Ancient DNA reveals the truth about Vikings - BBC REEL
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лис 2021
- Vikings are often thought of as 'pure-bred', blonde-haired, and blue-eyed warriors who changed the course of European history.
Now a team of international scientists has debunked this modern-day myth of the Vikings by examining their genetic ancestry. The largest-ever DNA sequencing of Viking remains reveals their surprising ethnic diversity.
Video by Alexandra Rasmussen
Executive producer: Camelia Sadeghzadeh
#bbcreel #bbc #bbcnews
Being a BBC production, I'm half surprised they didn't say they were african...
They're just laying the groundwork, give them a year or two.
I saw a BBC article a few years ago claiming Hitler was half African, half Jewish. I’m not joking, they are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
You do understand, genetically the entire human race started from Africa, technically every skin tone that isn't black is a mutation just like blue eyes etc.
same but it wont surprise me they will come up with that soon
@@gonnaw1n Sorry to burst your bubble, but dark skin is a result of a mutation as well. Check out the skin tone of homo sapiens ancestors under the fur. You will find its pink, just tlike most primates.
As a person of 100 % Norwegian background, I find this program fascinating. My great grandfather Kolnes whose picture I have looks like a Viking from a picture book. His name was Enoch and he received a medal from the king of Norway for saving the lives of a shipwreck in the Stavanger area by rowing his rowboat into the north sea and saving people from shipwreck on the rocks.
😯😯
Probably because this show is just propaganda
@@macktheripper7454 Propaganda is to influence people to an end, a purpose, a conclusion. Just what end those this Video want us to believe.
As a product of the Southwest United States, a Heinz 57 of ethnicities, I can understand the Vikings varied lineage. As my great grandfather told my father, "I am pretty sure there are no Eskimos in our family tree. But don't bet on it".
I’m Latino and my grandpa also looked just like a Viking with a long white beard and apparently he also had light eyes. But he was Portuguese.
Back in the days when men had balls and strength to that
100% thought the BBC was going to say they were black!
lol
So THAT’S what BBC means… 🤔
Softening you up for that.
@@benitokiriGo 👉🏼 to jail! 👮 Go 👉🏼 directly to jail! 👮 And do not pass GO!
In the early 90s I spent 2 years in Pamir, Karakorum and Hindu kush mountains. In some of the most remote and isolate valleys I've met indigenous people with blond hair and blue eyes, we know that the Azores in the middle Atlantic ocean was inhabited 2000 bc so imo no doubt of the indo-european migration theory and much more frequent contacts than previous thought between ancient peoples. These people were more capable travelling long distances across land and sea than anyone believe.
This is legacy from Alexander's the Great conquest approx 300BC, they penetrated deep into Asia and subsequently on that path there was at least 200 cities founded and called after his name. It's a well known-topic all over the internet for the reasons why some people there have blue or green eyes as far as northern India states. Speaking of Azores, there is proof from some ancient greek historian, who wrote that Phoenicians described seeing sun rising and settling from the other side and added something in lines that he "didn't really believe this claim", but nowadays this is a direct proof that Ancient people were circumnavigating Africa, at least its western shores.
Most intelligent people, more intelligent than their others, have inquisitive minds and the thirst for exploration and adventure. "risk takers".
Then there are the others like the Polynesians who HAD to flee into the wilderness of islands to get away from smarter, hungrier people on the mainlands for example.
The world has always been a dumb vs smart Darwinian culling.
Robert Sepehr has some very fascinating stories, saying it dates even back way further back in time ..
@@ManteIIo that has been debunked long ago. Those people have nothing to do with Greeks however the come from the same blond hair and light skin population source from northern Iraq along with the Sinshasta culture in the Asian Steppe
I find listening to Eske Willerslev’s Danish accent more fascinating than his conclusions.
