SCI Why everything you thought you knew about the Norsemen may be wrong

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment

Vikings weren't necessarily blond. Or Scandinavian. Why everything you thought you knew about the Norsemen may be wrong
By Harry Clarke-Ezzidio, CNN

Updated 1500 GMT (2300 HKT) September 16, 2020

An artistic reconstruction of "Southern European" Vikings, emphasizing the foreign gene flow into Viking Age Scandinavia.


An artistic reconstruction of "Southern European" Vikings, emphasizing the foreign gene flow into Viking Age Scandinavia.

London (CNN)Blond-haired, Scandinavian warriors who pillaged their way through Europe.

We thought we knew everything about the Vikings. But some new research suggests we've been getting it wrong.

In the biggest study of its kind, published in the journal Nature Wednesday, researchers found that many Vikings actually had brown hair. And they weren't just from Scandinavia.

In a six-year study, archaeologists and academics used DNA technology to analyze more than 400 Viking skeletons from sites in Scandinavia, Greenland and the UK.
Researchers used DNA  technology to analyze remains.


Researchers used DNA technology to analyze remains.

They discovered that Vikings didn't just hail from Scandinavia -- they also had genes from both Asia and Southern Europe in their bloodline.

The study, by academics at the University of Cambridge in the UK and the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, found that Viking burial sites in Scotland contained local people who may have taken on "Viking identities."

Bronze Age Britons kept human remains on display in their homes

Bronze Age Britons kept human remains on display in their homes


Researchers say their findings shatter a lot of the preconceptions surrounding Vikings.

"The results change the perception of who a Viking actually was. The history books will need to be updated," said Eske Willerslev, a fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.

"We didn't know genetically what they actually looked like until now," Willerslev added.

He said the new research "debunks" the traditional image of blond Vikings, as "many had brown hair and were influenced by genetic influx from the outside of Scandinavia."

The study also revealed genetic differences between the various Viking populations within Scandinavia, which suggests different groups were more isolated than previously thought.
 Melting glaciers reveal lost mountain pass and artifacts used by Vikings

Melting glaciers reveal lost mountain pass and artifacts used by Vikings


And the research also indicated that Viking identity wasn't something exclusive to Vikings themselves.

Two skeletons found on Orkney, off the northeast coast of Scotland, which had DNA similar to modern-day Irish and Scottish people, were buried in Viking-style graves. This suggests they may have taken on Viking identities, researchers say.
The word "Viking" comes from the Scandinavian term "vikingr," meaning "pirate," and the Viking Age refers to the period of the Middle Ages between 800 and the 1050s, the researchers explained.

Vikings are known to have traveled across Europe and beyond by sea. Many of these expeditions involved raiding monasteries, but Vikings also traded goods such as fur, tusks and seal fat.

Researchers found that these all-male raiding parties were made up of friends, family members and neighbors.
Vikings sailed all over Europe and beyond.


Vikings sailed all over Europe and beyond.

The data collected will also be useful in the study of natural selection in the past, according to lead author Fernando Racimo, assistant professor at the University of Copenhagen.

He said the data "allow us to disentangle how selection unfolded before, during and after the Viking movements across Europe," with the potential to "begin to infer the physical appearance of ancient Vikings and compare them to Scandinavians today."

The genetic legacy of the Vikings is still present today, the researchers said, with an estimated 6% of people in the UK and 10% of people in Sweden carrying Viking DNA in their genes.
 

Faroe

Un-spun
Nobody creditable ever claimed they were all blonde. This type of article insinuates a lot, but doesn't say much. It does soften people up for the blatant PC bullshit that they were heavily influenced by Muslims (other than trade), or were even sometimes Black. So sick of that crap, but then, Sweden did put a Pakastani in charge as Minister of Culture.

The pre-Islamic Persian influences are interesting, but Caucasians of various tribes came from that area, THAT is actually worth tracing.

