The Viking presence in Ireland

O'Leprosy

I sometimes wonder if the Vikings had as strong a presence here as we sometimes believe. Why ? Well, the number one reason would be the lack of genuine Irish blonde women !!!! ( Sorry girls to be so sexist and no dumb blonde jokes !!! ). Seriously, if they arrived here in such numbers, then more of the population would have Scandinavian characteristics would they not.

But as a more concrete evidence of a scant presence of Viking invasion, in comparsion to findings in say, Scotland, there has been very little Viking artifacts such as coins, building tools etc ( the Celtics used barter, Vikings introduced first coins), found in Ireland. Aslo in the Irish language, according to linguists, very few words have found their way into the language. The Viking's also buried their dead by cremation, likewise archologists have found very few Viking cremations in Ireland.

Sure their are many accounts of attacks on monastry's, but some argue it was a clerical ruse overemphasising their roles as victims who resented the pagan influence on the Celtic Christian community.

The greater distance from Scotland, coupled with the fact that the Atlantic seaboard in the west of Ireland is among the roughest seas in Europe, would have been an inhibiting factor for them. Would they have been astute enough to see that coperation was easier and more profitable than long distance raids ?

brianthebard

afaik the main period of Viking attacks and settling in Ireland lasted only about 40 years. They founded several towns as I'm sure you are aware but I don't know about this whole strong presence thing. They existed, or coexisted along with a number of other tribes in Ireland at the time. For a certain period of time they may have been very common.

O'Leprosy

brianthebard wrote:

afaik the main period of Viking attacks and settling in Ireland lasted only about 40 years. They founded several towns as I'm sure you are aware but I don't know about this whole strong presence thing. They existed, or coexisted along with a number of other tribes in Ireland at the time. For a certain period of time they may have been very common.

If the Viking woman of today want to come and invade us - I'm all for it ( only the women mind ).

brianthebard

Roffles I heartily concur.

Hagar

[De Niro]Are you talking to me?[/De Niro]

karen3212

Apparently they did some genetic comparison thing with Dubliners who were known to have lived in Dublin for some generations. Dublin supposedly a viking town.

Anyway they didn't find any evidence that there was a presence of vikings in the blood there.

So if they couldn't find them there, well there can't have been many to begin with.

Fratton Fred

karen3212 wrote:

Apparently they did some genetic comparison thing with Dubliners who were known to have lived in Dublin for some generations. Dublin supposedly a viking town.

Anyway they didn't find any evidence that there was a presence of vikings in the blood there.

So if they couldn't find them there, well there can't have been many to begin with.

Surely if they were here for only 40 years or so, they would not have left much of a genetic fingerprint (or whatever the term is) behind? The population of Ireland grew enormously since they were here so there must have been a lot of "Breeding Out" of the Viking gene?

Also, who was it attacking Wales and Cornwall? I always put that down to the Viking influence on the east coast. Don't tell me it was the peace loving Irish?

brianthebard

Peace loving Irish? What period are we talking about? I mean Irish tribes basically took over Scotland at one stage and pushed the Picts out.

mike65

Well they must have left some sort of mark - Emmet and Patrick Bergin for a start! Bergin has to be a variation of Bergen which is the anglicised Bjørgvin.

Mikejorn.

Fratton Fred

brianthebard wrote:

Peace loving Irish? What period are we talking about? I mean Irish tribes basically took over Scotland at one stage and pushed the Picts out.

sorry, I should have added a :rolleyes: or possibly a

JMSE

Prehaps they [even when full of harp] practised safe sex?

karen3212

Fratton Fred wrote:

Surely if they were here for only 40 years or so, they would not have left much of a genetic fingerprint (or whatever the term is) behind? The population of Ireland grew enormously since they were here so there must have been a lot of "Breeding Out" of the Viking gene?

Also, who was it attacking Wales and Cornwall? I always put that down to the Viking influence on the east coast. Don't tell me it was the peace loving Irish?

I know what you mean, but the Y gene in males is passed with only little changes(mostly due to damage), so apparently they can tell. Really they can. I don't know how but there are markers.

I don't know who was attacking wales, but they really got us back when they sent the Norman Welsh Strongbow, he was our downfall, the ba**ard.

odonnell

heres a good wee link for a bit of reading for anyone who might be interested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/828453.stm

Its only a short read, i saw the documentary on TV a few of years back and they went all over the UK taking swabs from mens mouths. Turned out that a staggering amount of families on the west coast of Scotland retained viking geneaology. Common traits were (unsurprisingly) red or orange hair and a family history of Jupitons Contractions.

I dont know if this study was extended to Ireland though id say it would turn up the same results. I think something like this has already been done in Dublin though yes? Does anyone have a link?

Interesting stuff...

jmayo

Actually not all Scandinavians are blonde, that is a misconception.
Yes there is a fair percentage of blondes in Sweden but I didn't notice it as much in Norway. Finns are different as well since their closest realatives appear to Magyars. Can't speak for Denmark.
Where in Scandinavia did the vikings that came to Ireland originate?
Were different settlements founded by different viking groups or were they all founded by vikings from same geographical region?
I know there were sometimes referred to as The Danes.

Crowhill

The vikings that attacked and settled in Ireland were Norse not Danes. Raids started in 795 (first documented raid on Rathlin island) and continued to 836 ( is this the 40 years you're talking about?) After that the Vikings settled in 840 in Dublin and where sent packing by the combined forces of the King of Brega and the King of Leinster in 902.

They did come back again in the early 10th Century, and were again sent home in 1014 by Brian Boru and his merry men.

The Vikings established towns in various parts of the country and it is likely that a good deal of intermarriage took place.

Personally, I was always under the impression that the red hair gene came from the Scandinavian side of the pool.

Dave.

odonnell

Crowhill wrote:

The vikings that attacked and settled in Ireland were Norse not Danes. Raids started in 795 (first documented raid on Rathlin island) and continued to 836 ( is this the 40 years you're talking about?) After that the Vikings settled in 840 in Dublin and where sent packing by the combined forces of the King of Brega and the King of Leinster in 902.

They did come back again in the early 10th Century, and were again sent home in 1014 by Brian Boru and his merry men.

The Vikings established towns in various parts of the country and it is likely that a good deal of intermarriage took place.

Personally, I was always under the impression that the red hair gene came from the Scandinavian side of the pool.

Dave.

Well thats actually been proven to be a sure sign that youve got scandinavian genes - more often than not! Im not an ignorant who thinks all swedes are blonde by the way - to anyone thinking we follow stereotypes on these boards! But certainly there are traits which can, more oft than not, be traced or used as a marker.

Scotland has a long line of Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian settlers, though the Danish settled and raided more on the East coast of England. We tended to have settler tribes, or raiding parties who settled and traded - evidence of which has now been found on both coasts of Scotland AFAIK. Interestingly the people of the Shetland isles still think of themselves as more Norse than Scots. Annual boat burnings take place in some parts too, solstice and equinox are observed...... wee things like that. In central Scots English and in Swedish/Norwegian/Danish and Dutch too - there are MANY words which are the same....

I can only imagine the same could be said for Ireland??? (youll have to excuse me i dont know my Irish history at all)

mountainyman

The most noticeable result is the other way. The genetic makeup of Icelanders is 40% irish.

MM

odonnell

mountainyman wrote:

The most noticeable result is the other way. The genetic makeup of Icelanders is 40% irish.

MM

mate most of the world has a bit of irish in them....

stipey

Completely OT... saw a preview of Neil Delamere's Edinburgh show in the International bar a few weeks back - its called The Vikings and its all about (you've guessed it) the Vikings.

Was only a rough version of the show (don't think Edinburgh is until August) but it was quite good.

O'Leprosy

karen3212 wrote:

Apparently they did some genetic comparison thing with Dubliners who were known to have lived in Dublin for some generations. Dublin supposedly a viking town.

