Home

Iron Age and Anglo-Saxon genomes from East England reveal British migration history

1 Comment

001.

002

A very interesting ethno-political map of Britain in AD 530 (above) based on the archaeological map below, the literary sources and other data (maps credit: Home Page for Howard Wiseman in Griffith Univ., maps added by periklisdeligiannis.wordpress.com)

.

Republication from Nature.com

 

 

Stephan Schiffels, Wolfgang Haak, Pirita Paajanen,  Bastien Llamas, Elizabeth Popescu, Louise Loe, Rachel Clarke, Alice Lyons, Richard Mortimer, Duncan Sayer, Chris Tyler-Smith,   Alan Cooper & Richard Durbin

Nature Communications7,  Article number:10408  doi:10.1038/ncomms10408

 

British population history has been shaped by a series of immigrations, including the early Anglo-Saxon migrations after 400 CE. It remains an open question how these events affected the genetic composition of the current British population. Here, we present whole-genome sequences from 10 individuals excavated close to Cambridge in the East of England, ranging from the late Iron Age to the middle Anglo-Saxon period. By analysing shared rare variants with hundreds of modern samples from Britain and Europe, we estimate that on average the contemporary East English population derives 38% of its ancestry from Anglo-Saxon migrations. We gain further insight with a new method, rarecoal, which infers population history and identifies fine-scale genetic ancestry from rare variants. Using rarecoal we find that the Anglo-Saxon samples are closely related to modern Dutch and Danish populations, while the Iron Age samples share ancestors with multiple Northern European populations including Britain.

More

Collateral relatives of Amerindians among the Bronze Age populace of Siberia?

Leave a comment

Republication from Pub Med

siberia map[maps added by the republisher]

Am J Phys Anthropol. 1999 Feb;108(2):193-204.

Abstract

Nonmetric and metric traits were studied in cranial series representing prehistoric and modern populations of America and Siberia. Frequencies of the infraorbital pattern type II (longitudinal infraorbital suture overlaid by the zygomatic bone) are universally lower in Amerindians than in Siberians. The os japonicum posterior trace, too, is much less frequent in America than in Siberia. The only two Siberian groups with an almost Amerindian combination are late third to early second millennium BC populations from Okunev and Sopka, southern Siberia. The multivariate analysis of five nonmetric facial traits and ten facial measurements in 15 cranial series reveals two independent tendencies.

More

Ancestors of Native Americans migrated in single wave, genetic study finds

4 Comments

Reblogged/ Source: news.ku.edu/2015/07/21/ancestors-native-americans-migrated-single-wave-23000-years-ago-genetic-study-finds

LAWRENCE — A new genome-scale study that includes a University of Kansas anthropological geneticist has determined ancestors of present-day Native Americans arrived in the Americas as part of a single-migration wave from Siberia no earlier than 23,000 years ago.

Later migrations of Aleuts and Eskimos occurred approximately 9,000 and 4,000 years ago.

“Using coalescence analyses, not just using one piece of DNA, but the entire genome, we find that the earliest someone could have come to the Americas was 23,000 years ago,” said Michael Crawford, head of KU’s Laboratory of Biological Anthropology and a professor of anthropology. “This study also pretty well does in the whole idea that gene flow from Europe contributed to the original migration of present-day Native Americans.”

Crawford is a co-author on the study, and the journal Science has published its results online. The Center for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen headed the international research team, which included co-authors Eske Willerslev, a Lundbeck Foundation professor at the center in Copenhagen; Maanasa Raghavan, a postdoctoral researcher at the center; Yun Song, a professor of electrical engineering and computer science, statistics and integrative biology at University of California, Berkeley; and David Meltzer, an anthropology professor at Southern Methodist University, among others.

To more accurately pinpoint the account of how and when modern humans populated the Americas from Siberia, the team generated genomic data from several present-day and past Native American and Siberian populations. This included an analysis of the DNA of the fossil known as Kennewick Man, found along the Columbia River in Washington State in 1996.

“This is not just mitochondrial DNA,” Crawford said. “It’s shown on the entire genome that’s been sequenced.”

More

THE BATTLE OF STONES RIVER or BATTLE OF MURFREESBORO (Part II)

3 Comments

confederate
Confederate infantry reenactment (copyright: John Moore-Getty Images).
.
By Periklis Deligiannis
.

