GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119632935
From: "Glen Todd" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Haplogroup F*
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:08:55 -0600
> Most of us are not biologists or geneticists, which I think
> helps the field by bringing in fresh perspectives on things.
> Now I understand your logic in the I1a connection; the over
> lap of the area of hits. But just keep in mind the clear
> biases in the databases Ysearch and Sorenson. Ysearch is
> extremely overloaded with contributions from British Isles
> Sorenson has a stronger continental contribution, but it is
> also biased toward Scandinavia and (northern) Germany,
> although I see more and more Eastern Europe contributions
> to Sorenson show up as time goes by.
I'm well aware of the biases in the databases, although in this case that's
perhaps all to the good, as that's exactly where I would expect to see the
> Ix is a small group!
It certainly is! In fact, one of my more fanciful speculations is that it
might even be a single family line.
> That nothing has shown up in Eastern Europe could just be
> statistics given the small numbers of database contributions
> from that area.
> What struck me from Sorenson hits for Ix was nothing from
> Norway or Sweden and only one from Denmark.
Given the extremely small numbers that we're dealing with at this point,
even one Danish hit is statistically significant, and this would be
consistent with a pattern that never went out to the Scandinavian islands at
all, but remained Continental. (There was also a German hit, IIRC, as
well as I believe one in the Alps.) That is also consistent with the
Norman connection that I have speculated on, since many of the Norman
Vikings were originally Danes.
To my mind, perhaps the most significant hit in support of this idea is the
one with family name Tavernier and earliest known ancestor in Norman France.
Tavernier is a 'job' surname that means 'innkeeper', which suggests strongly
that the person to first adopt that name was an innkeeper in Norman France.
Combine that with an Irish hit with family history of coming to Ireland from
Norman France by way of England ca. 1200 CE (and another Irish hit -
different surname - that matches him 25/25), as well as statements in a
couple of books that my own surname came to England from Normandy
(definitely prior to 1320, since I have it documented in Yorkshire back that
far), and the linguistic evidence of the surname's origin (Old English/Old
Norse), and you have the makings of a definite pattern. Now before
anybody says it, I'm well aware that surname linguistics don't necessarily
signify anything about the underlying genetics, but in this case it's
another marker pointing in the same direction. Since the name is not
remotely of French or Latin origin (as can be demonstrated linguistically),
if it did indeed come to England from Normandy (which I am not as yet
completely convinced of, since there are two other very possible sources,
but it will do as a working hypothesis) it suggests that the people that it
came with were at some point OE/ON speakers. They might well have been
French speaking by the time that they came across the Channel, but traces of
the older language would have survived, particularly in such things as
|RE: [DNA] Haplogroup F* by "Glen Todd" <>|