day Orcadians, Irish, western Scots, Icelanders and western Norwegians, more or less in that order. However, it's fairly distinct from the modern inhabitants of England, or at least those in my datasets, who mostly come from Kent and Cornwall.
Please note, this analysis features two different datasets: Eurogenes and Human Origins. Eurogenes, which is my own dataset, includes more populations than Human Origins, and is based on SNPs used in commercial ancestry and medical work. On the other hand, Human Origins shows a more varied sampling strategy, and is based on SNPs specifically chosen for population genetics.
Shared drift stats in the form f3(Mbuti;Hinxton1,Test) - Eurogenes dataset
Shared drift stats in the form f3(Mbuti;Hinxton1,Test) - Human Origins dataset
Eurogenes K15 4 Ancestors Oracle results
See also...
Analysis of Hinxton2 - ERS389796
Analysis of Hinxton3 - ERS389797
Analysis of Hinxton4 - ERS389798
Analysis of Hinxton5 - ERS389799
Hinxton ancient genomes roundup
340 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 340 of 340Okay, apparently this is what number 4 is...
R1b1a2a1a2c1g2-FGC3903/S5201/Y2890.
I think that 3 and 4, are the Brits.
Genetiker's results may be noisy, but they still match up with the abstract rather well. He has found the 3 remains he labeled Anglo's carry more Baltic and that the two he presumes to be Celts carry more Iberian affinities.
Even if his results are not 100% accurate, I do believe he has labeled the individuals correctly.
Time will tell, I guess.
Yeah, L11, almost certainly means Angle, and possibly Saxon. I doubt it was in Britain before that. It's in Denmark and Mercia.. Both Angle lands.
I downloaded the file that Felix posted just now, but I removed the duplicate SNPs.
Hinxton3 - ERS389797
K15
North_Sea 48.73
Atlantic 30.97
Baltic 3.7
Eastern_Euro 6.96
West_Med 4.83
West_Asian 4.81
East_Med 0.02
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 0
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0
K13
North_Atlantic 61.15
Baltic 21.55
West_Med 8.26
West_Asian 8.62
East_Med 0.16
Red_Sea 0.25
South_Asian 0
East_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0
K7
ANE 15.82
ASE 1.08
WHG-UHG 68.68
East_Eurasian 0
West_African 0.01
East_African 0.01
ENF 14.4
PCA
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQLWlWTzJpWDF2MXM/view?usp=sharing
With your EEF,WHG,ANE test..
42.71% EEF, 40.74%WHG, 16.54% ANE
Anyway to do a plot with all 3 samples together?
No, they're too homogenous and form their own cluster, which isn't very informative.
It looks like 3 is further away from Brits than 1 and 2. 3 is between an Irish and a Swede. 1 is by the British, so this looks like our first Brit.
It looks like Iron Age Brits had more ANE and less WHG and EEF than Anglo-Saxons.
I think that 4, is the high coverage one. It includes snps for hair, complexion, eyes, and all that. He is R1b-L21.
If this really is ERS389797, then it comes from the same population as the other two.
Where did you get the information that ERS389797 is the Brit?
That is the word on Anthrogenica, where the other info is posted. 3 is about half of the Balto-Finnic, and nearly twice the Iberian as #2. Which follows the abstract. That's using Felix's files and not Genetiker's numbers. The numbers are different, but the amount of difference is the same.
I ran both through the MDLP k12. #2 is nearly twice the amount of Eastern European as 3, as well.
It could be another Anglo-Saxon, but doesn't really look that way. I guess number 4 will make it obvious.
I'm getting different numbers for Hinxton 2, than you got, while using Felix's file. Why is that? How is your method different?
Chad, if it isn't too much to ask, do you mind posting the EEF, WHG and ANE breakdown for the 3 samples so far?
Posts some results for what The Hinxton 1+2 have to be admixed with to be modern people:
Just to stare at. Dont know if something similiar was posted in any forum so far (for sure I think)
Modern Southeast English =
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 French+Irish+Irish+Hinxton2 @ 1,666315
2 Hinxton1+French+Irish+Irish @ 1,970637
3 French+Irish+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,031738
4 French+Irish+Danish+Hinxton2 @ 2,185476
5 French+Irish+Hinxton2+North_Dutch @ 2,234515
6 French+Irish+Irish+Irish @ 2,390411
7 Spanish_Aragon+Irish+Hinxton2+Swedish @ 2,419416
8 Hinxton1+French+Irish+Danish @ 2,504648
9 French+Irish+Irish+Danish @ 2,517665
10 Spanish_Aragon+Hinxton2+Swedish+North_Dutch @ 2,54321
Modern Irish:
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 1,863996
2 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German @ 1,948037
3 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 1,948421
4 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German @ 2,088056
5 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 2,165334
6 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,167609
7 Hinxton1+Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 2,195694
8 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_German+North_German @ 2,204294
9 Hinxton1+Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,207423
10 Danish+Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch @ 2,220909
Modern Norwegians:
from least square:
1 50% Swedish +25% Hinxton1 +25% Swedish @ 1,341365
2 50% Swedish +25% Hinxton2 +25% Swedish @ 2,135009
Or Gauss:
Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Hinxton2 +25% Ukrainian +25% Hinxton2 @ 1,655796
2 50% Hinxton2 +25% Hinxton1 +25% Ukrainian @ 2,180673
Modern Danes:
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German+North_German @ 1,165218
2 Norwegian+Hinxton2+North_German+North_German @ 1,439594
3 Hinxton2+North_German+North_German+North_German @ 1,463707
4 Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_German+North_German @ 1,465233
5 Norwegian+Hinxton1+North_German+North_German @ 1,673928
Modern North Germans
very hard to get them mixed from those... it only starts at rank 10 in Gauss:
10 Danish+Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,453592
11 Danish+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,463108
12 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,467758
13 Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,476982
14 Danish+Irish+Irish+North_Dutch @ 3,477578
POsted wrong section... damn again...
Posts some results for what The Hinxton 1+2 have to be admixed with to be modern people:
Just to stare at. Dont know if something similiar was posted in any forum so far (for sure I think)
Modern Southeast English =
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 French+Irish+Irish+Hinxton2 @ 1,666315
2 Hinxton1+French+Irish+Irish @ 1,970637
3 French+Irish+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,031738
4 French+Irish+Danish+Hinxton2 @ 2,185476
5 French+Irish+Hinxton2+North_Dutch @ 2,234515
6 French+Irish+Irish+Irish @ 2,390411
7 Spanish_Aragon+Irish+Hinxton2+Swedish @ 2,419416
8 Hinxton1+French+Irish+Danish @ 2,504648
9 French+Irish+Irish+Danish @ 2,517665
10 Spanish_Aragon+Hinxton2+Swedish+North_Dutch @ 2,54321
Modern Irish:
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 1,863996
2 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German @ 1,948037
3 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 1,948421
4 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German @ 2,088056
5 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 2,165334
6 Hinxton1+Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,167609
7 Hinxton1+Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 2,195694
8 Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_German+North_German @ 2,204294
9 Hinxton1+Hinxton1+Hinxton2+North_German @ 2,207423
10 Danish+Hinxton2+Hinxton2+North_Dutch @ 2,220909
Modern Norwegians:
from least square:
1 50% Swedish +25% Hinxton1 +25% Swedish @ 1,341365
2 50% Swedish +25% Hinxton2 +25% Swedish @ 2,135009
Or Gauss:
Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Hinxton2 +25% Ukrainian +25% Hinxton2 @ 1,655796
2 50% Hinxton2 +25% Hinxton1 +25% Ukrainian @ 2,180673
Modern Danes:
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_German+North_German @ 1,165218
2 Norwegian+Hinxton2+North_German+North_German @ 1,439594
3 Hinxton2+North_German+North_German+North_German @ 1,463707
4 Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_German+North_German @ 1,465233
5 Norwegian+Hinxton1+North_German+North_German @ 1,673928
Modern North Germans
very hard to get them mixed from those... it only starts at rank 10 in Gauss:
10 Danish+Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,453592
11 Danish+Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,463108
12 Hinxton2+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,467758
13 Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,476982
14 Danish+Irish+Irish+North_Dutch @ 3,477578
limited the participating populations to:
- Irish
- SE English
- Norwegian
- Swedish
- East Finnish
- Ukrainian
- Polish
- Northgerman
- North Dutch
- French
- Aragon Spanish
and the Hinxtons
Ok, no wrong section. Just a second page or something.