OMG - they interbred with Celtics!....shocked.
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
Last Viking settlement I read about being discovered was just outside Istanbul...


Archaeologists conducting a study for evidence of Vikings near the city of Istanbul (formerly the Byzantine capital of Constantinople) have suggested the discovery of a Viking neighbourhood.

The study has focused on the ancient city of Bathonea (previously identified as Rhegion) on the European shore of the Sea of Marmara, 20 km west of Istanbul.

Vikings first came to the Byzantine Empire as merchants, before being incorporated into an Imperial guard formed by Emperor Basil II in AD 988, consisting of Varangians from the state of Kievan Rus’.


The recruitment for the guard outside of the Empires borders was a tactical policy, as the guard members lacked any loyalty to factions other than the emperor or held any political ambition (a common issue historically with the Praetorian guard of the Western Roman Empire) that could be a threat to the Emperor’s position.

Over the next 100 years, the guard’s ranks would include Norseman from Scandinavia, establishing a Norse cast that would become the dominant entity of the guard’s ranks.

According to contemporary texts, foreigners were forbidden from settling in the capital, but were instead said to be living in a port which corresponds with sites such as Bathonea. Vikings and Varangians could enter the capital in the morning within small groups, but had to leave the city before sunset.

During excavations of Bathonea, the team of archaeologists found a cross made from ambergris, a substance formed from a secretion of the bile duct in the intestines of the sperm whale. The most significant find is a necklace depicting a snake, that represents Jörmangandr (also known as the Midgard Serpent) that will bring about the first signs of Ragnarök.

Head of excavations Şengül Aydıngün, an associate Professor of the Kocaeli University told Hurriyet Daily News “Vikings lived in Istanbul between the eighth and the 11th centuries in different periods. We have found their exact settlement area to be between the ninth and 11th centuries in the Bathonea excavations.”
//////////////snip
 

Old Gray Mare

TB Fanatic
The Vikings got around.

The Byzantine Emperor's Varangian Guard was made up of Vikings. Legend has it they beat the crap out of the Emperor's troops and hung their shields on his gate after they'd fought their way to it. It indicated they were open to employment negotiations. Whooping the Emperor's troops was like a pre employment test so to speak.

The Russ in Russian were Vikings who'd settled the area and mixed and traded with locals.

One branch of the family tree came from Norway. A black Norwegian Square Head was a Norwegian or Norse decent that wasn't blond and blue eyed. Skin color was inferred to be white.

Varangian Guard
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Jump to navigationJump to search


The Varangian Guard (Greek: Τάγμα τῶν Βαραγγῶν, Tágma tōn Varángōn) was an elite unit of the Byzantine Army from the tenth to the fourteenth century. The members served as personal bodyguards to the Byzantine Emperors. The Varangian Guard was known for being primarily composed of recruits from northern Europe, including Norsemen from Scandinavia and Anglo-Saxons from England.[1] The recruitment of distant foreigners from outside Byzantium to serve as the emperor's personal guard was pursued as a deliberate policy, as they lacked local political loyalties and could be counted upon to suppress revolts by disloyal Byzantine factions.[2]
Link to source:
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
Ancestry.com's latest ethnicity iteration elevated my Norwegian percentage, and separated out the Welsh and Scottish from the English - which became Western northern Europe. (I suppose from the Angles and the Saxons, but it also included a pocket in the Alps.) The Irish were always separated. I became less "German."

It is interesting what they are learning from population studies.

The Norwegian Vikings had trade and ship building bases in Ireland. I understand their genes are found mixed with early Irish and Scots. The era usually identified with Vikings came after the Anglo Saxons and appeared to be more Danish, (Cnute, etc.) This was the "Danelaw" and the levying of the "Danegeld," or bribery to keep them at bay.