Anyway they didn't find any evidence that there was a presence of vikings in the blood there.

So if they couldn't find them there, well there can't have been many to begin with.

Yeah, I remember seeing that. I think they found a very small trace of Viking blood in Dublin but they also did tests with males from the west and found effectively zero for them, much to the programme makers surprise.

odonnell wrote:

Interestingly the people of the Shetland isles still think of themselves as more Norse than Scots. Annual boat burnings take place in some parts too, solstice and equinox are observed...... wee things like that.

So if Scotland are playing Norway, which side do the Shetlanders cheer for ?

odonnell wrote:

In central Scots English and in Swedish/Norwegian/Danish and Dutch too - there are MANY words which are the same....
I can only imagine the same could be said for Ireland??? (youll have to excuse me i dont know my Irish history at all)

No, very few words have found their way from the Scandiavian languages into Irish. Whatever words in 'Irish English' (so as to speak) similair to Scandiavian languages would have existed in English before it was ever spoken in Ireland.

Cateym

I am pretty sure I saw a documentary a few years back about the origins and superstitions concerning red hair, had the likes of Blathnaid Ni Chofaigh on it. I distinctly remember them saying that the red hair is a viking trait.

Funny thing is my aunt married a norwegian and her kids would never be mistaken for Irish, point being I think the norwegian genes are quite dominant.

Aedh Baclamh

Yep, I heard about the red hair/viking link. Sure look at Gillian Anderson!

Burga Galti

O'Leprosy wrote:

Yeah, I remember seeing that. I think they found a very small trace of Viking blood in Dublin but they also did tests with males from the west and found effectively zero for them, much to the programme makers surprise.



So if Scotland are playing Norway, which side do the Shetlanders cheer for ?



No, very few words have found their way from the Scandiavian languages into Irish. Whatever words in 'Irish English' (so as to speak) similair to Scandiavian languages would have existed in English before it was ever spoken in Ireland.

As a Shetlander, we'd cheer for Scotland. Our heritage and tradiations may be more Norse than Scots (i.e. more boats and less kilts) but we are Scottish make no mistake.

Also, being a Shetlander I've been amazed by the similarities between my own culture and that of Ireland. Quite apt really considering that the vikings who came to Ireland came through Shetland.

There are quite a few words commonly said in Ireland that are norse in origin (can't think of any off the top of my head mind but I know I've been suprised many a time since coming here).

On the note of genetic testing, they may have tested Dublin but did they test Limerick? I'd bet the West Coast would have much more viking ancestry than the East due to the terrain around that area. It''s more typical of the areas where the Vikings liked to live.

Mick86

O'Leprosy wrote:

But as a more concrete evidence of a scant presence of Viking invasion, in comparsion to findings in say, Scotland, there has been very little Viking artifacts such as coins, building tools etc ( the Celtics used barter, Vikings introduced first coins), found in Ireland.

I wouldn't say Viking artefacts are scarce in Ireland. The National Museum has the largest collection of Viking Grave Goods outside Scandinavia. Meanwhile Scandinavia has a large collection of Irish stuff that the Vikings nicked. One of the Roskilde ships was built in Ireland according to dendrochronoligists.

O'Leprosy wrote:

Also in the Irish language, according to linguists, very few words have found their way into the language.

Dublin, Wicklow, Wexford, Waterford, Carlingford, Howth and Helvick are all Viking placenames. Higgins is an Irish name derived from the word for a Viking pirate.

Lirange

Aedh Baclamh wrote:

Yep, I heard about the red hair/viking link. Sure look at Gillian Anderson!

Well she would! Even though she has some Scots heritage her father's side descends from Swedish emigrants to America.

Lirange

Going on what I've researched I'm of the belief that the Vikings did have a profound impact on Ireland. As did other non celtic groups such as those nefarious Anglo-Saxons/Normans. Of course the Normans themselves though French speaking were descendants of Norsemen.

The Viking influence extended over a period of two centuries (800-1000AD). They were not limited to the east coast. Their influence was definitely felt in the west too. They navigated up the rivers (e.g The Shannon) Their Long Ships could ply shallow waters. The Vikings founded Limerick.

Viking art and Celtic art had bidirectional influence. Hence many similarities can be seen between the interlacing intricate art styles of both cultures. There is some argument among art scholars if certain traits were passed from the Irish to the Vikings or vice versa but there is general agreement about the exchange of artistic tenets.

Norway and Iceland do tend to be less blonde saturated than Sweden and correctly this has much to do with the slaves/partners brought back to Norway or taken to Iceland.

Think Bjork, Frida Lyngstad (the brunette Norwegian in the Swedish group ABBA), current young musician Marion Raven (Ravn), or the lead singer of 80s band A-ha. I stayed in Trondheim Norway for a week three years ago and one of the docents was a dead-ringer for Andrea Corr. Not just a slight approximation or resemblance ... I literally thought she was Andrea momentarily until she started speaking to us in her uneven English. I have a good eye for that as I'm smitten with Andrea's beauty. The Trondheim area is crawling with brunettes ... easily as prevalent as blondes.

I think we get caught up too much in hair colour and eye colour. It's true that hair colour can be useful to show the presence of a genetic link it is not necessarily a good signifier of one individual's genetic history. Hair colour and eye colour is neither dominant or recessive (generally speaking) unlike skin colour. It's more of a genetic fusion or intermingling ... much like height. So knowing the basics of genetics ... theoretically someone with darker features might have more Scandinavian genes than someone with fairer features that we tend to associate with the Norse peoples.

Traits that are better indicative of one's genetic past are bones/structure/teeth. That brings me back to Andrea Corr. It would be counterintuitive to think of the raven haired singer as being of Viking descent. She is small, has dark hair, and dark eyes. However, her teeth suggest otherwise. Nordic peoples have large wide teeth. This is a distinctive genetic signifier much more reliable than hair colour. Andrea does indeed have very large teeth ... much larger than the archetype for someone of a purely Celt background. Gabriel Byrne's teeth would be closer to the other end of the spectrum. But clearly not every Irishman and woman have the archtype chompers.

A strong argument could be made that Andrea Corr has more Norse in her genes than Brian O'Driscoll, who you'd think was the poster boy for the viking presence in Ireland. But he has distinctly Celt sized molars. Hair colour simply is not the most accurate way to judge an individuals genetic map even if it's presence is a signifier for a population at large. (My gf is following along here and with the teeth discussion she brought up Shane MacGowan at which point I strangled her). At any rate even within families you see variation. Andrea's siblings all have fairer features. Round faces and sharp cheekbones are distinctive of the Norse. Traits also evident in the Corr clan.

Tis true though that The Celts were people with dark(er) features. If it weren't for the influence of outsiders everyone would have features similar to Colin Farrell and Gabriel Byrne. Good or bad depending on your POV!

Have a gander at Grace Kelly. She's is 100% descended from County Mayo emigrants.

Not bad for a Blonde. Though I still prefer Brunnies meself.

Son Goku

Aside from cultural aspects, our Iberian genetics are apparently very dominante and leads to the breeding out of any invading populace. An example of this is the native people of Cornwall, who are the same ethnic group as the Irish. These people, despite seeing the Angles/Saxon invasion of England followed by the Norman invasion of Britain are still 95% Iberian.

professore

Burga Galti wrote:

As a Shetlander, we'd cheer for Scotland. Our heritage and tradiations may be more Norse than Scots (i.e. more boats and less kilts) but we are Scottish make no mistake.

Also, being a Shetlander I've been amazed by the similarities between my own culture and that of Ireland. Quite apt really considering that the vikings who came to Ireland came through Shetland.

There are quite a few words commonly said in Ireland that are norse in origin (can't think of any off the top of my head mind but I know I've been suprised many a time since coming here).

On the note of genetic testing, they may have tested Dublin but did they test Limerick? I'd bet the West Coast would have much more viking ancestry than the East due to the terrain around that area. It''s more typical of the areas where the Vikings liked to live.

I think they tested people in Swords (county Dublin) and somewhere in mayo as a control group - so a very limited sample. Both returned with no viking genes. I agree they should have tested some well known viking ports such as Wexford and Waterford :

Wexford is from Esker Fjord or Inlet by the Sandbank and Waterford is from Vadre Fjord, or which means a landing place for sheep. Both have completely different Irish names, Loch Garman (Lake of the River Garman) and Port Láirge (bank of the haunch) respectively.

Also people with Norse surnames should be tested - see article:

http://www.dochara.com/stuff/surnames-viking.php

Lirange

Son Goku wrote:

Aside from cultural aspects, our Iberian genetics are apparently very dominante and leads to the breeding out of any invading populace. An example of this is the native people of Cornwall, who are the same ethnic group as the Irish. These people, despite seeing the Angles/Saxon invasion of England followed by the Norman invasion of Britain are still 95% Iberian.

Why do you use the term Iberian?

Central Europe is the hearth of the Celtic tribes. Many Celts branched off from there moving west. Some went Northwest (Britain/Ireland) and some went Southwest ... Southern Gaul and the Iberian Peninsula (particularly northern Portugal and Northwest Spain). They are not related to the Latin peoples that arrived from Etruscan Italy or the Moors from Northwest Africa which are the other predominant strains. The long residing Basques of southern France and Northern Spain are altogether different from the Celts. But interestingly there is a connection between the Basques and the Welsh indicating a link prior to the Celts arrival in Britain.

But suggesting the Celts of Britain/Ireland are Iberian is odd. It is no more accurate to claim this than that the Celts of Northern Portugal are a Brittanic people.

There were also a few Germanic tribes that ventured into Iberia. That doesn't make the Germans Iberian does it?

Despite some yearnings for the Latin linkage it is *gasp* the Slavs that are the nearest break away group from the Celts in the Melting Pot of that Indo-European Cauldron. Though that was quite some time ago.

Son Goku

Lirange wrote:

Why do you use the term Iberian?

Lirange wrote:

There were also a few Germanic tribes that ventured into Iberia. That doesn't make the Germans Iberian does it?

No, but it does make the early Spanish aristocrats Germanic. I use the term Iberian because it is the term used by geneticists to refer to our ethnic groups characteristics. Genetic analysis, particularly since 2006 has been showing that we are a different ethnic group from the Celts and that we simply adopted Celtic culture, as we have very little Celtic DNA.
As for why geneticists use the term Iberian, I think it's because they believe our ethnic group originated ("evolved") in the Iberian Peninsula.

Lirange

Son Goku wrote:

No, but it does make the early Spanish aristocrats Germanic. I use the term Iberian because it is the term used by geneticists to refer to our ethnic groups characteristics. Genetic analysis, particularly since 2006 has been showing that we are a different ethnic group from the Celts and that we simply adopted Celtic culture, as we have very little Celtic DNA.
As for why geneticists use the term Iberian, I think it's because they believe our ethnic group originated ("evolved") in the Iberian Peninsula.

So you would be referring to the Britons? The predecessors to the Celt culture in Britain and Ireland. That's reaching well back into history there as the Britons were indigenous to the Isles (I use that term loosely) for a long period of time (Technically we're all Africans you know). I'm always bemused by the idea of a race "evolving" at a specific place. It's about movement of people ... migrations.

Most of the current population in Iberia however is not descended from Britons. But rather emigrants from present day Italy, the Moors, and to a lesser extent Celts/Germanic tribes. The Basques of southern France and Northern Spain have been genetically linked to people in Britain particularly Cornwall/Wales.

Tut-tut on the use of the term ethnicity! That's a cultural association not a biological one. Hence, we are a Celtic "ethnic group."

Re: The Briton foundations: If true it actually promotes the notion of a strong Viking influence simply because The Britons specifically were a dark eyed dark haired race. Not everyone in today's Ireland is dark haired and certainly not dark eyed. There is no such thing as a pure or even "mostly pure" race in Europe. Some people like to think of Ireland as being on the margins but it would have been just as much a genetic crossroads as anywhere else in Europe. So even if we accept that the Briton gene is more prevalent than other genes ... the other genetic inputs are not an irrelevant or minor piece of the puzzle. The most concentrated area of people of ancestry to the original Britons is Cornwall.

The Celts of Central Europe tended to have (not as) dark hair but with some light features (e.g. blue/green eyes) ... much like their Slavic cousins.

In a forthcoming book by Brian Sykes it is shown that blond hair occurs with greatest prevalance in East Anglia and Lincolnshire, with high values in Yorkshire, Cumbria, the north of Scotland and the Hebrides. It is least prevalent in Ireland and Cornwall, and found in intermediate proportions in the rest of England and Wales.

Eye colour is a different take altogether. Brown eyes are common in the south and the east, but in Ireland, Yorkshire and Cumbria three-quarters of the population have blue or grey eyes.

European Hair/Eye Colour Distribution Maps

How might we explain these two different genetic distribution maps? The first map shows the distribution of light/dark hair colour across Europe. The second map shows the distribution of light/dark eye colour.

Why do you think when it comes to eye colour that Ireland is grouped with Northern and Central Europe? Whereas the Southwest UK is grouped with Southern and far Eastern Europe? Even in terms of hair colour Ireland is on par with Germany and Holland. How so if the Irish are an "Iberian" people? The Britons mind are dark haired AND dark eyed. Even if that's the foundation gene in Ireland it is obvious that the genetic soup of the Irish people has had many inputs. Ireland did not have the sort of sustained isolation (ie zero migrations) to claim anything close to racial purity. I think the maps help to show that while there are different influences based largely on geography ... that no European people are of one specific Indo-European origin only.

Son Goku

Lirange wrote:

Tut-tut on the use of the term ethnicity! That's a cultural association not a biological one. Hence, we are a Celtic "ethnic group."

Sorry used the wrong term.

Lirange wrote:

So you would be referring to the Britons? The predecessors to the Celt culture in Britain and Ireland. That's reaching well back into history there as the Britons were indigenous to the Isles (I use that term loosely) for a long period of time (Technically we're all Africans you know). I'm always bemused by the idea of a race "evolving" at a specific place. It's about movement of people ... migrations.

Most of the current population in Iberia however is not descended from Britons. But rather emigrants from present day Italy, the Moors, and to a lesser extent Celts/Germanic tribes. The Basques of southern France and Northern Spain have been genetically linked to people in Britain particularly Cornwall/Wales.

No, I'm saying that the indigenious people of Ireland and Britain are the original (in the sense of inhabiting there before the great migrations) people of Iberia. I'm not saying anything about the peoples who currently live in Iberia, so the Moors have nothing to do with it.
Genetic Analysis indicates that our genetic group was displaced from Iberia and moved to here and at some point afterwards adopted Celtic culture, becoming a Celtic ethnic group as you say.
Basically the word Iberian is used in a completely different way by modern geneticists to refer to the "Basque" genetic group of which we are a member. Although it is confusing since Iberian usually refers to the people living there now and their post-Roman ancestors.

Ireland did not have the sort of sustained isolation (ie zero migrations) to claim anything close to racial purity.

But our genes are very pure, so what does that mean? Do you mean our genes only look pure because we are taking a mixed grouping as "pure".

that no European people are of one specific Indo-European origin only.

That's true, it's more so that our "basis" genes, which would be the genes of the people who first arrived here, have gone largely unchanged because they are so dominant.

I'm enjoying this conversation, it's possible I've left something out or more so we might be talking past eachother as I'm talking about the movement of genes and genes can be a bit oblivious to the meanderings of history.
Basically what I'm saying is that it's surprising that despite the Vikings, Normans, Celts, e.t.c. who came here we are still mainly the people who arrived here from Iberia 9,000 (or so) years ago.

Lirange

Son Goku wrote:

That's true, it's more so that our "basis" genes, which would be the genes of the people who first arrived here, have gone largely unchanged because they are so dominant.

I wouldn't say unchanged. I would say persistent ... as it remained the most prevalent gene type.

Son Goku wrote:

I'm enjoying this conversation, it's possible I've left something out or more so we might be talking past eachother as I'm talking about the movement of genes and genes can be a bit oblivious to the meanderings of history.
Basically what I'm saying is that it's surprising that despite the Vikings, Normans, Celts, e.t.c. who came here we are still mainly the people who arrived here from Iberia 9,000 (or so) years ago.

True. I'm just attempting to clarify that the most prevalent gene marker doesn't negate the existence of genetic variety. For example, if 78% of the population show the presence of a certain gene type it doesn't mean that 78% of each individual's genetic make-up is composed of that gene type ... as Sykes and Oppenheimer often point out. In a recent University of London study geneticists discovered great variety on the genetic tapestry within Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, and Scotland. Ireland's particular genetic mix is not quite the same as Wales and not quite the same as Scotland. There exists a different mix of inputs in these areas.

Take a look at the maps in the link I provided in my previous post. Notice that the outward gene expression in Ireland and Scotland differs from that in Cornwall and Wales. It's true that we can't get caught up too much in appearance but even Geneticists do surveys to compliment their lab work. Ireland has some of the highest rates of blue/green/grey eyes in Britain/Ireland. Cornwall and Wales have the lowest.

Does this look like racial homogeneity to you?

Irish fella #1

Irish Fella #2


The Univ of London Geneticists discovered many gene types in Britain and Ireland. The population of Britain and Ireland is mainly a mixture of: Picts, Gaels/Britons (Irish, Scotti, Manx, Cymry Cumbric, Cymry Breizhoneg, Cymraeg & Kernewek), Anglo-Saxons: Angles, Jutes, Saxons, Frisians & Geets, Scandinavian Haethen-Vikings: Danes, Norwegian. Normans: Scandinavian Vikings. The study did identify the presence of Scandinavian genes in Ireland but did not cite the distribution of this genetic marker. The study areas included Wexford, Wicklow, Dublin, Meath and Louth in the East and Clare, Galway, and Mayo in the West.

Throughout the centuries intermixing of people was necessary for survival. Studies show that rare cases of prolonged genetic isolation in EurAsia could be catastrophic. Obviously with the spread of diseases and/or hereditary afflictions too much homogeneity is not a good thing.

Sufferers of MS may have a "viking gene" to blame. The disease afflicts mainly those in Northern Europe, particularly those with descendants from Scandinavia. Scandinavia has the highest rate followed closely by Scotland. However the Sammi peoples of northern Scandinavia and the Inuit of North America are not affected by MS so it is not climate or latitude related. The Scots, and then the Irish have much higher rates than Cornwall and Wales where MS is more rare. It occurs in the North of Germany but is much rarer in France, Southern Germany, and the rest of Southern and Central Europe.

Norwayviking

O'Leprosy wrote: »

If the Viking woman of today want to come and invade us - I'm all for it ( only the women mind ).

Thats probably all it takes anyway lol.The men can have a beer and watch instead

owenc

karen3212 wrote: »

I know what you mean, but the Y gene in males is passed with only little changes(mostly due to damage), so apparently they can tell. Really they can. I don't know how but there are markers.

I don't know who was attacking wales, but they really got us back when they sent the Norman Welsh Strongbow, he was our downfall, the ba**ard.