As a Dane, yes, both twins (Rane and Eske) speak with a quite distinguished accent, I think from Gentofte. Even when they speak Danish I have a very hard time to block this away and concentrate on the content :)
Danes are like the Geordies of Scandinavia. :-)
I though he was English, but he's not - he's Danish. It's just...you can't tell, 'cause he doesn't have any accent.
Its like woody Allen had a child with his Danish step daughter
An even more fascinating thing is to listen to a Scandinavian language with an English accent.
I wouldn't call adding Anglo-Saxons and Celtic peoples to the warband very diverse. The genetic distance between the British isles and Scandinavia is tiny.
And the Angles, Jutes and Saxons originated from Northern Germany/Denmark. Anglo-Saxons are basically pre-viking Vikings themselves. They left the lands that later Vikings lived in hundreds of years prior. So genetically they’re probably extremely close.
@@MrTangent I did read somewhere that anyone who claims to be able to distinguish genetically between Vikings and Anglo-Saxons is talking nonsense, given that they were effectively the same people.
Classic BBC. They lived in Scandinavia, had a Scandinavian culture, and were overwhelmingly Scandinavian genetically. But because all human beings started somewhere else, ancient groups split and spread across the world, and sailors pick up partners in ports, bits of other genetic material are also present. The BBC gets ammunition for its assault on common sense and European identity.
Wrong ! The british isles population shares more DNA with France and Spain than Scandinavia !
@@antoinemozart243 *laff*
I don't think I've ever seen someone work so hard at speaking as Prof. Willerslev.
I was just thinking that. Trying to figure out what accent ? Impossible
Ahnold
@lindaross783 Danish accent of course.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I note that there was very little mention of Scotland, for some unknown reason. The Vikings in Scotland were from Norway and they ruled the north of Scotland, the Northern Isles (Orkneys and Shetland) as well as the Western Isles (the Hebrides). Those areas were all part of the Norwegian kingdom. Norwegian genes are a larger part of Scottish DNA than Danish DNA is in English DNA.
I live on the Wirral in England that was inhabited by Norwegian Vikings that had been expelled from Ireland. 50% of the men in the Wirral of Viking DNA. I've had my DNA done and I have some Norwegian DNA too
this seems to be the modern consensus. i'm Scottish with a touch of Norwegian/finnish. it's now said that the Vikings stayed longer than originally thought and even influenced names of towns etc
Oh no! They forgot to make the programme all about the Scots. Thanks for letting us know.
@@covidcarl7480 'By', pronounced 'bee', appears in many town names in the UK. In Norwegian, Swedish and Danish it means some form of settlement - a village, a town or a city. Think of all the place names ending with 'by' in the UK? Denby, Formby, Derby, Granby, etc. There are more than 200 such places in Yorkshire, alone. These towns were once Viking settlements. Over the centuries, each town would set up its own rules for residents and visitors, enshrined in what we now refer to as by-laws, the laws of the village.
Celtic tribes coming 6 sentry BC from Balkans
Showing a nineteenth century sail ship makes no sense in talking about Vikings 500 years earlier
I think quite a lot of the footage was of fairly sketchy reenactors. There was a pair of boots that stuck out as anachronistic near the beginning. And I would like some independent confirmation that Viking women wore septum piercings.
Oh well.
Donate your authentic Viking Ship so it can be used in documentaries then ya buzzkill dufas.
@@mrnobody3161 Blablabla, there is hundreds of totally seaworthy Viking longboats available all over Scandinavia!
You land lubber can even hire a short trip, if you want and dare to..
Yeah the first pictures undermines and show the creators have no idea what are they talking about, just want to promote the modern trends.
Imagine being a proud warrior, tough as hell and fight with no fear and end up in someone's office as a paperweight
This is both hilarious and depressing
I find anthropologists treatments of burial sites disrespectful. RIP used to be sacred.