THE BATTLE OF STONES RIVER or BATTLE OF MURFREESBORO (Part I)

On the night before the big showdown, there was a “singing battle” between the rival soldiers who were established in positions within a few hundred meters apart. Some Federals began to sing their ‘national’ folk songs “Hail Columbia” and especially the “Yankee Doodle”, and the Confederates answered immediately singing their own traditional songs “Dixie” and “The Bonnie Blue Flag”. Soon the two rival lines began to sing each one its own traditional song more and more loudly, in an almost unbearable squealing. Eventually a group of soldiers started to sing the nostalgic song “Home Sweet Home” for the home and the family that every soldier had left behind, which brought a “musical compromise” of the opponents. Soon, thousands of ‘Yankees’ and “Rebels” were singing simultaneously its nostalgic lyrics, as an informal peace, without knowing that in the next day they would clash in the second bloodiest battle of the Civil war, after the battle of Gettysburg.

At dawn of December 31, Major General Hardee led the Confederate left wing and a strong cavalry force against the Federal right. The impetuous Southerners quickly outflanked their opponents who fell back towards the bank of Stones River. Thus Bragg surprised Rosecrans, forcing him to cancel his own envelopment maneuver. Around 7.00 am and under the pressure of the Confederate attack, Rosecrans recalled the division of his left wing which he intended to use for the maneuver. Its commander, Major General Thomas Crittenden, had crossed with his men the Stones in order to outflank the Confederate right wing under Major General John Breckinridge. Meanwhile, in the center of the two lines, the Union division of Major General Philip Sheridan and the Confederate Army corps of Major General Polk were clashing with unusual ferocity. The two rival army corpses were “familiar” to each other since the battle of Perryville, where they had clashed with the same determination.

More

THE BATTLE OF STONES RIVER or BATTLE OF MURFREESBORO (Part I)

3 Comments

Re-enactors Union troops

Union infantry reenactment (copyright: EPA).
.
By Periklis Deligiannis
.
(OK, I know that you are a little disappointed when I’m not posting on ancient and medieval topics, but as you have probably guessed the Colonial Americas and the American Civil War are among my favorite topics. This article is a summary of the chapter “The Battle of Stones River or Battle of Murfreesboro” of my book “The Civil War”)
.
In July 1862, the skilful Confederate Commander in Chief in the West, General Beauregard, was assigned back to the Eastern Front, but President Davis did not define a replacement for his office. The Confederate president confined in assigning the thrice distinguished in the Mexican War, Major General Braxton Bragg, as general commander of the armies at the Tennessee-Mississippi front, who was from now on the unofficial Commander in Chief in the West. Braxton Bragg and his subordinates Major Generals Kirby Smith and Earl Van Dorn started to prepare the Confederate counterattack in order to recover the lost territories in the Western Front. Their distressed forces were reinforced and revived by the recent conscription.

map(copyright: US Military Academy)
.
The general Confederate plans involved three synchronized campaigns in all the fronts from the Mississippi River to Virginia. In the East, General Robert Lee (the new commander of the Army of Northern Virginia) would invade Maryland. On the Western Front, the armies of Bragg and Smith would launch major offensives to Kentucky rushing from Chattanooga and Knoxville respectively (southeastern Tennessee). Simultaneously, Van Dorn would campaign from the Mississippi State against Grant’s army in western Tennessee. If he could manage to force back Grant’s army, he would then join Bragg and Smith somewhere in Kentucky. The ultimate aim of the Southerners was to encourage the (Southern after all) states of Maryland and Kentucky in leaving the Union and joining the Confederacy. Much depended on the speed of their march, the communications and the logistics.
The success of the Confederate plan would also yield benefits on the diplomatic field because Britain and France would probably acknowledge the C.S.A. as a sovereign state – a much desired aim of the Richmond government. The French Emperor Napoleon III wanted to promote his plans on turning Mexico to a French dominion or semi-colony, but he would not officially acknowledge the Confederacy if the British did not do the same. However, the British were waiting patiently watching the progress of the war.

More

SOME SCENARIOS ON THE OUTCOME OF THE UKRAINIAN CRISIS

Leave a comment

By Periklis Deligiannis

ukraine
Russian-speaking combatants gather ammunition from the place of crash of a Ukrainian fighter aircraft.