So does that mean my blood would be coming from my own family surname currently? I thought that you got your looks from all the families joint together not just the one of your father, though i do find that i look more like my fathers family, we all have a same colour of eyes and hair, i look the spit of my cousin! Now they are saying that my family originates in normandy as i guess but i think thats wrong (they seem to think every family in britain came over in the bloody norman conquest!) as i found a person with my surname in scotland in 991ad, i think they are norse not norman!

owenc

odonnell wrote: »

Well thats actually been proven to be a sure sign that youve got scandinavian genes - more often than not! Im not an ignorant who thinks all swedes are blonde by the way - to anyone thinking we follow stereotypes on these boards! But certainly there are traits which can, more oft than not, be traced or used as a marker.

Scotland has a long line of Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian settlers, though the Danish settled and raided more on the East coast of England. We tended to have settler tribes, or raiding parties who settled and traded - evidence of which has now been found on both coasts of Scotland AFAIK. Interestingly the people of the Shetland isles still think of themselves as more Norse than Scots. Annual boat burnings take place in some parts too, solstice and equinox are observed...... wee things like that. In central Scots English and in Swedish/Norwegian/Danish and Dutch too - there are MANY words which are the same....

I can only imagine the same could be said for Ireland??? (youll have to excuse me i dont know my Irish history at all)

Would scotland not be more norse? Theres a girl in my class and i'm almost certain that she has Scottish/norse blood her eyes are pure blue, her hair is pure white/blond and her face is pure white, she looks so norse its freaky i've never seen anyone like that in my life!

owenc

mountainyman wrote: »

The most noticeable result is the other way. The genetic makeup of Icelanders is 40% irish.

MM

Iceland aye right, irish people think everysingle person in the world has got bloody irish blood in them for god sake!:rolleyes:

owenc

odonnell wrote: »

heres a good wee link for a bit of reading for anyone who might be interested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/828453.stm

Its only a short read, i saw the documentary on TV a few of years back and they went all over the UK taking swabs from mens mouths. Turned out that a staggering amount of families on the west coast of Scotland retained viking geneaology. Common traits were (unsurprisingly) red or orange hair and a family history of Jupitons Contractions.

I dont know if this study was extended to Ireland though id say it would turn up the same results. I think something like this has already been done in Dublin though yes? Does anyone have a link?

Hmm, i'd have thought that the North East coast of scotland would've had more norse (is that viking?) connections because of its proximity to norway, theres something about their accent as well, i don't know what it is but it definately sounds more norse...

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

Iceland aye right, irish people think everysingle person in the world has got bloody irish blood in them for god sake!:rolleyes:

True for once.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1287529/

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

So does that mean my blood would be coming from my own family surname currently? I thought that you got your looks from all the families joint together not just the one of your father, though i do find that i look more like my fathers family, we all have a same colour of eyes and hair, i look the spit of my cousin! Now they are saying that my family originates in normandy as i guess but i think thats wrong (they seem to think every family in britain came over in the bloody norman conquest!) as i found a person with my surname in scotland in 991ad, i think they are norse not norman!

Norman means Northman or Norseman. The Norman conquest of Britain is thought to be more of a military "elite" take over. With the other groups already there having a Scandinavian background (Saxons thought to be more Southern Denmark) may have made it easier.

owenc

fontanalis wrote: »

Norman means Northman or Norseman. The Norman conquest of Britain is thought to be more of a military "elite" take over. With the other groups already there having a Scandinavian background (Saxons thought to be more Southern Denmark) may have made it easier.

Oh right.

mithril

owenc wrote: »

Iceland aye right, irish people think everysingle person in the world has got bloody irish blood in them for god sake!:rolleyes:

Not an expert on the subject in any way myself but I visited Iceland recently.
In their National Museum, they claim that gene analysis indicates that the male line is overwhelmingly Norse while the female line is in fact as high as 60% "Celtic" in origin. However, the female stock is thought to originate predominately from the Hebrides rather than Ireland.

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

Oh right.

A bit of background.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollo

brianthebard

Off topic + 3 year vamp = locked thread.