I remove the duplicate SNPs, that's probably why I get different results than Felix, with less noise. Felix should maybe remove the duplicates before uploading to GFDmatch.
Gotcha. Do you have all 3 in your k13 spreadsheet?
I do now...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Oz6P5-SVEJciPX1TciGe-zoqA5JtOGIMG7nh-rCOj0c/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19c_bZjUV_RouKyGyLHmMDw57WwAVabXFJOaso_gcuRE/edit?usp=sharing
Awesome! Thanks!
Hinxton1 43.8%EEF, 40.1%WHG, 16.1%ANE
Hinxton2 39.3%EEF, 43.6%WHG, 17.1%ANE
Hinxton3 42.65%EEF, 40.8%WHG, 16.55%ANE
All three are actually fairly similar.
David, re-looking at the plot, I see now that Hinxton2 is further way than 3. It'll be interesting to see how far off the map number 4 is going to be.
Is it possible for your samples without duplicate snp's to be uploaded to gedmatch, to see if the Iberian stayed the same in MDLP? It would help to see who is who.
The files I used are here...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQdUFqTHN2bmloUTQ/view?usp=sharing
You can run them with calcs by changing their names to "genotype".
I don't really know how to upload them to GEDmatch. You might need to edit them in some way.
Perhaps Felix would if you sent them to him, or anyone else here that could.
Davidski just got results for Hinxt 3, check out the K13 and K15 spreadsheets. Hinzt 3 is very similar to Hinx 1 and 2. Since the abstract says there are 2 Iron age samples and 3 Anglo Saxon ones, it's safe to assume the Kinxs are the Anglo Saxon ones!!!
I can't wait to see the Briton results, it may be even more surprising. The Hinxs probably means that there were Germanic-speaking populations around the North sea during the Iron age and early middle ages, who had hardly any Meditreaen and eastern European-like ancestry and extreme amounts of North Sea-like ancestry. Also, that there are no populations like them today because of admixture with more eastern and southern-like people.
The Hinxs are very interesting because they're so different from modern Scandinavians, who are assumed by some to be pure descendants of proto-Germanics. There must be signals of admixture with Hinxt-like populations in Germanic-speaking people, but maybe early Germans were not only Hinxt-like.
Maybe the Iron age-Brits will turn out to be mostly descended of immigrants from Gaul or Iberia.
"Yeah, L11, almost certainly means Angle, and possibly Saxon. I doubt it was in Britain before that. It's in Denmark and Mercia.. Both Angle lands."
He wasn't L11*. He's L151+, which is on the same branch as L11, he didn't get results in P312 and U106. I bet he had U106 if he was mostly of early German decent.
" who had hardly any Meditreaen and eastern European-like ancestry and extreme amounts of North Sea-like ancestry."
good old "he does know nothing about the people he wrote about" Tacitus ("Germania"@99AD) comes to mind...
"they dont seem admixed with any other known people but apear like a pure and indigenious race"
Maybe there is more to it. Maybe these peoples difference to their neightbours was far higher than today.
Because you are right. For over 100 years people believed that Scandinavians are the closest to iron age Germans...possibly even of "pure blood" while English are Germans mixed with Celts and er... central European "Germans" are Germans mixed with Slavs and Celts in different degrees depending of how much east or south.
And now we see... even Scandinavians apear admixed compared to these old corpses.
Barak,
With the extreme nature of their Northern location, it is unlikely that they will be anything other than mostly descended from very Northern like people. They probably will have Gallic and Belgae ancestry, as well as 'Iberian', from the Megalith period, on top of that. All of this may mean that the divide between Northern and Southern Europe was more extreme in the early Medieval period. There is no such thing as a pure Celtic or Germanic 'race', or people. The speakers of these languages mixed into people of varying degrees of EEF, WHG, and ANE. We would likely have to go back to the late Neolithic to find a close to homogenous core group of speakers. It may mean that the groups that brought in the Celtic and Germanic languages were something similar to the Bronze Age Dane. Almost a hyper Finn, based on plots. Mid-Late Neolithic Europeans of the Atlantic would've been shifted further away from Mal'ta, than the Basque. Basically all falling between Stuttgart and Loschbour.
David,
Can you include the Hinxton individual samples into your plots of Europeans, based on Stuttgart, Loschbour, and Mal'ta?
Felix said that Hinxton-4 will be ready by next week.
"With the extreme nature of their Northern location, it is unlikely that they will be anything other than mostly descended from very Northern like people. They probably will have Gallic and Belgae ancestry, as well as 'Iberian', from the Megalith period, on top of that. All of this may mean that the divide between Northern and Southern Europe was more extreme in the early Medieval period."
Like I said before the Hinxts have very very little Meditreaen and east European-like ancestry.
Meaning a significant amount of Gaulish(or anything south of that) or east Baltic ancestry very unlikely. The borders of modern France one way or another come from the general range of Gaulish speakers right before Ceasar came, meaning French are mostly Gaulish. Even eastern French, west Germans, and south Dutch are way to Meditreaen for the Hinx's ancestors to have admixed a lot with them.
Polish and anything north of them are way to eastern for Hinxt's to have any significant ancestry from them(not true for modern Scandinavians).
Maybe back in Megalithic times or whenever Hinxts have ancestry from Iberia, but did Europe have the same trends(Gok2-farmers in Sweden, suggest not).
If Hinxts are very admixed it could only be from the distant past or from very NW-like populations, and not Baltic and Meditreaen-like populations which probably lived in Gaul and east of Denmark.
I highly doubt most NW European populations were like Kinxt as recently as the middle ages. IF so, there had to of been a change across the entire region, with no historical record of southern and eastern populations migrating from Germany-Ireland.
Hinxts populations may have just been unique. Today in NW Europe North Atlantic levals work in a way with other components that suggests a Hinxt-like population(could be even more extreme) gave big chunks of North Atlantic to NW Europeans.
I think Hinxt are just very pure examples of one of multiple ancestral populations that contributed ancestry to west Europeans(Stuttgart, and Balts I think would be the next 2).
NW Europeans could have all ranged from hyper-Icelandic to just outside of Irish. The modern day pull could all be from migrations during the Middle Ages and mostly the Industrial Revolution.
I would not be surprised if the Brits are more extreme, indicating that genes from Gascons, Flemish, Germans, Hugenots, and others, are very important to the ancestry of the English. It wouldn't be a shock if the English are 40% Continental, 30% Iron Age Brit, and 30% post-Iron Age West Germanic.
"NW Europeans could have all ranged from hyper-Icelandic to just outside of Irish. The modern day pull could all be from migrations during the Middle Ages and mostly the Industrial Revolution."
I'm sure we could find plenty of Americans or mainly coloniel British decent(pre-industrial revolution) who would turn out just like modern British. You could also look at the European-segment of ancestry of African Americans, since it mostly comes from people of colonial British decent. The Spainish ancestry of many Latinos would be even better.
Also, the Amish have been in America, unadmixed since colonial times. They're of course just about 100% German, and I've heard western German. I'm not sure if they'd comply to a DNA test though.
I'm not one to judge if your idea is credible, I just think it's to extreme.
Does anyone know when the paper is likely to be released? This year?
Just for reference, I'm half colonial and northern British, and the other half is rather continental. I still plot as 100% SE English. I think that it's highly possible.
If Amish plot with Western or Northern Germans, that's another interesting hint at the same thing. The Amish are Swiss in origin, not from Germany.
If they plot with Northgermans it would be strange,
Westgermans, Southdutch, germanic speaking Belgians and Swiss plot close to each others. (quiet far from Northgermans)
"It wouldn't be a shock if the English are 40% Continental"
Just to repeat the very large percentage of Welsh surnames in England.
I agree with what you are saying in one sense but i think the term "continental" distorts the true picture.
I think the non-Belgae Celts were already "continental" and they got pushed back to the mountainous strong holds of the far west by the Belgae / Saxons / Danes and they bounced back with the industrial revolution via internal migration - hence all the Welsh surnames.
If correct then the key imo will be in the differences between the Welsh in the mountains (and to a lesser extent Cornish) and the more Belgae Irish.
(I don't know if there have been samples taken specifically from the north Wales mountains but I would expect them to show some similarities to the Basques.)
Gray,
I am not so sure that the Brits will be much if anymore EEF, than the Anglo-Saxons. Brits tend to plot together and overlap with the Irish. Names are not the best thing to go by. Anglicization of surnames didn't just happen in America, but Britain too. Two men named Brown could have different origins. One could be Welsh, and the other from a German Braun.
Felix fixed the duplicate SNPs issue. I've just downloaded the new files and yes they have a larger number of usable markers. I'll post the updated results later today.
@Chad
Yes but i'm not talking about two men named Brown i'm talking about Welsh surnames vs English surnames.
Time will tell but I'd suggest (from physical observation) that there were two distinct populations at one time which are still faintly visible now: the first being shorter, stockier, darker and more curly haired centered around Wales, Cornwall and parts of Ireland and a taller, leaner, paler, straighter haired population that includes other parts of Ireland.
I could be wrong of course or the key might be in unsampled parts of north wales (as the south has had a lot of English mixture) but that's my guess.
1 migrant in 100 per generation over 30 generations - about 1000 years - leads to about 30% change. 1 per 100 seems high but plausible. (It's more complex to measure this when likely migration is fairly equal and bidirectional).
You could imagine the Central-Western European aristocracy, who probably had more children than average, might have had a slightly greater rate of mobility than the average as well.
Regarding recent genetic change, where recent is in the last 1000 years, I'd hope we wouldn't really need genetic data to make estimates - genealogical experts should be able to just look at a sample of big family trees that have been charted. And we have censuses.
Certainly during the Industrial Revolution this should be feasible to chart, and academics should have good ideas about migration rates without even needing any genomics done. I don't have any impression there is a great deal of talk about migration to Britain from the continent (rather than Ireland) during the Industrial Revolution, which inclines me to believe it was not major. From history and I think census evidence, after the 16th century, net migration was from Britain largely to America.
David,
I'm not sure if you've seen this. The SRA files for all 5 samples are here if you want to try them out.
http://sra.dnanexus.com/dispatch_many?accession_type=Study&accessions%5B%5D=ERP003900&action_name=download
Matt,
If these Brits and Anglo-Saxons are both like Icelanders and Orcadians, then something obviously changed. To go from around 41%EEF to 50% EEF, post-Saxon, is a big change. There are plenty of records pre-IR, that show a good amount of genes from regions of France, including Gascony, as well as Italians. If it's lower than 40% continental, then the source populations are going to be very Mediterranean.
Wikipedia... blah.. but some info..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italians_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_immigration_to_Great_Britain
40-50k Hugenots alone, during the 17th Century.
David,
I'm still getting comparable results with Hinxton2 and 3. 2 is more Baltic, half as much Iberian, and twice as much Eastern Euro, as 3. Hinxton3 is 9% Caucasian, none for 2. 2 also has Volga-Uralic, that is lacking in number 3. Until 5 comes, 3 does look like a Brit. Does the plot change at all, with the change in snps?
PCA of Hinxton 1-3 using the new files. They look like they're all from the same village. In fact, from the same hut in the same village.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQYzBJeUNubmpudTg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQdFJ1dWZXNjJBYUk/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQcVFNa2NPMzdwSVk/view?usp=sharing
Hinxton4 will be interesting to run. I'll try and do a preliminary run tomorrow.
If the Briton turns out closer to Kent & West of Cornwall. But the Angle closer to Ireland/Scots/Orcadians, With the West Norwegians & Icelanders. Would be interesting and open up lots of new doors.
Or perhaps all the homogenous samples could be right up there near each other in the top corner drifting off. The Briton A bit closer to Ireland.
Anyhow looking forward to it.
" 1 per 100 seems high"
Recently they published a statistic about RECENT migrants in Germany.
They said, 20% of the current German population does not have 4 Grandparents who lived in Germany at 1945.
Interesting Fanty. It could be that the continental shift happened before the IR. Huguenots were more than a 1 out of 100 increase by themselves, during the Religious Wars. Protestants around Europe, flocked to England during that time. I am looking for information on the immigration from Gascony. I'm not sure how good the records were back then, but I'll look.
I am wondering also, the amount of genetic input from Danes, in the settlement and taking of 'Danelaw'. It looks like the English shift has been almost as much to the East, as the South. That could change after we see where the Brits are. I wonder if they will be between the Irish and French, or more of a hyper-Irish.
Shared drift stats for Hinxton2 based on more than 200K SNPs.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hdAQEwOEQNbuTldhbhzF_60xoUHeYC0g825EpG7OZwo/edit?usp=sharing
Closest to Danes.
Nice! Are you working on 3?
Are there drift stats for Hinxton-2? Danish, Norwegian, Swedish in the top three goes along with her people being Germans from Scandinavia. Now someone's gonna have to find out why Scandinavians and British-Irish have more Baltic-like and slightly more Meditreaen-like ancestry than the Hinxtons.
I can't wait till that conference on Monday, because they're basically gonna give the answer as to what the origin of modern northeast European genetic makeup is, and hopefully some insight into western Europeans.
Did anyone notice both Hinxton 2 and 3's parents were cousins? I guess Jutes or whoever they were had a tradition of doing it in the family. Also, both were women who probably died passed the age of 65. Ancient people died at 33 on average, my ass. Old age is obviously genetic, healthy people should live into their 60's.
I'm going to bet on the Danes, plus continental.
I'm glad to see concrete proof that the Anglo-Saxon genes do not dominate England. There are a hell of a lot of wipe-out theorists still hanging on. I still wont be surprised if continental sources in the last 1300 years, are more important than the Anglo-Saxons. I'm including 9th-11th Century Danes in that 40% continental for SE English.
Fanty wrote: "Modern North Germans
very hard to get them mixed from those... it only starts at rank 10 in Gauss:
10 Danish+Hinxton1+North_Dutch+North_Dutch @ 3,453592"
Makes sense, North Dutch that represents probably the Frankish influence. The western-southwestern parts of northern Germany are Frankish anyway. Also the Westphalians are hardly pure Saxons, they've got a Frankish substrate. Danish-like influence is of course hardly real Danish but perhaps from more eastern Germanic tribes like the Varini, who were assimilated by Slavs, and then Germanized again. Their cranial means show a Borreby-type tendency.
David,
Any chance you might combine 2 Brits, with 2 Anglo-Saxons, and then run an Oracle on that 50-50 mix? It would be interesting to see. Or do something like 2 Brits and 1 Saxon, and the opposite.
Even an f4 run with the Brits, Anglo-Saxons, and various European populations. For example, Brit+Saxon+French, and so on. Just to see what's closest to Cornwall, Kent, Scotland, and a North English group if you have one.
Chad, in case you include me among the "wipe-out theorists" again: all I've been saying was that the Anglo-Saxons had a non-negligible influence and that the theory of a predominance of local genetic continuity with language change due to elite dominance doesn't apply to England. And the abstract doesn't say that the present-day British are closer to the Celtic Britons, to the contrary. We still haven't seen where the two Britons plot, so don't be hasty.
Here are the ancestry proportions for the updated files with the most markers. I'm going with these...
Hinxton1 - ERS389795
K15
North_Sea 40.82
Atlantic 27.4
Baltic 6.42
Eastern_Euro 12.73
West_Med 6.78
West_Asian 4.12
East_Med 0.01
Red_Sea 1.41
South_Asian 0
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.01
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0.3
Sub-Saharan 0
K13
North_Atlantic 51.9
Baltic 25.21
West_Med 11.63
West_Asian 7.24
East_Med 0.03
Red_Sea 2.28
South_Asian 0
East_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.34
Oceanian 0.21
Northeast_African 1.07
Sub-Saharan 0.08
K7
ANE 16.33
ASE 0.38
WHG-UHG 64.35
East_Eurasian 0.01
West_African 0.42
East_African 0.66
ENF 17.85
Hinxton2 - ERS389796
K15
North_Sea 43.07
Atlantic 28.5
Baltic 7
Eastern_Euro 12.41
West_Med 5.01
West_Asian 2.82
East_Med 0.01
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 0.76
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.02
Oceanian 0.4
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0
K13
North_Atlantic 59.06
Baltic 23.26
West_Med 8.18
West_Asian 6.42
East_Med 0.26
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 0.99
East_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.46
Oceanian 0.81
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0.57
K7
ANE 15.81
ASE 2.43
WHG-UHG 64.21
East_Eurasian 0
West_African 0.32
East_African 1.5
ENF 15.73
Hinxton3 - ERS389797
K15
North_Sea 45.59
Atlantic 28.32
Baltic 3.38
Eastern_Euro 8.57
West_Med 5.26
West_Asian 6.74
East_Med 0.03
Red_Sea 0.15
South_Asian 0.32
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.08
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0.82
Sub-Saharan 0.76
K13
North_Atlantic 57.22
Baltic 20.52
West_Med 8.11
West_Asian 9.72
East_Med 0.45
Red_Sea 0.83
South_Asian 0.74
East_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0.48
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 1.36
Sub-Saharan 0.56
K7
ANE 15.81
ASE 2.43
WHG-UHG 64.21
East_Eurasian 0
West_African 0.32
East_African 1.5
ENF 15.73
How can la Brana be in 5th position in single population sharing ?
Eurogenes K13 Oracle results:
K13 Oracle ref data revised 21 Nov 2013
Kit F999915
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 Baltic 48.33
2 North_Atlantic 47.37
3 West_Med 3.08
4 Oceanian 1
5 Sub-Saharan 0.21
Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 Southwest_Finnish 11.1
2 North_Swedish 12.49
3 Finnish 13.55
4 Estonian 13.88
5 La_Brana-1 15.54
6 Swedish 16.99
7 East_Finnish 17.17
8 Belorussian 17.19
9 Polish 17.39
10 Lithuanian 17.67
11 Estonian_Polish 18.55
12 Russian_Smolensk 18.57
13 South_Polish 18.87
14 Norwegian 19.55
15 Ukrainian 20.71
16 Southwest_Russian 20.95
17 North_German 21.01
18 East_German 21.21
19 Ukrainian_Belgorod 21.29
20 Danish 21.38
I don't really know what that is. Are those La Brana's results at GEDmatch?
If so, that's probably because the La Brana results are based on different samples, with very different numbers of markers.
The updated population averages for the K13 are here, and they probably should be used at GEDmatch now. Feel free to send them over...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Oz6P5-SVEJciPX1TciGe-zoqA5JtOGIMG7nh-rCOj0c/edit?usp=sharing
The K15 pop averages are here...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19c_bZjUV_RouKyGyLHmMDw57WwAVabXFJOaso_gcuRE/edit?usp=sharing
Might help.
Yes, these results are those of Gedmatch
Well, either the La Brana results in the K13 oracle need to be updated....or the file of La Brana that Felix sent to GEDmatch needs to be updated, or both.
Like I said though, the new pop averages are at the links above, and it might be worth sending them over to GEDmatch.
Updated Oracle similarity . From Brits/Irish
Orkney
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Hinxton1 @ 5.928123
2 Hinxton2 @ 6.285687
3 Hinxton3 @ 8.819701
West Scotland
1 Hinxton1 @ 7.388403
2 Hinxton2 @ 7.942823
3 Hinxton3 @ 11.707137
Ireland
1 Hinxton1 @ 8.783805
2 Hinxton2 @ 9.529198
3 Hinxton3 @ 12.941692
South East England (Kent)
1 Hinxton1 @ 8.747718
2 Hinxton2 @ 10.010562
3 Hinxton3 @ 13.128732
South West English ( Cornwall)
1 Hinxton1 @ 9.45905
2 Hinxton2 @ 11.344357
3 Hinxton3 @ 13.979258
My Oracle
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Hinxton2 @ 3.352768
2 Hinxton1 @ 4.929874
3 Hinxton3 @ 7.393163
Modern population
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Orcadian @ 4.754434
2 West_Norwegian @ 6.793912
3 West_Scottish @ 6.922198
4 North_Dutch @ 7.799130
5 Danish @ 8.081676
6 Irish @ 8.313062
Simon,
I wasn't referring to you. Anthrogenica is filled with some who want to be descended from some great conquerors. Plus, the abstract says that the Brits were also Northern European, so it will not be far away from modern Brits. We also don't know the testing methods of the lab. Both could be basically almost an identical distance, with both being too WHG. The Saxons are way too WHG, and too little EEF, to be a majority component among British people. The drift and oracle stats make it pretty clear.
I've got preliminary K15 results for Hinxton4. Looks Irish/Cornish in the 4 Ancestors Oracle...
North_Sea 37.55
Atlantic 28.89
Baltic 13.96
Eastern_Euro 4.8
West_Med 10.09
West_Asian 2.11
East_Med 0
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 2.17
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0.43
1 Irish @ 6.304617
2 Southwest_English @ 6.618185
3 North_Dutch @ 6.702593
4 Southeast_English @ 6.84411
5 West_Scottish @ 7.046681
These will change when I run the full file, but not by much.
Really not a huge difference compared to the first three Hinxtonians, except for some of the details, like the much lower North Sea and Eastern Euro, and higher Baltic and West Med. I wonder why the Baltic is so much higher?
Nice!! English people must be pretty close to what I'm thinking. Do you have a k13, to check the EEF,WHG,ANE?
Looks like he might be close to 43%EEF, 41%WHG, 16%ANE
Preliminary K13 for Hinxtonian4.
North_Atlantic 51.42
Baltic 25.07
West_Med 15.8
West_Asian 4.23
East_Med 0.02
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 2.58
East_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 0
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0.87
44.8%EEF
39.6%WHG
15.6%ANE
There must be almost 40% Continental introgression to the English, since the Anglo-Saxon period.
After all is said and done, an f4 and z score would be interesting. I'd bet Hinxton2+Hinxton4+French=English. Maybe even closer to Germany.
Maybe, but all of these samples are from the east coast, facing the North Sea, and we don't know who was more inland and further south at the time, like closer to Wales.
Also, we're yet to see Hinxton5.
"There must be almost 40% Continental introgression to the English, since the Anglo-Saxon period."
No, Dude(scratching head) that's way to extreme. I think you should do a year of research before strongly backing theories such as that. We still haven't concluded if this is a pure Brit or if he had blood from somewhere else in Europe.
Americans are very conscious of their immigrant ancestors. Ask, anyone "What are you?" and they'll say German, British, Swedish, Italian, etc. Even my great grandfather who has mostly colonial ancestry had been told by his parents he has Welsh, English, German ancestry(Surname came from Wales in the 1700's, and they still remembered).
Why wouldn't modern British be conscious of their continental ancestors who arrived during the Industrial revolution? I know you don't think all 40% came during that time, but you have suggested a big chunk. Your suggesting an immigration bigger than most ethnic immigrations to America.
I don't think there is going to be much of a difference. I'm just speaking about the English in particular. The Cornish and Welsh Iron Age samples might be a bit closer to 50%, but they won't cover much at all. These samples should have Belgic and Gallic ancestry, so they could be just as much EEF as the West Coast.
I think most of it is pre-Industrial Revolution. People came from Denmark for nearly two hundred years, after the Anglo-Saxons. People came from France, for two hundred years following the Norman Invasion. Then, we have people coming in from Gascony, following the Angevin fall. The religious wars of Europe had what might be close to 100k Protestants from France, Germany, etc, move to England in the mid-late 17th Century alone. I am looking for the 16th century, right now. Italians have been coming for some time as well. It could be as low as 25%, depending on how Mediterranean some migrants were. I am using 40% as a ceiling.
Yeah, Hinxton 4 and 5 are probably Belgea Celts, and thus natives of Northern Europe, so that's probably why 4 isn't drastically different from 1-3 in these tests.
Of course, after or during Hinxton 4's liftime the Romans came to the UK. Maybe they wogged up the place, and then the Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Danes turned it all around again, to some degree anyway?
That is possible, David. Maybe just a bit more 'wog'. There is also the possibility that the Black Death disproportionately affected the Brit and Anglo-Saxon descendants more than Anglo-Norman/French ones. That could've turned the tide a bit more in their favor. They would've formed the working class, living in dirtier.. more confined living spaces.
Maybe the English are 30% Brit, 30% Anglo-Saxon, 10% Roman, 10% Dane, 20% post Anglo-Saxon continental.
BTW David,
Mostly U, with at least one H in Samara, per JMan at Antrogenica, who was in correspondence with Reich.
"Yeah, Hinxton 4 and 5 are probably Belgea Celts, and thus natives of Northern Europe, so that's probably why 4 isn't drastically different from 1-3 in these tests."
So are you suggesting northern Celts had alot of common ancestry with early Germans? How do you explain French, south Dutch, and west Germans? Do you think most Gauls were French-like but Belgea and more eastern and northern ones were more like early Germans?
Hopefully a genome of a Hallstatt Gaul from Germany will come up.
If Romans from Italy(possibly other regions) made a significant impact on Britons, we would see it in modern Welsh and English.
A 6-7% increase in EEF didn't happen by magic. A 10% impact by Rome, followed by Anglo-Saxons at 30%, would put us near 47% EEF. Later migrations could then explain the next 3%.
If Brits are ~44% EEF, and the average Roman/Gallic soldier at 75%. That 10% would put Britain up around 51%. Anglo-Saxons would drop it back under 50, and later migrations from France and Germany would bring it back up.
Chad Rohlfson: then something obviously changed
Sure, I'm not disagreeing obviously something changed, if the Hinxton 1-3 samples represent the population at the time (and not just of East England, if that). I'm sure there was substantial input, as I say, 30% might be plausible, or 40% change since 1000 AD, even at only approx 1% change per generation. The point I'm making is that 1% change on average per generation sustained for 1000 years is 30% change. 1.3% change per generation for 1000 years is 40% change. I'm not playing down change, but the impact of time and compound slight changes.
Sometimes it was more sometimes it was less, for instance with Huguenots, who were more, there was a reason why that was notable and other population movements were not. A majority of mixing populations will be essentially Dutch, Belgian, Normand, Scottish and Irish, who already overlap with the British cluster (any input from say Italy or the east of Germany will be a very small fraction of this percent per generation).
I certainly think these flows will have effected all of Europe. No doubt Spanish are closer to Norwegians due to North-South gene flow than their ancestors would've been 1000 years ago, for instance, etc.
I would just not agree that it seems likely the Industrial Revolution in Britain (or any part of Europe) had any particularly large impact on international migration - popular histories do not seem to paint any picture of large continental influx during the Industrial Revolution to work in factories, live in cities etc unlike it the USA. Industrialization in Europe did not really draw on cross national border labour flows to any great extent. It seems anachronistic to see Britain as particularly a migrant destination over long time scales, or even short time scales when the comparison is the USA.
For an example, comparing genetic diversity between CEU Americans (a population of possibly diverse origins which lands on Northwest European space on PCA) and GBR British, looking at in the Skoglund et al paper
(http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Pontus_Skoglund/publication/261880986_Genomic_Diversity_and_Admixture_Differs_for_Stone-Age_Scandinavian_Foragers_and_Farmers/links/00b4953625a2410d32000000),
Conditional nucleotide diversity in Europe among their 5 samples follows the order Iberian (IBS), Toscani (TSI), CEU, Finland (FIN), Great Britain (England and Scotland). FSTs between groups from smallest (least differentiation) to largest (most differentiation) are: CEU-IBS, CEU-GBR, CEU-TSI, TSI-IBS, FIN-CEU, GBR-IBS, GBR-TSI, FIN-GBR, FIN-IBS, FIN-TSI. In another paper, haplotype heterozygosity is also lower in the England, Scotland or Ireland, than in Sweden, etc. It is difficult to know how representative the GBR sample is, but Britain certainly seems to display markedly reduced genetic diversity compared to CEU and even here, compared to Finland. We'll have to see, perhaps when there are larger samples, if it is increased relative to approximately 700-1000 AD and by how much.
Matt,
No doubt the changes are interesting. Something else to ponder is how much the Industrialization of Northern Britain, bringing in Southern Brits changed things. Going further back, we have the Highland Clearance. We might see bigger extremes today, if not for that. Something like 14% of the English are of Irish descent, today, as well. I think that all NW Europeans could've been rather homogenous, up until 13-1500 years ago.
Matt,
Just to clarify, in my later responses I did say that I think most of the Continental shift happened pre-IR. Romans,Danes, Normans/French/Huguenots/Palatine Germans, Flemish,Italians etc.
The movement of Protestants looks like a huge factor.
Yeah, to be fair on you that is true, and I should have phrased my comment with that in mind.
I think the shift of modern Danes, Swedes, North/East Germans is from mixing with some Slavic tribes, on top of the Protestant movement to the North. You do see old records that point to Wendish and Obotrite mixing.
I also wonder how much East German/Goths play in this. Their movements correspond to a similar time.
Polabian Slavs, isn't a bad theory. I do get Polish cousins on 23andme, when I have no known Polish Ancestry, just Pomeranian German. It's probably more of an IBS thing.
Another factor to bear in mind for genetic changes - the massive expansion of the peasantry into the urban lower classes during and since the IR. If the Norman upper classes were predominantly Nordic (WHG+ANE), and the peasant life-style gradually favoured EEF amongst that caste during the Middle Ages, then the change in survival patterns with the IR may have led to a further expansion of EEF with the lower classes. Peasants/ farmers/ EEF.
@Chad
"There must be almost 40% Continental introgression to the English, since the Anglo-Saxon period."
With Welsh surnames. Right.
The EEF will turn out to be Welsh imo - with more descent from the first farmers than the northern component.
.
@barak
"So are you suggesting northern Celts had alot of common ancestry with early Germans?"
That's what Caesar said. He said Gaul was occupied by three distinct groups: "Vascones" (Basques) in the SW, "Belgae" in the NW and Gauls in the rest. He said the Belgae were a Germanic tribe that had crossed the Rhine early (and hence adopted Celtic culture).
So Belgae Celts ought to be similar to Saxons.
.
@apostate
"the massive expansion of the peasantry into the urban lower classes during and since the IR. If the Norman upper classes were predominantly Nordic (WHG+ANE), and the peasant life-style gradually favoured EEF"
I think that will be it except i think it will be more east vs west with the more lowland eastern half of England being mostly Saxon and the hillier western half mostly Welsh with the mixing happening during the IR.
.
Some north Wales samples would settle the argument.
@Chad
"I'm glad to see concrete proof that the Anglo-Saxon genes do not dominate England. There are a hell of a lot of wipe-out theorists still hanging on."
You're arguing against yourself.
Which group according to you ought to have more EEF: non Belgae Britons, Belgae Britons or Saxons?
The non Belgae Britons - who were already in England i.e. they were already "continental". The less "wiped out" they were the more EEF would be already there and the less you'd need from the continent.
So far all the genetic evidence is agreeing with Bede i.e. that there was a rapid full replacement type conquest in the east of England followed by a slow and gradual elite only type conquest of the west.
So something like 80% Saxon, 20% Briton in the eastern third of England, 50/50 in the middle third and 80% Briton, 20% Saxon in the western third.
The only question then would be when the mixture happened with the prevalence of Welsh surnames (representing just the male half of internal migration btw) suggesting that it was either a) after surnames became prevalent or perhaps b) "Welsh" names were common in parts of England before the IR i.e. apostate's peasantry suggestion.
The Belgae look just like the anglo-Saxons, just drifted more west. Neither one has close to enough EEF to cover anything. I said that they were Northern European, and continental input is needed.
@Chad
"I said that they were Northern European, and continental input is needed."
You're ignoring the Welsh. If the Welsh were non-Belgae Celts (Vascones-like?) with EEF similar to Basques then given Welsh surnames make up c. 20% of the top 20 surnames in England continental input is not required.
It *might* turn out that way but given the surnames there's another equally (i'd say more) plausible explanation.
Gray,
Sorry, but how or why in the hell would the welsh be like the Basque? No Northern European group is 60% EEF. Don't put too much stock into surnames. Several 'welsh' surnames have been anglicized, and are shared with the English. If Belgae are 44-45% at that time, I don't see how the welsh would be more. Northern Europe has become more mediterranean, not less. There has been a lot of migration to Britain. The numbers are there.
The only Welsh surname in the top 10, is Evans. Jones, Williams, and Davies, are also English names, and date almost as far back as the doomsday book, in England.
They are mostly Welsh names. The Only other place you'd find them are in the West Country.
For all the Welsh language. You can see they are anglo-Norman names. The Normans invaded Wales along with ireland.
Not Scotland, whom remained an independent Kingdom & many of the Anglo-Saxon elite moved up to Scotland leaving Englands Norman rule.
Orkney seems to be the most differentiated population within the British Isles area.
People of the British Isles project:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260910/?tool=pubmed
Pairwise FST values, calculated separately for each marker, showed no obvious consistent patterns, apart from the suggestion at three loci (HLA-B, rs7853989 and NRY) that the Orcadian samples appear to be significantly different from the rest (Supplementary Table 4). As may be expected from a marker with a lower effective population size, FST values calculated using the NRY data were greater than those for the autosomal markers.
(the lack of structure in FST is because these populations are really, really close, so it would difficult to find anything without much larger sample sizes than the really large sample sizes they have. like PCA and STRUCTURE didn't find anything.
unlike projects like Eurogenes they weren't conditioning using other European populations, so local drift (which is similar for all areas relative to one another) becomes more statistically more prominent than components which may have a more ancient time scale.
there is some alternative suggestions of structure in ydna structure).
A news story echoes this - http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2012/120703.html
It doesn't give any cluster differences, but the text suggests that the most differentiated people in the UK are people in Orkney.
So if at least present day North Welsh are "Vascones" like, it leads to them being less differentiated than SE English and Orkney should be.
Orkney on the PoBI was at 20-25% from Norway, Sweden. Whereas the rest of UK was from 0-10%, lowest being at West Wales and South West England.
Germanic similarity much higher in South-Central England
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g156/irnbru293/germanicbritain_zps7d1a9aa7.jpg~original
Graham,
That is a second argument to my point. Western Countries are usually where you find these names. It is also no guarantee that they are all Welsh, as some go back to the 11th Century, in Eastern England. For instance, Jones might be 5% of Wales, but 0.75% of England.
There are only about 600k Welsh, living in England. Welsh people were never numerous enough to influence later English genetics. Now, other native Britons, sure. There never was a population replacement in England, just variations in mixing. Now, with these old samples, seeing how close the Anglo-Saxons and Britons were, It looks like a fairly even mixing across most of England, plus later influence from across the Channel and North Sea.
Unfortunately, some will see the Anglo-Saxons plotting with Orcadians and Scots, and then assume some kind of replacement there. Round and round we go..
It is quite possible that 3 and especially 1, have native admixture. Hinxton 2 may not have any, but given her western plot, she could have some.
@Chad
"Sorry, but how or why in the hell would the welsh be like the Basque?"
Why wouldn't they be? Was Britain empty before the Belgae Celts arrived?
Jones, Evans, Williams, Davies are disproportionately Welsh - which is odd when you think about it and implies either a large migration at some point - most likely IR imo - or apostate's idea which I am wondering about now as well that "Welsh" names may have continued as a substrate in England especially in the less Saxon west of England.
Like I say assuming the Bell Beakers weren't Belgae then what were the inhabitants of Britain like before the Belgae - were they like Caesar's "Vascones"?
I think it is quite likely although it would take dna from north Wales to prove it one way or the other.
It is quite possible that 3 and especially 1, have native admixture. Hinxton 2 may not have any, but given her western plot, she could have some.
I think that too Chad. The Norse did mix with some people eventually up here in Scotland. That is why we have Somerled and the Gallowglass.
Perhaps the same thing happened in part with the Angles and natives. As long as the anglo- culture was intact, could be brought up in their ways.
"That is a second argument to my point. Western Countries are usually where you find these names."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_most_common_surnames_in_Europe#England
Most common London surnames:
4th Jones
5th Williams
.
"There are only about 600k Welsh, living in England. Welsh people were never numerous enough to influence later English genetics. Now, other native Britons, sure."
I'm inclined to agree with that bit but the prevalence of surnames suggest that either there was a lot of migration from Wales or there were a lot of pre-conquest "Welsh" in England.
The existence of the latter isn't an issue - only the proportions in different regions - so the question is were they all Belgae-like or were there also remnants of the pre-Celtic Atlantic/Beaker population and if so what were they like.
Gray,
Considering how close Denmark is to England in EEF, plus where the Iron Age samples are, there is no chance that the Welsh are much, if any more EEF than the Iron Age samples.
Let me break down the surname deal for you..
England has 53 mil people
600k are Welsh
That's only 1%.
Jones is .75% of England. Unless 75% of the Welsh in England are named Jones (only 5% in Wales), it could be safe to assume that most of those are of English origin. Even considering the chance of a paternal Welsh line, it won't increase those chances a great deal. Names are just names. Unless it's something like Chang or Patel, it will be hard to assume much.
It is unlikely that Bell Beaker is very 'Vasconic'. Considering the amount of ANE that will have to be in Bell Beaker to make everyone 15-17% ANE, they will probably be like the Bronze Age Dane. More of a hyper-Finn, than anything Western Mediterranean. Those 'Spanish' snps are probably more related to the Atlantic Megalith Culture.
Once again, Iron Age samples and Medievel Anglo-Saxons are very Northern European in their EEF. Northern Europeans became more Mediterranean in the last 1300 years, not more WHG. The data and PCS plots are very clear on this.
Grey,
Jones, pre-conquest?
There was no one named Jones in the 5th-12th Century. The oldest record of a Jones is in England, during the 13th Century. Surnames are a more recent thing. Native Britons may not have been over 50% EEF, at all. If a Belgae, from Northern Gaul is 45%, I fail to see how a person across a sea barrier, would be more. Northern French are 5% more EEF today, than the English. I think it's safe to assume that has been the case, since the Neolithic.
If Iron Age Britons were Irish-like and Anglo-Saxons Orcadian-like, then the largest part of the more continental input may have been brought by the Normans. The founders of Normandy had been Danes, but that was in 911 AD. Until 1066 they had plenty of time to mix with local French women. Rollo, the first Duke of Normandy, for instance married the daughter of the Count of Beranger. They even spoke French by the time they invaded England.
Ironically, the oldest record of a Jones, is in Cambridgeshire.
f you have times. You could look through the doomsday book of 1086, & the names here.
http://domesdaymap.co.uk/name/
This is only a theory but it seems conceivable that feudalism and IR may have raised the levels of EEF by 10% above the levels of ANY inhabitants of the UK and without ANY migration (which is not to deny that there would have been variations in levels or that there was some later migration.
EEF is historically associated with farming, hence we may imagine that some (genetic) psychic or physical traits may be associated with both EEF and that life-style. Now the AS, Danes and Normans ruled as aristocrats over a mainly farming peasantry. There would have been some slight variation of EEF among peasants and we may imagine that 1000 years of feudalism may have gradually selected for those peasants who had a higher level of EEF and who were thus most adapted to peasant-hood.
Over generations, centuries, millennia, the level of EEF may have risen significantly among the peasants just from the selective pressures imposed by feudalism. Then with the rise of capitalism and the IR, the peasantry expanded massively to become the urban lower classes and thus the peasants, who had come to bear a higher level of EEF, expanded as a proportion of the population - and with it the population average of EEF increased as a whole. With the IR came also the break down of the caste system and the gradually mixing of the classes, which levelled out EEF across the population.
Of course I do not clam to have any proof of this but it does perhaps make sense. Unless this theory can be disproved there is no need to _assume_ any later migration to account to higher levels of EEF.
Uhm... Britons at 45% EEF, anglo/saxon/Briton at 42-43%... How do either of those two mixing, make 50%? Think logically guys.
I'm analyzing the full Hinxton4 file now, so let's wait for the final results.