I was interested in the Celtic documentary. I just finished another BBC series on the Welsh and they made a point that the Welsh were great traders who brought their culture eastward with them. They had the bronze trade. The copper mines were in Wales and the Tin in Cornwall. There were greater ties between Wales and Scotland.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfKYqjempvc
58:53 min
The Story of Wales: The Makings of Wales (1 of 5)
•Jun 3, 2018


Clark's History Reels

2012 documentary in a series by BBC on the history of Wales.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
That is a very informative map. It seems to follow what I have read abut genetics and history/law. I am, however, curious about the Norwegians and Iceland. When I lived there for a year, I found the Icelanders most culturally linked with the Danes. That may have been a modern development of trade.

Here is another documentary.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_OFqGuLc7s
36:23 min
The Nordic Bronze Age / Ancient History Documentary
Feb 22, 2019


History Time



One map shows the Bronze Age Trade Routes. The authors appear to think it emanates from the Scandinavians. Perhaps, it emanates from the Welsh, or at least there was a more active/outgoing Welsh trade, not just a passive one of exploited raw resources. This could provide those Celtic people who became the Gauls and invaded Rome. Might explain why the Romans later invaded Wales.
1600583632276.png
or
1600584097749.png
 
Last edited:

Melodi

Disaster Cat
DOZ, did you and Melodi just split your reading lists this year??
[Long post - just skip if not interested lol - Melodi]

I'd already read this article in the OP, but I didn't post it because I thought the article was poorly written and with an obvious "agenda."

The original study I believe is correct and it is wonderful to see the Polyglot nature of Norse society in the Viking Age being proved by DNA.

But anyone who really reads the Sagas and has looked at the existing archeological and historical information knows that the "Norse" at the height of their raiding/merchanting/expansion era were nearly everywhere from the edges of China, to the edges of North America.

And they bred with anyone who didn't stand still long enough (oh did I mention the Visigothic "Northman" Kingdom in North Africa)? That was a little earlier than the later Norse period the Norse also traded extensively in North Africa with both their Germanic cousins there and the original local population.

And genetics is showing all sorts of interesting and fun facts - like the Scots in the article that adopted Viking culture, dress, and manners (but were physically Celts) in much the same way the Iberian peoples in Ireland seem to have adopted Celtic Culture a thousand years or so before - there are genetic Celts in Ireland especially on the East Coast (where the Vikings would later settle) but the shock of the recent DNA studies was The CELTIC SAGAS WERE CORRECT - a good chunk of the early Irish population CAME FROM SPAIN aka The Son's of Mil.

A founding "Mother" of Iceland (Iceland not Greenland) was an EAST COAST NATIVE AMERICAN WOMEN, who was not an Inuit, so Hagar or Ragnar brought home a Native American wife or mistress from the Vineland Colony or Baffin Trading Post.

These things shouldn't be as the big surprises that they are - The Norse were mostly traders as well as raiders and they went everywhere in the then known and unknown world if their technology and numbers had been a bit better; parts of the East Coast might be speaking a language similar to Icelandic today.

Norse graves in Scandinavia have included Buddha statues, peacocks, Islamic Trim and Coins, Greenland Wallas ivory, and Chinese silks.

There are even one of the stories about a mixed marriage with a "Dark Wife" (Southern European or possibly African/Middle Eastern) and a midwife who exchanges the dark-skinned babies for the children of a light-haired slave, a few years later it becomes obvious the dark-skinned boys are the actual Jarl's sons and they are brought back into the family and become "great heroes."

Finally, the biggest shocker of all, but it has been badly used (in my opinion) by the PC crowd to the point of being cringe-making was the discovery that in the European Stone age and through most of the move towards early agriculture; Northern Europeans had piercing blue eyes, brown or black hair, and dark skin.

Otherwise, their skeletons look pretty much like modern Scandinavians, mostly tall men and women (who shrink a bit like everyone else when they move to farm), and without DNA you can't even really tell when the shift in skin and hair color starts to move in.

On theory is that the very pale skin and blond/red hair comes from interbreeding with Neanderthal's but that jury is still out there.

