Origin of Icelanders

[Pangur Bán]

When we think of Iceland, we think of quintessential Scandinavians. They are the purest of all Scandinavians.

After all, they've been stuck on an island far away from everyone for the last millennium, and it is well known that their language is very conservative. It is closer to the Old Norse language than the modern Scandinavian language of Denmark, Norway and Sweden, obviously reflecting this purity.

Well, this is not the case ... not according to this study at least, in terms of genetics:
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000343

and to other studies cited therein.

Roughly one third of the maternal ancestors of modern Icelanders came from Scandinavia, while two thirds came from Scotland and Ireland. But 75 to 80% of paternal ancestry is from Scandinavia. That probably won't surprise many historians, as Gaelic-Norse intermingling in the north and west of Scotland, the east of Ireland and parts of England are known. Iceland was probably populated mostly by Scandinavian warriors who had married Gaelic women in eastern Ireland and western and northern Scotland, though some women had come from Scandinavia and some men from Scotland and Ireland.

Overall, while Iceland is Scandinavian in language and patrilineage, it is roughly half Scandinavian half Irish/Scottish in terms of genetic origin.

Incidentally, Icelanders are more distinct than this. If I read the article correctly (and I only have limited knowledge of genetics), the sample of early medieval Icelanders shows that high medieval Icelanders were more closely related to both the modern populations of the British Isles and Scandinavia than to modern Icelanders. I.e. Icelanders have undergone more genetic change than most other Europeans, something apparently expected from being on an island.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Interesting. I wonder what a linguistics study taking this into consideration would find.

 

[Traitorfish]

I was under the impression that their mixed ancestry was common knowledge, but it's interesting to see some genetic evidence for it. Certainly, I didn't realise that the proportions were as slanted towards Gaelic ancestry as they were. I suppose the obvious parallel to draw is with the Northern Isles, which show a similar mixture and distribution of Norse and Pictish ancestry. It's about the only place pre-inhabited where the Scandinavian influence prevailed; in most, it simply left them with a new aristocracy, some funny vocabulary and an unusual relationship with vowels. (Or "Un 'nyoozhull r'lehrsh'nshup w'v vaouwulls". )

 

[Birdjaguar]

When we think of Iceland, we think of quintessential Scandinavians. They are the purest of all Scandinavians.

After all, they've been stuck on an island far away from everyone for the last millennium, and it is well known that their language is very conservative. It is closer to the Old Norse language than the modern Scandinavian language of Denmark, Norway and Sweden, obviously reflecting this purity.

Well, this is not the case ... not according to this study at least, in terms of genetics:
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000343

and to other studies cited therein.

Roughly one third of the maternal ancestors of modern Icelanders came from Scandinavia, while two thirds came from Scotland and Ireland. But 75 to 80% of paternal ancestry is from Scandinavia. That probably won't surprise many historians, as Gaelic-Norse intermingling in the north and west of Scotland, the east of Ireland and parts of England are known. Iceland was probably populated mostly by Scandinavian warriors who had married Gaelic women in eastern Ireland and western and northern Scotland, though some women had come from Scandinavia and some men from Scotland and Ireland.

Overall, while Iceland is Scandinavian in language and patrilineage, it is roughly half Scandinavian half Irish/Scottish in terms of genetic origin.

Incidentally, Icelanders are more distinct than this. If I read the article correctly (and I only have limited knowledge of genetics), the sample of early medieval Icelanders shows that high medieval Icelanders were more closely related to both the modern populations of the British Isles and Scandinavia than to modern Icelanders. I.e. Icelanders have undergone more genetic change than most other Europeans, something apparently expected from being on an island.

If 2/3 of the maternal ancestors came from Scotland and Ireland while 80% of the men from Scandinavia that implies that the women were captured on raids and taken to Iceland by the raiders. i guess Scandinavian women knew full well that Iceland was no place to live and wanted to stay home in Norway and Denmark.

 

[Lord Baal]

If 2/3 of the maternal ancestors came from Scotland and Ireland while 80% of the men from Scandinavia that implies that the women were captured on raids and taken to Iceland by the raiders. i guess Scandinavian women knew full well that Iceland was no place to live and wanted to stay home in Norway and Denmark.

That's how I met my fiancee.

 

[Pangur Bán]

If 2/3 of the maternal ancestors came from Scotland and Ireland while 80% of the men from Scandinavia that implies that the women were captured on raids and taken to Iceland by the raiders. i guess Scandinavian women knew full well that Iceland was no place to live and wanted to stay home in Norway and Denmark.

More likely that the Scandinavian men in question came from the Hebrides, Orkney/Shetland and Ireland, where previously they/their fathers had got with natives. It's of note that the Scandinavians were expelled from Dublin in 902, and no-one really knows for sure what happened to all of them.

 

[Cutlass]

If 2/3 of the maternal ancestors came from Scotland and Ireland while 80% of the men from Scandinavia that implies that the women were captured on raids and taken to Iceland by the raiders. i guess Scandinavian women knew full well that Iceland was no place to live and wanted to stay home in Norway and Denmark.

Or Vikings liked to capture hot chicks wherever they were easy to grab and go....

 

[Traitorfish]

Or Vikings liked to capture hot chicks wherever they were easy to grab and go....

The Icelandic settlers weren't really "Vikings", though, in the proper sense. They were settlers, more akin to the New English pilgrims than to the raiders at Lindisfarne. By that time, Norse and Danish settlement in the British Isles had become rather more established, the warriors having found more stable employment in the service of various kings and lords, and no more likely to "go viking" in Britain than in Scandinavia.
Certainly, anyone hoping to earn wealth and power- as the Vikings did- was unlikely to wind up on a frosty island a thousand miles North of nowhere. There's a reason that so many of them left Scandinavia for the British Isles and Continental Europe in the first place.

 

[Shibbyman]

http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/vikingorkney/genetics.htm

The last section is interesting. It says that the further you get from Scandinavia, the higher the disparities between "viking" Y-chromosones (male) and "viking" mitochondrial (female) lines become.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_British_Isles#Genetic_peculiarities

Not really related but still interesting.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Nice links Shibbyman.

 

[BuckyRea]

Very interesting. I always thought the Icelandic accent sounds vaguely Scottish. I just figured it was because Scotland was the closest English speaking part of the world.

 

[Perfection]

Iceland seems to me to be amazing in that it's the only major landmass first colonized by a complex literate society.

 

[Lord Baal]

Iceland seems to me to be amazing in that it's the only major landmass first colonized by a complex literate society.

Probably due to its isolation. I'm sure the Eskimoes would have reached it given a little more time, but the Norse got there first.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Iceland seems to me to be amazing in that it's the only major landmass first colonized by a complex literate society.

How about Antarctica?

 

[Bill3000]

How about Antarctica?

No permanent settlements, so I wouldn't call it colonized.

 

[Yoda Power]

Antarctica isn't really colonized, is it?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Iceland seems to me to be amazing in that it's the only major landmass first colonized by a complex literate society.

Maybe Masada can help, but did they colonists of Madagascar have a writing system?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Folks are there year round. Buildings are pretty permanent. It is certainly more settled than Newfoundland was by the Vikings.

Antarctica has no permanent residents, but a number of governments maintain permanent manned research stations throughout the continent. The number of people conducting and supporting scientific research and other work on the continent and its nearby islands varies from about 1,000 in winter to about 5,000 in the summer. Many of the stations are staffed year-round, the winter-over personnel typically arriving from their home countries for a one-year assignment. An Orthodox church opened in 2004 at the Russian Bellingshausen Station is also manned year-round by one or two priests, who are similarly rotated every year.[33][34]

The first semi-permanent inhabitants of regions near Antarctica (areas situated south of the Antarctic Convergence) were British and American sealers who used to spend a year or more on South Georgia, from 1786 onward. During the whaling era, which lasted until 1966, the population of that island varied from over 1,000 in the summer (over 2,000 in some years) to some 200 in the winter. Most of the whalers were Norwegian, with an increasing proportion of Britons. The settlements included Grytviken, Leith Harbour, King Edward Point, Stromness, Husvik, Prince Olav Harbour, Ocean Harbour and Godthul. Managers and other senior officers of the whaling stations often lived together with their families. Among them was the founder of Grytviken, Captain Carl Anton Larsen, a prominent Norwegian whaler and explorer who, along with his family, adopted British citizenship in 1910.

The first child born in the southern polar region was Norwegian girl Solveig Gunbjørg Jacobsen, born in Grytviken on 8 October 1913, and her birth was registered by the resident British Magistrate of South Georgia. She was a daughter of Fridthjof Jacobsen, the assistant manager of the whaling station, and of Klara Olette Jacobsen. Jacobsen arrived on the island in 1904 to become the manager of Grytviken, serving from 1914 to 1921; two of his children were born on the island.[35]

Emilio Marcos Palma was the first person born south of the 60th parallel south (the continental limit according to the Antarctic Treaty),[36] as well as the first one born on the Antarctic mainland, in 1978 at Base Esperanza, on the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula;[37][38] his parents were sent there along with seven other families by the Argentine government to determine if family life was suitable on the continent. In 1984, Juan Pablo Camacho was born at the Frei Montalva Station, becoming the first Chilean born in Antarctica. Several bases are now home to families with children attending schools at the station.[39] As of 2009, eleven children were born in Antarctica (south of the 60th parallel south): eight at the Argentinean Esperanza Base[40] and three at the Chilean Frei Montalva Station.[41]

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

But everything the use or consume is imported, right?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Their water is probably local. Antarctica is how I imagine a moon colony to be, but with less severe conditions.