Leaving aside EEF estimates produced by secondary calculators based on plugging in ADMIXTURE components and looking at Hinxton4's Eurogenes K13 (for all that they may change when Davidski has made a fuller analysis) and trying to mix it with another population to get modern Southeast English, the best single population to mix with seems about 10% West German / South Dutch.
All other mixes become are more dissimilar to the modern Southeast English are than if Hinxton 4 were not admixed with anyone else (based on correlation coefficients and raw differences in components).
The French are too West Med and not Baltic enough - any mix with them which reduces the North Atlantic levels to the right levels, bring up West Med too fast and Baltic down too fast.
The Scandinavians bring up the Baltic too fast, mixes which take the NA to the right level have too much Baltic and not enough West Med (as do the North Germans).
In terms of modern populations, anything other than around 15% West German mixture makes the resulting mix less like Southeast English than Hinxton4 itself is.
1 population flow is a simplification, but that seems to show you couldn't have much flow from a French like source without counterweighting flow from Irish and Scandinavian like sources, or from Scandinavian sources without French and Irish like sources to balance, etc.
I'll be interested to see what Oracles find when which can freely vary in ancestry and target Southeast England using up to four populations e.g. any of the contributors is free to be 100-0% so long as it all sums to 100% (i.e not using an unrealistic assumption where all 4 contributors are stuck at equal percentages), using Hinxton4 and the other Hinxton samples as contributors.
Again, just for information, comparing Hinxton4 with the Southeast English average, it is different in the following terms
+1.46% North Atlantic, -1.17% Baltic, +1.12% West Med, +0.46% West Asian, -2.39% East Med, +0.86 Red Sea, disregarding differences in the non-West Eurasian components.
"disregarding differences in the non-West Eurasian components"
A minor and annoying problem comparing ancient-modern admixture results is modern ones have up to 1.5% noise, while ancient ones score 0 in pretty much all non-west Eurasian components.
Matt,
Considering the later settlement by Danes, Normans/French, Gascony, Huguenots, palatinate Germans, the IR migrations, and later Irish movements, should even it out, as you say.
Hinxton-4
k36
19.46 North Atlantic
18.61 Iberian
12.93 North Sea
12.02 Fennoscandia
10.21 French
8.45 Central Euro
6.53 East Central Euro
5.56 Italian
3.93 North Caucasian
1.22 Eastern Euro
1.01 Basque
0.06 East Balkan
Hinxton 3/4 mix
22 North Sea
20 North Atlantic
12 Fennoscandia
12 Iberian
8 Central Euro
8 French
4 Italian
3 Basque
3 East Central Euro
2 West Caucasian
2 North Caucasian
The rest is under 1%
@Simon_W
"If Iron Age Britons were Irish-like and Anglo-Saxons Orcadian-like"
That seems to me to be the critical point. Were the Belgae Celts the definitive Iron Age Britons or were there remnants from the previous layer.
The thing is it's been remarked on for many years by numerous writers that the Welsh look different. It's faded over time with mixing but it's certainly something I've noticed echoes of especially in contrast with the Irish/Scottish.
So were there both Belgae Celts in post-conquest Saxon England and non-Belgae "Welsh" Celts (both in Wales itself and outside).
Given the mountainous terrain in north Wales it seems to me even modern dna from that region might shed light one way or the other.
@Matt
"looking at Hinxton4's Eurogenes K13 ... and trying to mix it with another population to get modern Southeast English"
If there are differences between modern SE English and the Hinxton samples that certainly makes sense.
", the best single population to mix with seems about 10% West German / South Dutch.""
Which doesn't fit the Welsh idea. I guess my thinking was skewed by Chad seeming to say it was 40% Italian or something.
@Chad
"Jones, pre-conquest?
There was no one named Jones in the 5th-12th Century."
Exactly, surnames arrived relatively late so... the people who generated those distinctively "Welsh" surnames survived in a form that would generate those surnames until relatively late.
.
"England has 53 mil people
600k are Welsh"
Yes, that's why I thought the prevalence of surnames was a little odd - unless there was always a substrate of "Welsh" in England.
.
"It is unlikely that Bell Beaker is very 'Vasconic'...Those 'Spanish' snps are probably more related to the Atlantic Megalith Culture...Northern Europeans became more Mediterranean in the last 1300 years, not more WHG."
Yes, either Bell Beaker or Atlantic Megalith, one of them will be Vascones-like imo with the most likely center of gravity around the copper, silver and gold mines that used to exist around Wales, Cornwall and bits of the opposite Irish coast.
If north Europeans became more Mediterranean over the last 1300 years was it because of later migration or a bounce back of a more mediterranean-like conquered LBK / Megalith / Beaker substrate.
That's my point.
Either way the Welsh look different and there will be an interesting ancient story behind that difference one way or another whether it's connected to this or something else.
Grey, there were no Belgae in Ireland, yet the Irish seem to be close to the Hinxton Britons. Therefore whatever differentiates the Welsh from the Hinxton Britons, it's unlikely to be simply the pre-Belgic layer. I suspect it's more ancient.
40% Italian? You should re-check what I wrote. I said Danes, Normans/French, Gascony, Huguenots, palatinate Germans, Flemish, Italian, and Irish.
@Simon_W
"there were no Belgae in Ireland"
I'm using Belgae more generally as "Germanic Celts" but specifically maybe there were:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builg
The key point - which has got a bit lost I admit - is in the history books Celt and Saxon are generally seen as distinct populations with Welsh/Cornish grouped with Irish/Scottish in the Celt category whereas it always seemed plain to me visually that the Welsh (and to a lesser extent Cornish because of more mixture) were physically distinct from Irish/Scottish.
So I've always wondered if there were in fact two Celt branches in Britain with one centered around the now defunct copper, gold and silver mines in the SW.
And if that was correct then the mining link might be a clue as to where that branch came from i.e. the Iberian connection.
(which would then create a *possible* source for any extra Mediterranean component)
As for the Saxons in northern Germany, I think they were never quite homogenous, since they arose from a fusion of smaller tribes of early antiquity (as all the late antique West Germanic tribes did): Saxones, Chauci, Cherusci and Angrivarii. Hence probably only those close to the North Sea were very similar to the Anglo-Saxons in England. Those more to the South may have had a bit more ancestry from the Urnfield culture.
@Simon_W
"Therefore whatever differentiates the Welsh from the Hinxton Britons, it's unlikely to be simply the pre-Belgic layer. I suspect it's more ancient."
Started typing after your first sentence and didn't read the rest till after my last post so...
Yes. I don't have a clear view on where it comes from but there is (or was) a physical difference so now dna is being used for this I'm very curious about what is in those mountains.
There must have been more than two Celtic invasions on the British Isles. Because we find q-Celtic (Gaelic) and p-Celtic (Brythonic) there. Q-Celtic is the oldest branch, and in antiquity it was confined to Ireland. P-Celtic however was present in Wales and in Scotland, as well as in England. The Belgae however were only in the Southeast of England. They must have been at least the third Celtic layer.
I should have added to this to the last post so apologies but 30-ish years ago after spending a lot of time in "outdoor" activities in Ireland and the west of Britain it struck me that the Welsh/Cornish were distinct from (most of) the Scottish/Irish and if anything the English were like a mixture of the two.
Now that dna is being used I'm very curious to see if there was any truth in that belief or if it was a figment of my imagination.
# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 49.19
2 Baltic 23.52
3 West_Med 13.43
4 East_Med 7.80
5 West_Asian 2.98
6 Siberian 1.44
Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.
--------------------------------
Least-squares method.