One thing I am pretty sure of - and it is showing up in more recent (and toned down) artistic reconstructions is the early "slapping on" of black skin and kinky hair onto otherwise early Northern Europeans was a PC overreaction in the other direction.

Most people in Northern Europe before the "change over" (around 4 to 7 thousand years ago we think, but the studies are still in process, it might have been a bit earlier or later) I suspect looked somewhat people from Southern Italy/Spain/North Africa today.

Dusky with dark hair, except many had the piercing blue eyes.

By the 9th and 10th century Norse periods you would have had mixtures of the "newer" blonds and redheads with pale skin in the populations along with the older darker genetics and the spouses, slaves, adopted adults, and orphans to mix in and make things even more varied.

OK, this is long enough, anyone really interested can look this up - just remember things are changing and updated nearly every day on this topic as more DNA is looked at both in living people and in archeological sites.

The results are fascinating and do spend a lot of apple carts but I don't like such information being pushed and tweaked to fit a "modern" agenda either - and I felt this article was badly written and was doing that.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
OH, **** OFF with this BULLSHIT revised history crap!!!

I am so sick of it!!!
DNA isn't "revising" history, it simply adds to it, badly written articles though can slant things to try to revise history - including as an I mentioned in my tome above - discovering that very early Northern Europeans had dark skin and hair but then just slapping black paint (or a computer projection) onto the reconstruction of the oldest known "Englishman" (Cheddar Man, 9000 years plus) with what amounted to "blackface."

Then put it on the British evening news and claim "The First Englishman was black!" er...a no...he was probably dark brown with brown hair and blue eyes; but his features are all pretty modern European, and other than skin tone he looked a lot like his direct descendent 9,000 or so years later - the Time team member that was tested as part of the excavation!

In fact, something like 1/3 of his home village (where the excavation took place) was directly related to the guy from 9,000 years ago and a lot of them looked like him to a greater or lesser degree.

We wouldn't know about the darker skin color of the distant ancestor, without DNA but he doesn't look "African" in a modern sense - he probably looked like a friend of mine who is half Scots and half Southern Italian - brown hair with a serious suntan even in January.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Article might be news to people who only know Vikings from the TV show...and even they depicted some lovely dark-hairs (the guy playing Rollo - haha!).

The Vikings were movers and shakers...they (as much as possible) civilized what is now Russia (named for the Rus Vikings) for gawd's sake...let alone conquered, raided, founded, traded and married (or at least fathered) most of Europe. Sure, there are and probably were a lot of blue-eyed blondes in the mix but it's pure simpleton to think they were all like peas in a pod.
 

Trivium Pursuit

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I'm half Norwegian and have light brown hair, which I'm told was blond when I was very little. In the first map that Housecarl posted, you can see that the Varangian guard were primarily Swedish, which is what I'd always heard. As they were the ones who founded Kiev. Rus was the word for the Swede's reddish beards. Have also read that most of the northernmost of Scotlands clans were mostly Norse Vikings. Somewhat the same for the Orkney Islands. From which comes one of the best dark beers ever--Skull Splitter. This does NOT refer to what it does to your head the morning after you've had too many of them. Instead, it was named for Harald Hasakluif, a Norwegian who sailed down there and made himself King of the island. Hasakluif is Norwegian for 'Skullsplitter'.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
For a great, (if slightly Dated) fiction read of the Norse in Scotland and the Northern Atlantic, Poul Anderson's Mother of Kings is a very good and entertaining introduction to that period. Poul died a few years ago, and this was written before some of the more recent discoveries were made, but his academic focus was always on the Norse/Germanic people and some of the Celtic. He brought that into a lot of his science fiction and fantasy - but Mother of Kings is a historical novel.

41DD3aIZNiL.jpg
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Re AOL's genetic update; interesting that they have wiped out my documented 20% German ancestry. Hmmmmm
Haha. Yeah. I was updated by Ancestry.com last week. Their estimation of German is pretty spot on at 18%, but I consider the German and Scandaheuvian numbers as fluid, because my German is actually Dane (real Viking..haha!). Otherwise...the 2/3 make-up of Scot, Scot's/Irish (South Donegal) and English numbers remain stable, except that now they have broken out my Welsh DNA into a seperate catagory. I know...I laugh, because mine is all documented, too.
 

Troke

On TB every waking moment
The latest rendition of the Troke Bohemian (Czech) DNA has us at 11% Swede/Norwegian. Them Vikings sure did get around.

They have us at 26% Germanic, almost on the nose. We are 25% German.

And 59% Slav which Bohemia was.

They got rid of the 26% Brit/Irish which was their first rendition. I kind of lost confidence in them at that point.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Someone I know who is an academic in the field referred to the type of DNA "tests" and "results" used by the three major "ancestry" companies as:

"Pay us to send us your data and we will tell you lies.."

And I've already mentioned my close friend and former housemate that had her and her son's DNA tested by all three major companies and only the first one, verified and told her that what her family always said was "Native American" ancestry was actually fairly recent ancestry from West Africa.

This was the only information she was able to verify, finding the actual marriage records between an early 19th century East Coast Quaker ancestor to a "Free Women of Color."

The other two companies simply didn't bother to tell an obviously "white" women that she had a fairly recent black ancestor, they just ignore the whole issue

My friend thought it was amazing and said "what a love story that must have been," and I said "You're a novelist so write it" lol.

But I suspect there are a lot of "white" people, who might be really upset to the point of making noise and demanding refunds if they got such "news" about their family's past.

So, they just don't tell you...it isn't that real, professional DNA tests are screwed up, it is that the companies used cheaper versions and they only report what they think you want to hear - but now THEY have your DNA in a database and even charged you to put it there.
 

Sacajawea

Has No Life - Lives on TB
There is a strong whiff in that particular article, of the spurious idea that DNA determines culture. Which is all part & parcel of Rousseau's theory of the "natural man"... in my mind. Also the idea that only men went on trading/raiding missions is a bit misleading, given the evidence in the sagas and histories.

If that particular DNA claim were true, adopted infants raised in another culture wouldn't remain well within their cultural upbringing; eventually the "power" of the DNA in their blood would force them to be what they "naturally" are.

OF COURSE the Vikings procreated around the world; OF COURSE "native" Vikings have complex DNA... from various parts of the world. The Vikings weren't the only traders & explorers, before during or after that era. And OF COURSE, people shared their cultures and maintained those traditions (as best they could or made sense) as they resettled elsewhere.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Someone I know who is an academic in the field referred to the type of DNA "tests" and "results" used by the three major "ancestry" companies as:

"Pay us to send us your data and we will tell you lies.."

And I've already mentioned my close friend and former housemate that had her and her son's DNA tested by all three major companies and only the first one, verified and told her that what her family always said was "Native American" ancestry was actually fairly recent ancestry from West Africa.

This was the only information she was able to verify, finding the actual marriage records between an early 19th century East Coast Quaker ancestor to a "Free Women of Color."

The other two companies simply didn't bother to tell an obviously "white" women that she had a fairly recent black ancestor, they just ignore the whole issue

My friend thought it was amazing and said "what a love story that must have been," and I said "You're a novelist so write it" lol.

But I suspect there are a lot of "white" people, who might be really upset to the point of making noise and demanding refunds if they got such "news" about their family's past.

So, they just don't tell you...it isn't that real, professional DNA tests are screwed up, it is that the companies used cheaper versions and they only report what they think you want to hear - but now THEY have your DNA in a database and even charged you to put it there.
Yeah..well, they DID help me. There's always been a weird mostly unspoken mystery about my Dad's parentage - his father that is. Grandma had him when she was an unmarried 16 and wasn't talking (to her grave). Then she married a man (Russian/Pole and listed on my dad's birth cert as his father), divorced quickly within less than 2 years, and married my Dad's supposed stepfather (all English background) ) who was 30 years older than her. He divorced his wife w/family to marry Grandma. My father took his step-father's name by the time he was 12.

