Rodulf & Ubba

The most recent theories that i've heard from English historians is that the "Invasion" was more of a cultural take over driven by a small elite that moved from Europe and brought their culture with them rather than a large scale displacement of one population by another. Of course theories change over time so i might be wearing flares and mutton chops.

I agree with that, seeing these vikings as settlers looking for new land to harvest, like the emigrants leaving a poor Sweden for America in the 1850s & onwards.

You are referring to the Danish invasion, and not the "Angle/Saxon" of course

>> the "Invasion" was more of a cultural take over driven by a small elite that moved from Europe

Indeed, that is the current thinking. It seems to be confirmed by DNA. The more evidence that emerges the more solid it seems.

Justin Swanström , you are referring to the era just prior and during the rule of Knute ?

I'm thinking in general of all of it.

It should be relatively easy to find those sources (again). Both the Danish and Anglo-Saxon "invasions" left their genetic mark on England but not nearly in the numbers that would be expected if the old stories were true. It seems that our ancient historians exaggerated a bit ;)

Maybe we need to be a bit clearer, incase non-experts are following.
By Anglo-Saxon invasion I think of the period immediately after the Roman withdrawal, Danish invasion is the period of the Danelaw to my mind. So several hundred years apart.
Traditionally the AS invasion was thought of as a mass migration displacingthe natives but the Danish invasion was a smaller scale where the invaders conquered the locals and took over without displacing, similar to the Norman conquest.

My comments have all been about the AS invasion which may or may not have actual involved any Angles or Saxons, which was what i thought Justin was saying the DNA research showed?

Back to basics. Until fairly recently the normal picture of the migrations was that the Anglo-Saxon migration pushed the native Britons to what is now Wales and the north. The idea was that the Anglo-Saxons probably overwhelmed and pushed out the native population. That's now known from DNA studies to be a massive error. There seems to have been a large-scale AS migration because A-S DNA lineages are prominent in areas where the A-S settled but there can't have been a whole displacement because the pre-invasion DNA is still there.

There was a controversy about Danish settlement. Maybe it was overwhelming like the A-S, or maybe it was overwhelming but patchy, or maybe it was just an elite that took over the whole area. The DNA shows that -- like the A-S invasion -- it must have been a displacement of the elites, and probably both had a substantial non-elite element.

Yes, "displacement of the elites", (history in a nutshell)

Justin Swanström, this thread has drifted away from it's original subject, Rodulf & Ubba, which I would like to learn more about. (largely my fault, I think)
The idea that Rodolf and Rurik were related is intriguing.

I don't mind if we drift a bit, or more than a bit. I like having the chance the to talk to other users with the same interests, particularly in areas where no final answer is possible ;)

I'm particularly intrigued with this article because years ago, somewhere, I read an article that tried to make the case that Rurik came from this same Frisian family. I've long since forgotten the details. I've wished I could find it again, so when I saw this one I was immediately drawn back in.

"tried to make the case that Rurik came from this same Frisian family"

Rurik could at most have been related to that Frisian family, but Rurik came most likely from Svitjod, because they had ruled that area before, left it to decay, as a result of which some people there reasoned that when the area was under theirs control, there was order, that was good for the business as for the people, now it was in a state of great disturbance, so they chose some men to speak for the people and sent them over the sea to the former rulers and beg them to restore the order.

This is loosely from my mind what I recall from the Nestors chronicle, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_the_Chronicler and it do fit with some correlating information from Rimberts "Vita Ansgari", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vita_Ansgari , unfortunately for this Rurik, no one seems to want to take this seriously today, thus rather have Rurik with an unknown father, instead of Olof whom I'm believe would have been the best presumably candidate and thus also making Rurik a lot older than he would have actually been with him as a father.

Hello Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson, I went through the two links you posted, but I don't
see how either one of them supports your statement that Rurik was Swedish.

As for your claim that "because they had ruled that area before", refering to the Swedes?

Goths were still the masters of the southern trade routes along the rivers, until they came
to terms with the Swedes. At least, that is what I remember from my history books,

You will probably have to read the actual chronicles, not just a resume.

I believe you are right. Unfortunately I am not familiar with them,
don't understand what they signified, what you meant by posting them

It takes some effort in order to understand, that's something very useful in genealogy.

Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson, I understand a slight, when I hear it.,

Try to think chronological, what post did I referred to, when I started mine post with a quote from the post previous mine? You're wasting space.

Try to remember -- in this discussion at least -- that there is no way to find an answer. The best any of us will find is evidence that indirectly supports a favorite theory.

Nestor's Chronicle does not give an answer. it gives hints that might point to an answer. Scholars have been pouring over Nestor's Chronicles for generations. If the answer was there they would all agree on the answer. There would be no debate.

I mentioned above that I once read an article that tried to make the claim Rurik came from a family with links to Frisia. I lost track of the article, but it took only a quick search to find the theory elsewhere. It's in Wikipedia:

Rurik: Possible identity with Rorik of Dorestad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rurik#Possible_identity_with_Rorik_of...

After a brief discussion of the theory, the Wikipedia article says, "The idea of identifying Rurik, a legendary figure, with the historical Rorik of Dorestad was revived by the anti-Normanists Boris Rybakov and Anatoly H. Kirpichnikov in the mid-20th century,[4] while modern scholars like Alexander Nazarenko object to it.[5] The hypothesis of their identity currently lacks support among scholars,[6] though support for a "Normanic" (i.e. Norse, rather than Slavic) origin of the Rus' has increased."

There is also a DNA argument. I wasn't going to mention it because it seems too complicated to explain. However, the same Wikipedia article has a nice summary. Better than I could have written:

"According to the FamilyTreeDNA Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project, Rurik appears to have belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup N1c1, based on testing of his modern purported male-line descendants.[7] N1c1 is not widely found in Scandinavian countries, but is overwhelmingly found among Baltic and Finnish ethnicities. The N1c1 haplotype possess the distinctive value DYS390=23, also rarely found in Scandinavia.[citation needed] The closest relatives of the Rurikid haplotype are found in coastal Finland,[8] but Jaakko Häkkinen with the University of Helsinki has later argued that the Rurikid N1c1 lineage can in fact be traced back to Scandinavia.[9]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rurik#Genetic_investigation

Ulf Ingvar Göte Martinsson>" You're wasting space." (and stealing air)

I'm out of here

Justin,
It appears that DYS390 (23 value) is very much in HG I1-L22 I just gave a cursory glance at the table on the Norgesprosjektet and it looks to be a tell tale marker for L22.

This is a process called convergence.

There are a bunch of different markers randomly mutating. You are always going to get men who have the same number at one or more locations.

What this is saying is that within this group (presumably N), DYS390=23 is a distinctive marker that points to N1c1.

It isn't saying anything about the frequency of DYS390=23 in other groups, such as I1.

This whole area of convergent mutations is very interesting. Experts can often use the pattern across markers to predict the haplogroup. Of course, sometimes two haplogroups have the same pattern on a small number of markers. Then it becomes difficult to make predictions. For example, at 37 markers it was not possible to predict whether I am I1 or G2a. I had to have a SNP test to find out. Once I knew I was G2a it becomes very easy to predict which other G2a men probably also belong to my G-L42 subgroup.

In Nordvedt's assessment on the N1 group he had 5 markers to get to L22...I was wondering how many keys your were remarking as well...the charts are pretty interesting when they compare them. I will now scurry to my HG predictor and mess around with this...thank you as always.

Andrew, I'm not following what you're saying.

L22 is in haplogroup I, not haplogroup N.

Justin,

Sorry, I was using that as an example of markers and their relevance to a group as that is from mine as I am in Hg I, did not explain my logic.
It was also relalting to the Ultra Norse designations by Hg marker, Swedish v Norwegian/Icelandic...and it just didn't come out the way I wanted to frame the question relating to convergence...but whilst you are figuring stuff, what is the relationship in the Whit Athey predictor model to the term "fitness score" there are numerical values for other Hg but in right column (Probability) I am 100% I1...that one had me a bit confused.

I'm still not sure what you're asking or saying. Damn. I'll try to answer and hope I hit the right general area.

Utilities like Whit Athey's predictor look at the STR pattern (the markers, and the number of times the pattern repeats at each location). It's not uncommon to find exact matches between unrelated men on a bunch of different markers. But, it would be amazing if two different men had 24 matching or closely matching markers and not be in the same haplogroup.

It does happen, though. Particularly in haplogroup R1b where the group is so old and so large that the chance of convergence is much higher. I think I mentioned earlier that at 37 markers the algorithm couldn't tell if I'm I1 or G2a. At 67 markers it's (now) clear that I'm almost certainly G2a. But it's a moot point because I've already tested and been found positive for the SNPs that define G2a.

When the predictor says there is 100 percent probability that your markers are I1, then you are an easy case. You probably see some other percentages for other haplogroups. Maybe 15 percent change you are G2a, or a 10 percent chance you are R1. (Just making up numbers here for the purpose of illustration.)

If you're seeing something like that, it's not a mistake. It would mean your pattern of STR markers really does match I1 perfectly but it isn't proof. There are miscellaneous probabilities that you could actually belong to one of those haplogroups. You are "close enough" there is some chance, even if it's not very high. That's because DNA testing is on-going. New data is always coming in. There is no way to know absolutely and for sure what the upper and lower limits are for the markers in every haplogroup.

Justin, I saw the same pattern when I loaded the data into the predictor. Like you, I had tested into a few for clarification but was still curious on "tendencies" as I see from researcher language at the various ftDNA projects, there are certain indicators in STR groupings that "indicate" you could be part of it. I had started on the Ken Nordvedt five "positive indicators" for sorting types of Norse classification by groups. I think that is where I took you sideways as I can from time to time discuss stuff like the other person and I are in a tavern and have been discussing the point for hours.....my apologies. You have given me the clarification I was seeking...I will find out what the "fitness" numbers mean due to the fact they exist in all different Hgs to some degree. I thought I saw a narrative on that in the Athey documents, I will try fathom it a bit better and probably ask you another inane question...thank you for your extraordinary patience in this discussion.

Fitness means the degree to which this pattern of STRs matches a particular haplogroup.

I might be confusing you because I think of it as probability. It's not really probability, for technical reasons. It uses Bayesian analysis to weigh probabilities.

If you really love math, this article might interest you. It explains another haplogroup predictor and why it uses a different type of calculation than Whit Athey does. It also contains links to his articles explaining his methodology:
http://www.nevgen.org/AboutNevGen.html