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Southeast_English @ 3.888487
2 Orcadian @ 6.312996
3 South_Dutch @ 6.332889
4 Southwest_English @ 6.712634
5 North_Dutch @ 6.927157
6 Danish @ 7.023905
7 West_German @ 7.571272
8 North_German @ 7.909475
9 West_Scottish @ 7.973336
10 Irish @ 8.163597
11 Norwegian @ 9.377157
12 Swedish @ 11.103469
13 French @ 11.599116
14 Austrian @ 14.379334
15 East_German @ 15.257599
16 North_Swedish @ 16.392210
17 Spanish_Cataluna @ 19.390150
18 Hungarian @ 19.407026
19 Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon @ 20.656246
20 Southwest_French @ 21.097813
Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Southeast_English +50% Southeast_English @ 3.888487
Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Southeast_English +25% Southeast_English +25% West_German @ 3.428896
Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Southeast_English + Southeast_English + Southeast_English + West_German @ 3.428896
2 South_Dutch + Southeast_English + Southeast_English + Southeast_English @ 3.462484
3 French + Norwegian + Southeast_English + Southeast_English @ 3.517430
4 Danish + French + Southeast_English + Southeast_English @ 3.543394
5 Danish + Danish + Norwegian + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.589190
6 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.594308
7 Danish + North_Dutch + Norwegian + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.600254
8 French + North_Dutch + Southeast_English + Southeast_English @ 3.602931
9 French + Southeast_English + Southeast_English + Swedish @ 3.607332
10 Norwegian + Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Murcia @ 3.628754
11 Norwegian + Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.632568
12 Danish + Norwegian + Norwegian + Spanish_Murcia @ 3.633997
13 Danish + Danish + Norwegian + Spanish_Murcia @ 3.637224
14 Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Murcia + Swedish @ 3.660198
15 North_Dutch + Norwegian + Norwegian + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.665222
16 Danish + North_Dutch + Norwegian + Spanish_Murcia @ 3.672384
17 North_Dutch + North_Dutch + Norwegian + Spanish_Valencia @ 3.674136
18 Norwegian + Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Cataluna @ 3.683230
19 Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Valencia + Swedish @ 3.683983
20 Danish + Norwegian + Southeast_English + Spanish_Cataluna @ 3.688206
Matt, k13 has me in the se section of se English. I'm about half colonial and northern British. The other half is Danish, Pomeranian German, Alsatian/French, Bavarian, Irish, and Jew. Yet, I am close to a modern Kentish person.
@Simon_W
"There must have been more than two Celtic invasions on the British Isles...They must have been at least the third Celtic layer."
Yes and one of those layers could be a pre-Celtic layer that adopted Celtic culture.
(On the language issue could a conquered pre-Celtic population have caused the language shift?)
(basically i'm thinking of Caesar again and something like 1) a Celtic population with a Celtic culture (Gauls), 2) a Germanic population with Celtic culture (Belgae and maybe others before them with no names) and 3) a Vascones-like population with Celtic culture.
but like i say. it would need ancient dna from the west (or maybe modern dna from remote parts of wales) to show one way or the other.
@Chad
" k13 has me in the se section of se English. I'm about half colonial and northern British. The other half is Danish, Pomeranian German, Alsatian/French, Bavarian, Irish, and Jew. Yet, I am close to a modern Kentish person."
We're not actually arguing. I'm saying a similar more Mediterranean-like LBK/Megalith substrate may have existed in Britain already among the "Welsh" and by Welsh I don't just mean the ones in Wales.
I did read some time ago about a study of Welsh mountain dna but i haven't heard anything since.
I should have done this from the beginning but anyway a quick bit of googling produces the Welsh dna project and their Y dna page:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/walesdna/default.aspx?section=yresults
Majority R as expected but also what looks like c. 20% E, F, G, I1, I2 and J
.
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/archaeology/research/copper-mines/index
"The aim of this project is to investigate the possibility that 4000 years ago the Bronze Age copper miners at the Great Orme and Parys Mountain in North Wales were incomers from as far afield as the Balkans and Spain. We have reason to suspect this because a previous investigation in North Wales reported a much higher than average presence of a DNA marker that is commonly found in people from the Balkans and Spain."
"previous investigation"
more googling needed
.
some other related links
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18489735
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/bryn-terfel-michael-sheen-among-7828137
http://www.s4c.co.uk/e_press_level2.shtml?id=737
so it seems the dna data will be forthcoming
I think this from 2011 may have been the previous investigation mentioned above:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-14173910
"So far, 500 people have taken part in the study which shows 30% of men carry an unusual type of Y chromosome, compared to 1% of men elsewhere the UK."
Chad : Matt, k13 has me in the se section of se English. I'm about half colonial and northern British. The other half is Danish, Pomeranian German, Alsatian/French, Bavarian, Irish, and Jew. Yet, I am close to a modern Kentish person.
Yeah, I don't think that is impossible, although I imagine you would score higher on certain measures of genetic diversity and IBD with all those population than a Kent-ish person would.
But yeah, we couldn't someone with your mix apart from someone whose ancestors were a lot more local to Kent on the basis of component or PCA.
Grey Which doesn't fit the Welsh idea. I guess my thinking was skewed by Chad seeming to say it was 40% Italian or something.
I think the discussion tends to go that way with number checks.
Although to be fair looking at the PCA David's just put up with Hinxton4 in the Hinxton3 comment thread (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQVW5rVVhnbHAyMEE/view?usp=sharing), I do think the K13 components may lack some power compared to the PCA to detect populations beyond the norm, as they have maximum levels where PC dimensions aren't so constrained, so the K13 may normalises the sample more than it does. Like Loschbour gives very different results from PCA, which show it far beyond modern populations and K13 which show it much closer.
So admixture might be greater (perhaps by quite a lot), and I wouldn't put any great store on 10%, but the general direction of change seems best approximated (by a single population) by a modern day West German vector (no West Germans in the Human Origins PCA by David, but their centroid is gonna be on the French->Czech line, with a tiny skew to Denmark, as they are in reality). Although the Anglo Saxons certainly don't seem to be modern day West Germans, so multiple influences will be necessary, I guess...
Grey, the q-Celtic branch has the q instead of PIE *kw, I think that's still close to the original sound quality. Similarly in Italic there is a q-branch, the most famous being Latin. See "equus" for istance, that's derived from PIE *ekwos. And p-Celtic was also present in continental Europe, so that can't be from a specifically British substrate. Also there is a p-branch in Italic, namely Oscan-Umbrian.
As for the unusual y-chromosomes in parts of Wales, it's a pity the article doesn't specifiy the haplogroup. But from the description I would guess they mean J2. According to Eupedia J2 is 1% in Wales on the whole. And R1b clearly predominant, like in all remote parts of Western Europe. I think it's problematic to read too much into the haplogroup frequency of a single small area, since there is also drift at work. But on the other hand according to Eupedia the sampling in Wales could be more extensive.
I got as far as this:
"On the Norman invasion thing, the Normans were basically Scandinavians who took on French customs, culture and language. Hence the name (Northman). So would it be that Normans, (really French speaking Norwegians) were already quite high in WHG?"
then decided to comment. Yes, Normandy was settled by Scandinavians many generations earlier but they did not completely replace the locals and there was much intermarriage. By the time Guilliame le Conquerant (not Sven Skullsplitter) invaded England he had more French blood than Scandinavian. Further his followers were a minority of his Norman invaders. His army was a large mix of Normans, Bretons, northern French and Belgians. There were many contacts and migration from and to the continent (example South Wales) under the Norman and later the Anjou kings.
My guess is pre Roman British Isles, particularly the extremities had much higher WHG than after the Romans arrived and it decreased with medieval and modern empires, contacts and trade.
"If I use Tuscans to portray the average Roman soldier, Italian/Gaul, at 75% EEF, 13% WHG, and 12% ANE, "
Using people from an area that has genetic links in both people and cattle to Anatolia & the near east to model central and western European Gauls?
"CEU, in many runs, does show up in the British plot. These people are mostly of British and North German descent, I believe. "
Utah is the really only state where conclusively English are the largest ethnic group* Add in that many Mormons came to the US from England, including Mitt Romney's ancestors and they seem a pretty good stand in.
As far as the difference between modern Danes and the Angle ancestors keep in mind that there was also a large slave trade sending Anglo Saxon thralls to Scandinavia (as well as to Ireland, Iceland etc) throughout the viking period and probably before. Some of the modern similarities may be a result. Also wrt Iceland, many of the immigrants came from England and had English wives and slaves.
*They also show up as largest in VT and ME but in the former and probably the latter (I've seen contradicting evidence) they are outnumbered if you combine French and Canadian French ethnicities
Post a Comment