Long story short, I could never figure ALL of the English % that ancestry.com claimed for my background, could never fit in any DNA connections or documentation to the supposed Russian/Pole on Pa's birth cert - until one day I gave up and entered his (again supposed) stepfather into the tree as his father. Suddenly DNA connections were made to cousins distant and close...turns out, all those step-relatives my dad grew up with were actual blood relatives. There were too many DNA connections to ignore as chance. As far as I'm concerned, the mystery is solved. Pa's birth cert was fraudulent, but his (our) family name was actually his own by birth.

Haha! She stayed married to my dad's real father until he died 30 years later, then she married twice more in her lifetime. Grandma led a colorful life.
 
Last edited:

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
The OP was intended as a springboard to discussion, and it worked :D

Thanks, all. I've never seen a place like this that could be a good editorial board for almost any subject and not throw furniture :D
 

Stanb999

Inactive
Someone I know who is an academic in the field referred to the type of DNA "tests" and "results" used by the three major "ancestry" companies as:

"Pay us to send us your data and we will tell you lies.."

And I've already mentioned my close friend and former housemate that had her and her son's DNA tested by all three major companies and only the first one, verified and told her that what her family always said was "Native American" ancestry was actually fairly recent ancestry from West Africa.

This was the only information she was able to verify, finding the actual marriage records between an early 19th century East Coast Quaker ancestor to a "Free Women of Color."

The other two companies simply didn't bother to tell an obviously "white" women that she had a fairly recent black ancestor, they just ignore the whole issue

My friend thought it was amazing and said "what a love story that must have been," and I said "You're a novelist so write it" lol.

But I suspect there are a lot of "white" people, who might be really upset to the point of making noise and demanding refunds if they got such "news" about their family's past.

So, they just don't tell you...it isn't that real, professional DNA tests are screwed up, it is that the companies used cheaper versions and they only report what they think you want to hear - but now THEY have your DNA in a database and even charged you to put it there.

I did 23 and me and it's pretty much spot on. Polish, german/french, and Irish. All easily documented from family history. Basically it confirmed what we already knew. One interesting fact is my Y chromosome traces back 9000 years in what would become Central Poland. You can also find other free online data bases to compare segments if your really into it. 23 and me.. gives a very basic overview by design.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Walkntrot, she didn't really me there was never any useful information in such DNA tests; in fact, many have recovered all sorts of family secrets without the happy ending where you can just see your grandmother as "colorful."

Support groups have been started, sometimes by the companies themselves for people who discover things like: their older sister is really their Mother, their biological Dad is the family's former plumber, they married their double-first cousin or even a half-sibling, they were adopted (very common) and the bit further bad you go, the more "colorful" things tend to get.

But just one example, I am well aware because my last surviving aunt, a lady of great age and dignity managed to hint (in a very ladylike way) when my Mom was dying that my her mother (my grandmother) may have had her second two children with someone else, even though officially they belonged to my grandfather.

Since I had already figured out long ago from bits and pieces my Mom mentioned about her horrific dirt-poor childhood, that there was a good chance my grandmother did what almost anyone would do in the face of her children actually starving to death and shall we say did what she needed to do to survive, this was not a shock to me.

In fact, I found the idea that both my second aunt (now deceased) and my Mom rather comforting to the alternative - and I've always wanted a good test because I'd like to know what that part of my ancestry already is.

Being me, I would find most anything interesting to fascinating from: "yep grandad really is grandad the old scoundrel" to "oh my goodness, now we know where my mutation that is associated with the Greenland Inuit came from - time to start hunting the Danish records for a name..."

But the Companies selling the tests don't know that about me, and if they found out that say my actual grandfather was a black dock worker from the Port of Long Beach, they might just "fuss" a bit with the details, especially if the ancestry were even a bit further back.

I am not saying they would, but I am saying at least several years ago at least two of them were obviously omitting things - so I'm waiting, hoping my anthropologist friend can get me a real academic study someday - she said those you can mostly trust, or at least trust them more than the commercial ones - even if you pay to be in the study.
 

Stanb999

Inactive
Walkntrot, she didn't really me there was never any useful information in such DNA tests; in fact, many have recovered all sorts of family secrets without the happy ending where you can just see your grandmother as "colorful."

Support groups have been started, sometimes by the companies themselves for people who discover things like: their older sister is really their Mother, their biological Dad is the family's former plumber, they married their double-first cousin or even a half-sibling, they were adopted (very common) and the bit further bad you go, the more "colorful" things tend to get.

But just one example, I am well aware because my last surviving aunt, a lady of great age and dignity managed to hint (in a very ladylike way) when my Mom was dying that my her mother (my grandmother) may have had her second two children with someone else, even though officially they belonged to my grandfather.

Since I had already figured out long ago from bits and pieces my Mom mentioned about her horrific dirt-poor childhood, that there was a good chance my grandmother did what almost anyone would do in the face of her children actually starving to death and shall we say did what she needed to do to survive, this was not a shock to me.

In fact, I found the idea that both my second aunt (now deceased) and my Mom rather comforting to the alternative - and I've always wanted a good test because I'd like to know what that part of my ancestry already is.

Being me, I would find most anything interesting to fascinating from: "yep grandad really is grandad the old scoundrel" to "oh my goodness, now we know where my mutation that is associated with the Greenland Inuit came from - time to start hunting the Danish records for a name..."

But the Companies selling the tests don't know that about me, and if they found out that say my actual grandfather was a black dock worker from the Port of Long Beach, they might just "fuss" a bit with the details, especially if the ancestry were even a bit further back.

I am not saying they would, but I am saying at least several years ago at least two of them were obviously omitting things - so I'm waiting, hoping my anthropologist friend can get me a real academic study someday - she said those you can mostly trust, or at least trust them more than the commercial ones - even if you pay to be in the study.
Oh, they tell you if your african or other brown. No worries. Kum ba ya!
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
Walkntrot, she didn't really me there was never any useful information in such DNA tests; in fact, many have recovered all sorts of family secrets without the happy ending where you can just see your grandmother as "colorful."

Support groups have been started, sometimes by the companies themselves for people who discover things like: their older sister is really their Mother, their biological Dad is the family's former plumber, they married their double-first cousin or even a half-sibling, they were adopted (very common) and the bit further bad you go, the more "colorful" things tend to get.

But just one example, I am well aware because my last surviving aunt, a lady of great age and dignity managed to hint (in a very ladylike way) when my Mom was dying that my her mother (my grandmother) may have had her second two children with someone else, even though officially they belonged to my grandfather.

Since I had already figured out long ago from bits and pieces my Mom mentioned about her horrific dirt-poor childhood, that there was a good chance my grandmother did what almost anyone would do in the face of her children actually starving to death and shall we say did what she needed to do to survive, this was not a shock to me.

In fact, I found the idea that both my second aunt (now deceased) and my Mom rather comforting to the alternative - and I've always wanted a good test because I'd like to know what that part of my ancestry already is.

Being me, I would find most anything interesting to fascinating from: "yep grandad really is grandad the old scoundrel" to "oh my goodness, now we know where my mutation that is associated with the Greenland Inuit came from - time to start hunting the Danish records for a name..."

But the Companies selling the tests don't know that about me, and if they found out that say my actual grandfather was a black dock worker from the Port of Long Beach, they might just "fuss" a bit with the details, especially if the ancestry were even a bit further back.

I am not saying they would, but I am saying at least several years ago at least two of them were obviously omitting things - so I'm waiting, hoping my anthropologist friend can get me a real academic study someday - she said those you can mostly trust, or at least trust them more than the commercial ones - even if you pay to be in the study.

I wouldn't be surprised (actually had this convo with a friend yesterday - spurred by the recent Ancestry.com update) if I someday turn up with "black" relatives, since I do have slave-owners in the family as close as my great-great grandfather. People were as "colorful" back then as they are now - behaviorally and otherwise. :)
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
I do know the Norse Vikings took Irish slaves. When I lived in Iceland, all the Icelanders had the patronymic naming tradition where their last names were their father's first name + son or dottir. Off the southern coast was the
Vestmannaeyjar or Westman Islands. People there had last names like Williams. The story was that the island was inhabited by escaped slaves from the mainland.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
I do know the Norse Vikings took Irish slaves. When I lived in Iceland, all the Icelanders had the patronymic naming tradition where their last names were their father's first name + son or dottir. Off the southern coast was the
Vestmannaeyjar or Westman Islands. People there had last names like Williams. The story was that the island was inhabited by escaped slaves from the mainland.
When the genetic break down was done for the entire Island of Iceland a few years ago, it was found that 50 percent of the DNA was Irish on the maternal side.

That doesn't mean no Norse women went to Iceland, we know that they did, but there was a huge influx of Irish thralls (slave women) that were probably "hidden" to history because the Icelanders kept really detailed genealogical records and were continuously literate from the time of European settlements in the 900s.

I remember Nightwolf being as surprised as any other Norse scholar with the DNA because of those records and I made two suggestions of possible ways this happened that both have historical precedents in other places.

The most likely (because it happened in other parts of the Norse world) the women were freed when they bore their masters children and often officially married as first (or second) wives. In the "stories" the slave women is almost always "discovered" to be the "daughter of an Irish king" which since that required something like owning Five cows under the old Irish law codes, was a pretty low bar (and probably not even true in most cases).

And these ladies, especially those who officially married their former masters probably took new Norse names voluntarily or by custom, so an Irish Mary became Helga and that's how she's recorded on the genealogy lists.

The other possibility that also has historical (and even modern precedents) is that the children of the master were considered as belonging to himself and his wife legally rather than their biological Mother. In many places that would be more obvious because cultures that have a lot of slaves, could end up with one woman "having" an impossible or improbably number of children.

Since they don't seem to have unusual numbers of children and the population of Iceland has always been pretty small (even today it is about 350,000 people on the entire Island) I think freeing the thrall and marrying her is much more likely.

We know the Norse were doing this all the time, they freed a lot of men as well, because in reality they didn't have that much use for slaves given the types of farming, trading, or even raiding that they were engaged in.

Their main use for slaves was to sell them to the Muslim world which did use them in exchange for silver and other goods, that and having a small number around a homestead for farm work and household labor, something a happy freedman may actually do even better (in exchange for a tiny house, a bit of land and a place in the extended kindred) than an unhappy, disgruntled slave.
 

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
And there was always a need for more willing men who would fight when called as well. As now, military service as a path to citizenship - or freedom as the case may be. :D
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
And there was always a need for more willing men who would fight when called as well. As now, military service as a path to citizenship - or freedom as the case may be. :D
The Norse period was pretty much towards the end of the period when an adult man (or women) could train to arms and be reasonably good at it as a young adult rather than starting as an older child.

So yes, this was also the case, in fact, the story of Athelstan's journey from Monk to the slave, to a trusted member of the war band to the leader's best friend is based loosely on the stories of a number of different people in the sagas, history, and hints in the archeological record.

Like Rollo become King of France, the time-lines are not historically accurate but that was done in storytelling in "period" too with "heroes" like Theodric during the migration age needed to have lived to be about 400 years old if he had really been there and done everything attributed to him, as it is he may have lived to a good age for the time; but a lot of the adventures of other people probably got tacked onto his.
 
Top