GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-11 > 1164779201


From: "Greg & Irene" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Vikings in Ireland
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 22:46:41 -0700
References: <20061128185426.54460.qmail@web50704.mail.yahoo.com>


I'm confused by the stats. You mention 'The "Ui Neill study" by Moore at TCD
study collected 796 Irish samples and only 3 were R1a". I am the
coadministrator of the Craig Dna project. 3 of the our 29 members (myself
included) are R1a, and of Irish descent. Are we Craigs statistical
anomalies, 10 % vice .04% ?

Gregory Craig
Co-administrator
Craig DNA Project



---- Original Message -----
From: "David Faux" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 11:54 AM
Subject: [DNA] Vikings in Ireland


>
>
> 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.
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>

This thread: