00:09
@T.E.D. It actually falls within the same range as the amount of
Neanderthal DNA contribution to non-African modern humans.
It is worth thinking in terms of numbers of ancestors.
If we allow 30 years per generation (probably on the high side, but it will give us a lower estimate for the number of ancestors), the Norman Conquest was 30 generations ago. 30 generations before that, and we are in the Romano British period.
30 generations ago, we each had 2^30 ancestors = 1,073,741,824 ancestors.
30 generations before that, each of those 1,073,741,824 ancestors also had 1,073,741,824 ancestors.
That is way more than the total population of the earth!
What that means is that the same names will appear multiple times on each line of the tree.
The implication being that the vast majority of people of "British" heritage are related.
But in this case, only the direct father-to-son male line (the one that carries the Y-chromosome is being considered). That is a tiny subset of the whole.
A father who has only daughters does not pass his Y-chromosome to the next generation. (Equally, a mother who has only sons will not pass her mitochondrial DNA to future generations since her grandchildren will get their mt-DNA from their mothers).
Now, in this case, I think there are significant problems in their interpretation of the data. There are very few published peer-reviewed papers on the Alpine R1b-S28 haplotype. This worries me.
However, it is likely that virtually no Alpine R1b-S28 haplotype was introduced during the Norman Conquest. Most "Normans" were descended from the Norse invaders who had conquered and settled in Normandy.
The Y-chromosome in that group predominantly originated from Scandinavia - where there is hardly any
R1b-S28 haplotype, even today.
Discussion on question by Charlie: Wa…
Discussion on question by Charlie: Wa…