GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-11 > 1164740066


From: David Faux <>
Subject: [DNA] Vikings in Ireland
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:54:26 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <000a01c71304$d1888310$6101a8c0@owner45459e956>


ef_mckee <> wrote: Every now and then I run across articles that would give one the impression that the Norse influence on the history of Ireland was considerable. I would like to see other viewpoints on the subject. I wonder whether the Vikings might have spent a lot more time exploiting the area that now encompasses Germany, Denmark, and other lands on conitnental Europe. I dunno, jus' askin'. Has someone more knowledgeable of the history of Ireland than I come to the same conclusions or to other conclusions?

Ed McKee
________________________________________

Yes, on all counts.

The Danes, Norse and Swedes were constantly at war with one another (often much more localized) in the years leading up to the Viking era - if the scant sources are to be believed. They harried Friesland and Saxony until stopped by the Franks; and the Baltic states until the Wends became more formidable. These conflicts are shown quite clearly in the archaeological record of Denmark where the old Cimbri tradition of breaking the weapons of the enemy and throwing them in sacred bogs held until the 6th Century (at which point they were apparently overthrown and absorbed by the Danes from the east). Prior to this point the Harudes (Charudes), the largest tribe among the Cimbri, had (according to an extensive study by Troels Brandt) invaded Hordaland in Norway and made a number of settlements there. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The momentum then shifted and the centrifugal force spun the Danes and Norse to the British Isles etc. so their aggression was vented
outward (at least for a time).

Based on some research data from Norway it appears that the majority of the "Viking R1b" was R1b1c9 (S21) and to a lesser extent R1b1c10 (S28). The TCD team did not test for these markers but will do so at a later date.

It is also debatable whether using the surnames employed in the study is the best way to identify those of Viking descent. For example the surname Arthur if found in Shetland it indeed denotes someone whose ancestors were Viking (it was actually Arthurson but the son was dropped). However, especially considering that two of the three Arthurs were E3b, a source in England is possible. Hendricks may be a German surname. In 1709 the English government established a large settlement of Palatine Germans in Ireland. I am not sure that surnames are a good indication of Viking ancestry in Ireland.

Jim Wilson noted in one of his 2001 papers that R1a was the only unequivocal indicator of Viking ancestry in Britain. Five years later this conclusion may need to be modified slightly to take into account a modicum of R1a in the Anglo - Saxon invaders. Certainly R1a from Ireland or Scotland is much more likely to be Norse Viking than anything else. The "Ui Neill study" by Moore at TCD study collected 796 Irish samples and only 3 were R1a, which certainly is very low indeed and supporting the hypothesis that Viking genetic input was minimal. However there were fairly substantial numbers of haplogroup I whose origins are a mystery (at least to me).

I suppose it is possible that even if 5% of the R1b was R1b1c9 this might reflect a notable Viking input but I would put this into the same category as haplogroup I since it may be via Anglo - Saxon or Norse sources. A more persuasive argument could be made if there was a detectable R1b1c10 (S28) input. This is probably much like R1a in that the only likely source is Norse Viking. To date S28 has, however, not been observed in Ireland, at least via the customer base of EthnoAncestry.

In my opinion the .004% R1a in the Irish sample (the percentage being typically about 30% in Norway) does argue for a very limited genetic contribution of the Vikings to the Irish gene pool. In looking at a map of the areas the Vikings raided (just about everywhere there was a river) the findings are quite surprising - given the reputation of the Vikings in the rape and pillage department (but the numbers may also be telling us something about Viking behavior; or the response of the Irish women to same). How many of the apparently few Irish Viking Y-chromsomes are attributable to "casual encounters" versus stable Viking families integrated into the Gaelic community. Considering the documented presence of Norse and some Danish Vikings in Ireland it is surprising that their genetic signature is not apparent. However it is possible that as they began to lose power the Norse Vikings of Dublin etc. migrated to Chester, York and Cumbria in England or to Iceland leaving very
few of their confreres in the Emerald Isle.

David Faux.

This thread: