Almost all British people have British ancestry dating from Neolithic times.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by JackHorner222
I just want to know what percentage of mother to daughter only lines go on for thousands of years.
Well given that nobody here to my knowledge is an Geneticist, you are not going to get that information.
People may have had multiple children, but those kids generally died before they became fertile.
about one in two hundred men are related to Genghis Khan
people were pretty mobile back in the day as wars, famine etc drove them to wander.
There were black african "romans" found near hadrian's wall, but most "romans" towards the end shared the same DNA as the Britons
The whole concept of 'this is our land" is a modern idea ( in terms of anthropology)
about one in two hundred men are related to Genghis Khan
people were pretty mobile back in the day as wars, famine etc drove them to wander.
There were black african "romans" found near hadrian's wall, but most "romans" towards the end shared the same DNA as the Britons
The whole concept of 'this is our land" is a modern idea ( in terms of anthropology)
Original post by JackHorner222
Why? If a woman has a daughter, and this daughter has a daughter, how long does this normally continue before only sons are born? I suspect that most chains of this type are not that long, certainly not 30 000 years long.
You have to look at it going backwards, there will be many chains of mothers and daughters ending in a son but for example im a female so im from long line of mother and daughters going back to the beginning of humans if we follow the maternal line of all ancestors, same with every female
Original post by JackHorner222
Correct - but I am only talking about a particular type of chain of ancestors - women only in the chain. You obviously have such a chain going back from you but what are the chances that many other people have a chain of mothers only that hits your chain of mothers only at some point?
Eventually, the two chains must cross. As you increase the time span the probability of a common female ancestor increases. Eventually it becomes almost certain.
Original post by JackHorner222
The history teacher in the village of Cheddar was found to have the same mitochondrial DNA as Cheddar Man. How likely is it that he does not descend from Cheddar Man's family?
I obviously descend from an unbroken chain of mothers but how many times would this line meet another unbroken chain of mothers going back from another person?
I obviously descend from an unbroken chain of mothers but how many times would this line meet another unbroken chain of mothers going back from another person?
The same?
So they were an identical twin to Cheddar man?
That is pretty freeky!
Most people are going to have mixed ancestries. Here's another study that suggests the average white Briton is 30% Saxon (and when you take out the non-Saxon-ruled Welsh, Scots and Cornish, that's going to be even higher).
Original post by Dez
Eventually, the two chains must cross. As you increase the time span the probability of a common female ancestor increases. Eventually it becomes almost certain.
Yes, on reflection I think you're right. Though you might have to go back to before the origin of mankind before they cross.
Original post by anarchism101
Most people are going to have mixed ancestries. Here's another study that suggests the average white Briton is 30% Saxon (and when you take out the non-Saxon-ruled Welsh, Scots and Cornish, that's going to be even higher).
Some time in the future someone will dig up Yamaha and Samsung television screens and conclude that there was a Japanese invasion during the twentieth century.
Original post by JackHorner222
Some time in the future someone will dig up Yamaha and Samsung television screens and conclude that there was a Japanese invasion during the twentieth century.
What on earth does this have to do with what I said? How are globalised brands anything like genetics?
Also, for the record, Samsung isn't Japanese....
Original post by anarchism101
What on earth does this have to do with what I said? How are globalised brands anything like genetics?
Also, for the record, Samsung isn't Japanese....
Also, for the record, Samsung isn't Japanese....
OK, try this instead:
"Now Stephen Oppenheimer's groundbreaking genetic research has revealed that the Anglo-Saxon invasion contributed only a tiny fraction to the English gene pool. In fact, three quarters of English people can trace an unbroken line of genetic descent through their parental genes from settlers arriving long before the introduction of farming."
A Genetic Detective Story
by Stephen Oppenheimer • Paperback: 400 pages
• Publisher: Robinson Publishing
• ISBN-10: 1845294823
• ISBN-13: 978-1845294823 As a child, I sometimes wondered why people told jokes about Englishmen, Irishmen, Welshmen and Scotsmen. Why should our origins and differences matter? Part of growing up was realizing that they do matter and trying to understand why. This book challenges some of our longest held assumptions about the differences between Anglo-Saxons and Celts - perceived differences that have informed our collective sense of identity. Orthodox history has long taught that the Romans found a uniformly Celtic population throughout the British Isles, but that the peoples of the English heartland fell victim to genocide by the Anglo-Saxon hordes during the fifth and sixth centuries. Now Stephen Oppenheimer's groundbreaking genetic research has revealed that the Anglo-Saxon invasion contributed only a tiny fraction to the English gene pool. In fact, three quarters of English people can trace an unbroken line of genetic descent through their parental genes from settlers arriving long before the introduction of farming. Synthesizing the genetic evidence with linguistics, archaeology and the historical record, Oppenheimer shows how long-term Scandinavian trade and immigration contributed the remaining quarter - mostly before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons. These migrations may have introduced the earliest forms of English. And what of the Celts we know - the Irish, Scots and Welsh? Scholars have traditionally placed their origins in Iron Age Central Europe, but Oppenheimer's new data clearly show that the Welsh, Irish and other Atlantic fringe peoples derive from Ice Age refuges in the Basque country and Spain. They came by an Atlantic coastal route many thousands of years ago, though the Celtic languages we know of today were brought in by later migrations, following the same route, during Neolithic times. Stephen Oppenheimer shows us, in his meticulous analysis, that there is in truth a deep genetic line dividing the English from the rest of the British people but that, fascinatingly, the roots of that separate identity go back not 1500 years but 6,000. The real story of the British peoples is one of extraordinary continuity and enduring lineage that has survived all onslaughts. Stephen Oppenheimer of University of Oxford is a leading expert in the use of DNA to track migrations. His last book Out of Eden rewrote the prehistory of man's peopling of the world in a thesis that has since been confirmed in Science. He is also the author of Eden in the East: The Drowned Continent of Southeast Asia, which challenged the orthodox view of the origins of Polynesians as rice farmers from Taiwan. Praise for The Origins of the British 'Stephen Oppenhimer's exciting new book sets a whole new agenda for prehistoric archaeologists working in Britain...essential reading for everyone interested in the origins of the Britons...British prehistory will have to be radically re-thought.' Barry Cunliffe, Professor of European Archaeology, University of Oxford 'Stephen Oppenheimer is the supreme genetic detective fishing for evidence in the gene-pools of history. Be prepared to have all your cherished notions of English history and Britishness swept away in this fascinating and superbly illustrated account of what makes up our national character.' Professor Clive Gamble, Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London 'A well-informed, original and challenging application of new genetic data to the early population history of Britain.... British prehistory will never look the same again.' Professor Colin Renfrew, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge 'Stephen Oppenheimer's challenging book contributes significantly to the growing body of genetic, linguistic, and historical evidence for an early Germanic presence in "Celtic" Britain.' Dr. Peter Forster, Molecular Genetics Laboratory, University of Cambridge 'Oppenheimer calls his book "a genetic detective story". It is. Pre-Roman language in western Europe was a locked-room mystery - until someone looked for the key.' Aubrey Burl, Archaeologist & author on megalithic monuments
OP: What actually is the argument you're attempting to make here? Assuming we accept the starting premise that some people living in Cheddar today have common ancestry in a person who lived there 9,000 years ago*, well... so what?
Are we meant to extrapolate that some subset of the current British population are "true" British? Have you any indication that these 2 people in Cheddar are indicative of any genetic trends across the wider British gene pool?
Is there meant to be an implication that having ancestors who were here 9000 years ago is in some way relevant, or gives a person more right to live here than someone whose ancestors only arrived with the Romans/Saxons/Danes/Normans/other?
Also, how do you feel about the USA? I'm curious what your position is on the Native American population.
*Which, as others have pointed out, is open to dispute.
Are we meant to extrapolate that some subset of the current British population are "true" British? Have you any indication that these 2 people in Cheddar are indicative of any genetic trends across the wider British gene pool?
Is there meant to be an implication that having ancestors who were here 9000 years ago is in some way relevant, or gives a person more right to live here than someone whose ancestors only arrived with the Romans/Saxons/Danes/Normans/other?
Also, how do you feel about the USA? I'm curious what your position is on the Native American population.
*Which, as others have pointed out, is open to dispute.
Original post by ManifoldManifest
OP: What actually is the argument you're attempting to make here? Assuming we accept the starting premise that some people living in Cheddar today have common ancestry in a person who lived there 9,000 years ago*, well... so what?
Are we meant to extrapolate that some subset of the current British population are "true" British? Have you any indication that these 2 people in Cheddar are indicative of any genetic trends across the wider British gene pool?
Is there meant to be an implication that having ancestors who were here 9000 years ago is in some way relevant, or gives a person more right to live here than someone whose ancestors only arrived with the Romans/Saxons/Danes/Normans/other?
Also, how do you feel about the USA? I'm curious what your position is on the Native American population.
*Which, as others have pointed out, is open to dispute.
Are we meant to extrapolate that some subset of the current British population are "true" British? Have you any indication that these 2 people in Cheddar are indicative of any genetic trends across the wider British gene pool?
Is there meant to be an implication that having ancestors who were here 9000 years ago is in some way relevant, or gives a person more right to live here than someone whose ancestors only arrived with the Romans/Saxons/Danes/Normans/other?
Also, how do you feel about the USA? I'm curious what your position is on the Native American population.
*Which, as others have pointed out, is open to dispute.
Those who would wipe out the British are justifying it by making out that there has been a complete population replacement in Britain since Neolithic times. I am questioning this supposition.
North America? Three points:
The Native American Indians may not have been the first inhabitants of America. Google Kennewick Man.
There were only 6 million Native American Indians, not enough to cover the whole of North America.
The 800 000 Native American Indians who remain have been given vast areas of land that is for them and them alone. Incidentally, nobody is saying that this action is racist.
Original post by JackHorner222
The Native American Indians may not have been the first inhabitants of America. Google Kennewick Man.
There were only 6 million Native American Indians, not enough to cover the whole of North America.
The 800 000 Native American Indians who remain have been given vast areas of land that is for them and them alone. Incidentally, nobody is saying that this action is racist.
There were only 6 million Native American Indians, not enough to cover the whole of North America.
The 800 000 Native American Indians who remain have been given vast areas of land that is for them and them alone. Incidentally, nobody is saying that this action is racist.
Well since your last was closed, I will reply to you here.
Greenland has population density of 0. But it has a population of 56,000, therefore Greenland is populated.
They have been given reserves which they can't really leave as they are not recognised as US citizens.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-racism-against-Native-Americans-commonly-not-even-recognized-as-such
Original post by DiddyDec
Well since your last was closed, I will reply to you here.
Greenland has population density of 0. But it has a population of 56,000, therefore Greenland is populated.
They have been given reserves which they can't really leave as they are not recognised as US citizens.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-racism-against-Native-Americans-commonly-not-even-recognized-as-such
Greenland has population density of 0. But it has a population of 56,000, therefore Greenland is populated.
They have been given reserves which they can't really leave as they are not recognised as US citizens.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-racism-against-Native-Americans-commonly-not-even-recognized-as-such
Much of Greenland is uninhabitable. If you only consider the inhabitable part that would increase the population density.
US citizens are not allowed into the Indian reservations either.
Original post by JackHorner222
Much of Greenland is uninhabitable. If you only consider the inhabitable part that would increase the population density.
US citizens are not allowed into the Indian reservations either.
US citizens are not allowed into the Indian reservations either.
It is their land. Can you walk into your neighbours garden? Not without breaking into the law. It is private property.
So the Romans, Saxons, Normans, and anyone else who came before and after them didn't know how to reproduce?
Ain't buying it. Indigenous Brits may share a common ancestor, but our blood has been mixing with that of other peoples for thousands of years. I doubt there are many people whose bloodline has remained completely untouched by the stream of peoples entering the country over the years.
Ain't buying it. Indigenous Brits may share a common ancestor, but our blood has been mixing with that of other peoples for thousands of years. I doubt there are many people whose bloodline has remained completely untouched by the stream of peoples entering the country over the years.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Drop ur ethnicity
- Finding my Heritage
- Why British Girl/ Men do not date Indian Boy/ Men and prefer Black Men/Boy?
- fellow asians of the UK rise up
- Flatmate
- Is my mate wrong here?
- Do you find Reginald D Hunter funny?
- Free things to do in London - Art Galleries and Exhibitions
- Does Brown Guys Living in England like Brown Girls?
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Making friends as a transfer student
- British/European boys, would you date a Latina girl?
- What's your go-to Airline for travelling?
- confirming identity for British passport need help
- If you have success on tinder does that mean your at least fairly attractive above av
- I’m british Pakistani girl. Ask me anything...
- Will you feel British without the monarchy?
- Struggling to find jobs?
- late application for tuition fee loan and being abroad!!!!!! help :((
- residence on relevant date
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
