Search in titles only Search in The Genographic Project only
The Genographic Project
U5a, Suebi origins?
byakhee_2001
10 January 2008, 06:30 PM
I have Spanish origins and I am U5a, 16192T,16270T,16519C.
I have an exact HVR1 match with 48 persons. 1 of Austria, 1 Azores, 2 British Isles, 1 Denmark, 8 England, 3 France, 10 Germany, 1 Great Britain, 1 Greece, 3 Hungary, 5 Ireland, 2 Italy, 2 Portugal, 1 Russia, 1 Scotland, 2 Spain, 1 Sweden, 2 United Kingdom, 1 Wales.
We can regroup Azores with Portugal, and British Isles, England, Scotland, United Kingdom and Wales with Great Britain, and Finaly Austria with Germany. So we have 1 Denmark, 3 France, 11 Germany, 15 Great Britain, 1 Greece, 3 Hungary, 5 Ireland, 2 Italy, 3 Portugal, 1 Russia, 2 Spain, 1 Sweden.
Suebi in the classical sources is used with two different meanings: the specific tribe of Caesar's campaign, "dwelling on the Main", and "broadly, to cover a large number of tribes in central Germany." The broad view is expressed in the Germania of the Roman historian Tacitus, a basic written source for the Suebic peoples. That work states:
" We must come now to speak of the Suebi, who do not, like the Chatti or Tencteri, constitute a single nation. They actually occupy more than half of Germany, and are divided into a number of distinct tribes under distinct names, though all generally are called Suebi. "
The Suebi comprise the Semnones, who are "the oldest and noblest of the Suebi"; the Langobardi; the seven tribes of Jutland and Holstein: Reudigni, Aviones, Anglii, Varini, Eudoses, Suarini, Nuitones; the Hermunduri on the Elbe; three along the Danube: Naristi, Marcomanni, Quadi; the Marsigni and Buri. Then there is a mountain range, and beyond that in the drainage system of the Vistula five tribes of the Lugii including the Harii, Helvecones, Manimi, Helsii and Naharvali; the Gothones, Rugii, Lemovii along the Baltic Sea; all the states of the Suiones, located in peninsular Scandinavia; and finally the non-Germanic Aestii, and the Sitones, beyond the Aestii along the Baltic yet "continuous with the Suiones". Says Tacitus then: "Here Suebia ends."
But few clues to the identity of the Suebi are given. They can be identified by their fashion of the Suebian knot (a hair style), which "distinguishes the freeman from the slave"; in other words, was intended as a badge of social rank. The same passage points out that chiefs "use an even more elaborate style."
A second criteron for being Suebian is residence in the territory of Suebia. That country goes beyond the Germanic-speakers. It is not just that the Suebi are also all the tribes of central Germany or even a block of tribes sharing the same language and customs: "it is clear that there is no monolithic 'Suebic' group, but a series of tribes who may share some customs (for instance, warrior burials) but also vary considerably." The Suebia of Tacitus comprises the entire periphery of the Baltic Sea, including within it tribes of the Sitones, who must have resided where Lapland and Finland are now or have been, who today are speakers of Finno-Ugrian, and there has been no replacement of their language since antiquity. On the south shore of the Baltic are the Aestii, in the territory of the modern-day Baltic language speakers, or where they have been (Prussia), again equally as ancient as the Germanic-speakers.
A third criterion is sharing in the name Suebi, which is "indeed genuine and ancient." Evidently the name is multi-ethnic and cross-cultural, but there is reason to postulate an original corps of Germanic speakers who were called the Suebi, who for a time by conquest or colonization dominated the Finno-Ugrians and the Balts. The core tribe of the Suebi were the Semnones, whose name means Suebi.
In this link you can have more informations about Suebi tribes:
Suebi - Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suebi
Between 4th and 6th century AD, because of Huns, most of these Suebi tribes were forced to move. To France, Spain, Portugal, England, Italy and Balkans.
But originally the core tribes lived in Germany. About 406 AD, a part of the Suebi who stayed on the right bank of the Rhine moved to the south. First France, then Basque country, and finally found a Kingdom in the north of Spain and Portugal who lasted until 586 AD.
I am sure that German, French, Spanish and Portuguese who have same mtdna HVR1 than me descend from these Suebi.
I think that English and other nationalities have some Suebi ancestors, but from different Suebi tribes. Anglii tribe for the English for example.
Bracari
The Suebi settled only in NW Iberia. Where were your U5a from ?
All U came from the Mediterranean, originally from North Africa and the Middle East
Originally posted by Bracari
Do you have read seriously my post? I speak about a more recent period of history. And there were a lot of different Suebi tribes ... not only one ...
U5b?
Read this link:
Where are Ursula descendents found today
http://www.brian-hamman.com/WhereAreUrsulaDescendentsFoundToday.htm
Suebi would be rather U5b.
3,4% in South Germany, 2,7% in North of Portugal, 1,5% in Galicia.
It corresponds to movement of Suebi.
another one.... how could we guess yet more studies where there is no U5B2's , why do they ignore it? or was there only just the 7 in all of the world.....( am I that special in all my fragile-X-ness) there has to be more than that in South America and the Caribbean why is the U*******'s from South America not being listed or put in any studies too?
derinos
Suebii? Real or imaginary?
Discussing the Suebii, a word persisting in modern German as "Schwabenland".
Words words! They create a virtual reality in the mind, magnets to which sentiments become attached. They present personal illusions of clear meaning, where reality can offer only a seductive vagueness.
"Evidently the name is multi-ethnic and cross-cultural," .....
is the operative concept in discussing the Suebii, quoted from Wikipedia's definitions of the term. The meaning of the name equates with "darfst-teller" in modern German,, or "the independent ones, the free ones" in their own language as stated by Roman writers.
The ancient definition quoted from Rome is hard to disentangle from the slightly earlier definition by the Greeks, of the Celts .
Perhaps the difference is only in the point in the timeline where the definition originates. Go back from 100 BC to 1000 BC and "Celts" walk out of almost the same definition from the two sources.
Now we have DNA criteria, it is difficult to identify a Schwabian modal format, due to multitribal and multilocational factors and diffusion with time. To truly claim Suebian identity one would have to be alive 3000 years ago; and wearing one's hair in a knot.
Originally posted by purple flowers
It is simple: U5 and subclades originated in Europe.
The only thing we could do is to see the percentage of U5 in South-America. But I am sure that something exists already.
But one thing could be done. Test the individuals who can attest very ancient female ancestors, like before 1800.
So we could perhaps follow the migration of different Suebi and other tribes. And DNA/mtDNA could give some indications and proofs.
The problem actually is recent migrations, even internally in the same country. So it is difficult to follow ancient ones.
Myself I can attest that my female ancestors are from Galicia (Spain), near the frontier of North of Portugal.
As they were only about 30'000 Suebi inside a total population of 700'000, I am sure that I have a Suebii female ancestor. Very few people have U5 in Galicia and North of Portugal. About between 1,5% and 4%. More or less like the original 4,3% of Suebii (30000/700000). Suebi were more installed in north of Portugal than in Galicia. And we have more U5 in Portugal than in Galicia. It corresponds to the migration of Suebi. Their capital was Braga, in Portugal.
Originally posted by derinos
Originally posted by byakhee_2001
"simple".. .. I think the jury is out on that one.. maybe some of the U5's
HUM the paper said
"Where are Ursula descendants found TODAY"
but it wasn't all of the Ursula descendants of today! it showed Europe and Africa ... but not here and not south America and not the Caribbean... so it is not all of the tested Ursula of TODAY. that in and of itself makes it NOT factual. it is thus misleading . so what is the real statistics? because this one is not presenting what it claims to be presenting .
Stevo
R1b-FGC36981
You might be interested in this article about the U5a remains found in China that belonged to Yu Hong. He was Sogdian, and they were an Iranian-speaking people. Of course, Indo-Iranian is a sub-family of the Indo-European language family.
This study also found a significant amount of supposedly "Western" mtDNA in ancient remains in Central Asia. The groups found were H, HV, I, T, U (including U5 and U5a), and W (see the link above for a more detailed breakdown).
Byakhee, you are into a most interesting puzzle, albeit the "recent" story of a very long MtDNA timeline. We have a very ancient marker (ca 50,000 ybp), and the 2000+ ybp, relatively "modern" communal self-name Suebii, Latinized from an older tongue, given us by Tacitus. The name is not territorial but cultural, conflating a shared political stance common to similar but independently named tribes. They covered a very large land area, lightly populated enough to allow much wandering. A nice, free, arrangement, demographically resembling pre-Columbian North America, and sadly soon to be liberated by Rome.(Liber means book; so the word means the opposite of "free", to be listed in the Book of State!)
Galicia is a name cognate with "Land of the Celts", reported also in Poland and in the Near East as Galatia. (Gallici, from Gallatoi, from Keltoi). So we are into the naming problem of the folk of the past 3 millennia, where the Romans, who were the main historians, asking questions and receiving answers of varying degrees of convergent or diffusive application. "Suebii" appears to be an expansive self-name for tribes who were free, in contrast to the peoples of the Roman Empire. I can imagine Roman official explorers asking some local leader "What people are you?" And getting the answer "The free people", perhaps a word like
"Sha-wab, ("King of ourselves" in Indo-European.").
Reminiscent of the State of New Hampshire motto ?
That Ursula must have been a very fine woman, for she and her daughters to be so much appreciated as to have been taken along with the men in all their many wanderings!
Good luck in further developing your research idea.
U5 originated in Europe. Then there were migrations of U5 in other parts of the world as we see in these articles.
Yes U5 is very ancient.
But it seems that people forgive recent migrations like Suebi or other tribes.
Actually, we can't be sure if we come from recent or ancient migrations. But I hope that someday we will know.
Last edited by byakhee_2001; 21 January 2008, 07:19 AM.
J Man
I don't know if this is just me but it seems like mtDNA is not as good as Y-DNA when it comes to connecting haplotypes or haplogroups to certain historical groups. mtDNA seems to be more ancient in most places which seems to imply that the women did not move around as much as the men throughout the ages.
J Man:
I think you are right that mtdna is much less precise. One reason is simply that it doesn't allow as high a resolution as the Y chromosome. There is one HVR1 mutation every 20,000 years or so - and one coding region mutation every 3-5,000 years, so matches can go way back in the past.
But the main reason could be what you say - female lineages survive more easily than males. Males were subject to lots of risks (war etc.), so for males it's more like a winner takes all. Female lineages are both more ancient and more numerous.
You say that women travel less - but I think the opposite is true. Male lineages tend to remain more concentrated, which is also why they are more useful in defining geographic origin. Women actually move more, not in the sense of migration, but of marrying out. This may mean just going to the neighboring village, but slowly, over time, one lineage can cover great distances. So boundaries defined by mtdna are always fuzzy.
vraatyah
it seems to be so: first of all, the mitochondrial molecule is too small so there is no enough "room" for many markers there (as we need to get the best resolution), while Y seems to have infinite "capacity" compared to mtdna although it is still unexplored. The second reason is that european mtdna is almost the same throughout the continent and more than 90% of the tested folk is from Europe/USA, isn't it?