Many of us remember the classic book “Clash of Civilizations” (1996) of Samuel Huntington, the main successor to the geopolitical school of the British historian Arnold Toynbee, and his remarks on the bipartition of the cultural identity of Ukraine and Turkey, which is dramatically verified for both of them in the last twelve months. Yet Turkey, despite the dramatic events taking place in the country during the last year, does not wobble as much as Ukraine.
Let’s see how things have developed for the Ukrainian crisis and then some scenarios on its solution. The terms of the recent agreement were not really implemented and the Ukraine is possibly moving towards a more violent confrontation. The “big players” (Russia, U.S., E.U. and China) are rather cautious preferring keep waiting, except the rapid Russian annexation of Crimea.
The Western media have probably overstated the financial dependence of Russia from the Western economies, although the American financial reprisals on her have already been felt in the country. Neither Russia can seriously threaten the U.S. in retaliation, but can push to a certain extent the European Union using energy reprisals. Of course the latter did not have any serious problems of energy supply before the energy agreements with Russia, but it now appears to depend a lot on the inexhaustible Russian gas resources, especially Germany, France and the other Northern European nations.
The Ukrainian crisis is the outcome of the constant attempts of the U.S. and the E.U. to penetrate a geopolitical region which Russia considers exclusively her own since at least 1793. However it seems that they have not anticipated the extent of the internal struggle in Ukraine.

What are the reasons of the current embarrassment of the “major geopolitical players”?

More

FROM PROVINCES TO STATES: the Spanish Viceroyalties, audiencias and provinces in America

3 Comments

By  Periklis  Deligiannis

european aggresion

European knights of the 15th century. The heavy  cavalry of the Conquistadores belonged to this type. The native Central and South American warriors could do very little against these armoured and mounted war machines.

Viceroyalties_Audiencias_16th_Ce

Viceroyalties and Audiencias, 16th Century

In the 16th and 17th centuries, the initial Spanish colonies in the Americas were divided administratively in two viceroyalties: the Viceroyalty of New Spain, comprising the Caribbean, Mesoamerican, North American and Pacific colonies of Spain, and the Viceroyalty of Peru comprising her South American colonies.
Each Viceroyalty was divided in audiencias. The audiencia was a high court of justice exercising judicial, political and military power in the Spanish colonies.
The Viceroyalty of New Spain was divided in the audiencias of Nueva Galicia (modern NW Mexico and SW USA), Mexico (modern Central Mexico and the Caribbean coast of the US), Guatemala (Chiapas, Yucatan and modern Central America), Hispaniola (Cuba and Florida) and Santo Domingo (Haiti/Santo Domingo, Puerto Rico and all the lesser islands of the Caribbean, plus “Little Venice” i.e. modern Venezuela). The Viceroyalty of New Spain included also the Philippines and all the other Spanish islands of the Pacific.

More

THE IRISH BRIGADE IN THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

3 Comments

By  Periklis  Deligiannis

Irish Brigade at Gettysburg

The  Irish  Brigade  at  Gettysburg.  A  classic  artwork  by  Don  Troiani.


The  Irish  Infantry  Brigade  of  the  Federal  Army  (USA)  in  the  Civil  War  consisted  mainly  of  Irish  immigrants  and  Americans  of  Irish  descent,  Catholics  almost  entirely.  After  the  Civil  War,  the  69th  Infantry  Regiment  of  New  York  is  considered  to  be  the  descendant  unit  of  the  Brigade  (because  its  power  was  decreased  because  of  the  losses  and  the  demobilization  after  the  end  of  the  war).  Moreover,  the  69th  Regiment  which  goes  on  serving  the  U.S.  Army  was  the  original  core  of  the  Brigade.  The  Irish  Brigade  became  famous  for  the  high  aggressiveness  of  its  men  and  their  characteristic  Celtic  battle  cry  ‘Fag  an  bealach!’  (‘Open  the  way!’,  in  Gaelic  Celtic),  typical  of  its  risky  missions.
The  Celts  have  always  been  renowned  (already  from  Antiquity)  for  their  bravery  on  the  battlefield,  being  elite  combatants  (warriors  and  then  soldiers)  and  renown  mercenaries.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Celtic  soldiers  (expect  possibly  the  Highlander  Scots)  were  often  considered  to  be  expendable  by  the  Anglo-Saxon  political-military  leaderships  of  the  U.S.  and  Britain  until  the  end  of  World  War  I.  However,  the  heavy  losses  suffered  generally  by  the  Fed  Irish  soldiers  during  the  Civil  War  were  not  always  necessarily  due  to  this  mutual  antipathy  between  Anglo-Saxons  (‘natives’  as  they  called  themselves)  and  Celts  (usually  newcomer  immigrants),  which  in  this  period  often  ended  in  street  clashes  with  several  people  dead  in  major  American  cities  of  the  North  like  New  York,  Boston,  Philadelphia  etc.  Their  losses  in  the  war  were  due  to  a  significant  extent,  to  the  aforementioned  martial  reputation  of  the  Celts:  they  used  to  undertake  a  major  part  of  the  fighting,  thereby  they  had  such  heavy  losses.

More

%d bloggers like this: