GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

From: ellen Levy <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] "Celtic" dna
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:03:21 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <010820052020.26973.41E040830000F4CE0000695D2200762194050B989A0E00@comcast.net>

Hi David:

Yes, Romans appear to have left a genetic legacy in
every land they inhabited. Not surprising given the
length of time they lived and dominated such lands.

However, are you arguing that there was enough
Sarmatian soldiers in Britain to have left a genetic
legacy? How many are we talking about, according to
historical sources? And do those sources attribute
most of their ancestry to the Western Samartians?
More importantly, how have you determined that they
were primarily J2? Is this through comparison with
modern Iranian populations in the areas that comprised
Western Sarmatia?

Also, looking at Roman genetics: modern Italian
populations are about 50% J and E (I'm referring to
Semino's study here). That leaves another 50% or so
to be "other." I assume this "other" includes R1b, I
& R1a. How can we be sure that these haplogroups were
not part of the Roman legacy in Britain?

The Neolithic movement of peoples out of Anatolia is
not hypothetical, though I agree with you that it's
movement into Britain may be. Interesting that the
latest linguistic studies attribute the movement of
Celtic culture into Britain with agriculture. I think
it could also be attributed to the movement of
metallurgy into Britain, which happened fairly close
to that time period as well. These ideas are
thought-provoking.

The Neolithic migrations out of Anatolia is
well-supported by the archaeological record, as well
now as the DNA studies, indicating a decreasing cline
of certain Middle Eastern haplogroups as you travel
further and further west into Europe. Like R1a, it
simply petters out the closer your are to the western
fringes of Europe. However, that these Anatolia
haplogroups made it to Britain is seems fairly likely,
though I agree with you that it's really the
percentages were arguing about here. The
archaeological records speaks to constant and
continued contact (both cultural exchange and
population movements) from the mainland, particularly
France and Spain, into Britain from at least 4000 BC
and probably earlier. Some of these migrating people
were probably J & E (and R1b and possibly R1a as
well). In my opinion, it would be very difficult to
differentiate between Roman J2 and Neolithic/Anatolian
J2.

Ellen


--- wrote:

> Indeed Ellen, and I did make that caveat as you will
> see below. It is possible, however, that the
> Western Sarmatians (Jazyges) were largely Iranian
> and thus J2 etc.
>
> As to the presence of J2, E3b, and G2 in my opinion
> the most parsimonious explanation of their presence
> in Britain is the documented presence of Romans and
> the mercenaries from regions rich in precisely those
> haplogroups. To me, this is the most parsimonious
> interpretation. There is no need to refer to
> hypothetical Neolithc migrations of people with
> these haplogroups when we are then required to refer
> to data sources like linguistics and archaeology
> which are more indirect. Cultural diffusion and
> elite dominance can explain any influences in
> Britain during Neolithic times. However this does
> not preclude the infusion of some few of the above
> mentioned haplotypes during this undocumented era.
> I think that the only difference in our perspectives
> here is one of degree. Quantitatively more can be
> attributed to Roman - Era migrations (me) or
> Neolithic haplogroup diffusion (you). As with so
> many things it is probably not an either - or
> scenario here, just a case of finding t!
> he relative percentages.
>
> David F.
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
>
>

This thread:

• Re: [DNA] "Celtic" dna by

  • Re: [DNA] "Celtic" dna by ellen Levy <>