@@Musick79 yes, very disrespectful and disturbing. -Viking from Ostrobothnia Finland
Was it for a long time at least in anglo cultures keeping around a couple of the bones of the decease was seen as honorable .. Especially during the whole momentous mori and tuberculosis explosion..
I mean think of The Vikings they always wanted to live in fight forever..
If they do true science and don't try and use it to push politics... He is technically fighting forever for his people's history
Does that also include that Vikings were shipborne bikie gang who practised gang rape and murder of women?
I fully expected “We wuz kangz and sheeit, we wuz Beethoven we wuz Vikings”
Dont worry they’re getting there. This data is extremely low quality and the bbc just makes flavor content now apparently. Too bad, I used to enjoy some content.
I’m neither Scandinavian nor British but it’s interesting watching the tone shift towards covering fact in the name of guilt.
@@namedrop721 I know.
Exactly! 😂😂😂😂
Rent free in ur head 🤓
@@xGlocklesnarx Why not…. y’all expect everything else for free that normal people have to work for. Squatting ain’t no different from that.
I recently had a DNA test, and I found that Danish and Scandinavian genes were still present in my ancestry from my father, who came from Yorkshire!
The "Saxons", "Angles" and "Jutes" ceratinly where close to the later Danes. They came over teh North Sea and conquered part of Britain (which had a large population they subduedand became part of) right?.
@@PMMagro The Vikings captured the city of York and ruled parts of the north of England for nearly a hundred years. My maternal grandmother came from the Anglo Saxon heartland of Somerset and my DNA inherited from her, originated from Germany! I find it fascinating that you can see how history is embedded in your ancestry.
Still
I'm not gonna pretend like I have a clue about what real viking scandinavian culture was actually like, but there was nothing presented here that drastically changes the outlook or necessarily supports the conclusions shared.
its the bbc never trust what they say these guys coverd up pedophile cases in northern England no joke
Because it's all about multicultural - ideological drivel. It's like 1000 years from now they would excavate graves in Sweden and find buried people from Africa, Pakistan...etc. And then claim that Swedish people were not white, that Swedish ethnicity means just eating meatballs or singing Abba or living in Stockholm.
@@Aleksamson it wodunt suprise me they all ready doing its all ready happing with the cheddar man case trying to claim he was African and trying to claim he was an ancestor to every brit which is BS
@@thelink4492 Well, if we go back a long way enough we all came from Africa...if they want to make a Mesolithic cave man = English men
That man has the most Danish accent ever.
It's more his voice than his accent. Not all Danes sound the same as their voices vary a lot.
I agree. I knew his was Danish as soon as he started talking. His accent must be exaggerated because I have only a couple Danish friends and I spotted the accent immediately. Weird.
Sounds like he begins every sentence with swallowing a tennis ball.
In the times of the Byzantine Empire, it was common for Scandinavians to go to the Black Sea area to work as mercenary soldiers for the Byzantines. At the same time, there was possibly an arrival of "Scythians" from the steppe of what is now the northern Black Sea coast to Scandinavia, carrying burial mound culture and even the Indo-European language (the true Scandinavians possibly spoke something similar to present-day Finnish)
Please research your history of time periods, when was the Byzantine Empire ? or if there was one ? Where are the Scythians? & where are they now? Дура мура у рэкï 🌅😜😂🍻
I don't know where you've got that information from, pretty much everyone agrees that Icelandic is the closest language to Old Norse.
@@permadsen1479 It is simply a hypothesis (I read it a long time ago, I don't remember where)
@@permadsen1479Genetics test have shown blue eyes appeared first in the western Black Sea 12000 years ago.
Scithians ukrainean, bulgarians and romanian dacians.
The goths from Gotland are dacian getae ( visigoths) and they migrated there 900 years before the wikings to spread arianic Christianity.
Goth language is 700years older than old Norse.
That's why Sweden, Denmark and Finland were named Dacia in official documents and also Iordanes, the goth historian says so.
Yes, true. Scandinavian men served as elite royal guards to Byzantine imperators for several centuries, but your described Scythian arrival from Pontic steppe happened several thousand years apart.
wow..., human genetics and migration is endlessly fascinating. I am not remotely Viking but I am fascinated by the 'culture' and the impact that their conquest had on Europe.
There was no Viking conquest. Vikings were just one of many, several dozens of groups of people defined by cultural identity and, in many cases, languages. They were cultures that no longer exist that had much bigger impact than the Vikings. Vikings were primarily settled around the shores of the Baltic Sea and in the region along the Dnipro River. Kyiv was at one point the center of Viking culture. Most of the settlement had nothing to do with conquest or violence, it was just migration and creating settlements. Only later, closer to the year 1000 different tribes and clans developed bigger, state-like communities that began establishing control over their territories. By then Vikings were integrated by or absorbed people from other cultures.
Wait, I'm confused. Is this video saying that the Vikings were *more* diverse genetically than modern Scandinavians? That would mean that Scandinavia has actually *lost* genetic diversity since the time of the Vikings, which seems odd. Or could it be that the BBC is once again straining to make a political point about "diversity", and in the process not giving us a clear account of what the science is really saying...
The latter
A Norwegian historian that worked on this project called them out for having a garbage sample size selecting for places outside of Scandinavia while ignoring the inner regions. Most Vikings where buried at sea or cremated so those graves might be Christians. Furthermore the study says the Viking had non Scandinavian European admixture not black admixture. This is an obvious attempt by academia to erase white people’s history. ua-cam.com/video/wc1GOPN5X3g/v-deo.html
They're trying to muddy the waters of history so we'll accept the fact that there are now a WHOLE LOT of dark - skinned people
in what used to be nearly exclusively Scandinavian societies. And we mustn't question it, because it was on a BBC documentary.
@@idontcare8405 people like you wipe away European culture by referring to Europeans as white, you can be a white Arab or white asian, you need to start referring to Europeans as Europeans. Each culture within Europe also have their own language and traditions that sets them apart from each other. White supremacy was the worst thing that happened to Europeans and European culture.
@@toriphillips7383 White commonly refers to Europeans. I’m using the word the way most people do. Arguing over the definitions of words instead of addressing my argument is retarded.
So, Viking was a lifestyle like say being a pirate. A mix of whatever culture that newcomers brought with them.
It was an occupation, NOT a nationality. When people refer, for instance, to a "Viking child," I just have to laugh. It's like saying "an accountant child" or "an optometrist child." And while there is some, very limited, evidence of women being on board raiding ships, it's vanishingly rare.
I was like being an arab, man people thinks that it's an ethnicity
@@pricklypear7516 Yes you went out on a "raid" to become Viking, you were no a viking at home. that is how it it thoughtt in Denmark
No Viking was a trade like carpenter stone smith and metal smith
Sounds more like bikie. Hells angels in a longboat.
There are currently plenty of norwegians a swedes who are not typically blonde, yet their facial features are distinctly belonging to their countries. Sure, blondes are more common in nordoc vountries than elsewhere but Scandinavians are no where near exclusively blonde. Norwegians especially have all sorts of spectacularly "tall, dark and handsome" types and a fascinating array of deep dark blue eyes instead of conventional greyblues or clears. In fact you'll probably find more "typical" blonds in westrussians than in Norwegians. There are just a lot of assumptions anout what scandinavians look like.
What instrument is the woman playing in the group near the end of the video?
This is where the bbc takes something out of context to push a political point. They do this every time. Dr. Who is the most scientific thing on the bbc.
Interestingly, when Thor Heyerdahl visited Azerbaijan and Caucasian region, he was shown the ancient petroglyphs (Gobustan) of boats on the western shore of Caspian Sea, strikingly resembling the Vikings’ ones. He also met people there with blues eyes and pale skin (living in mountains of Azerbaijan) , which have legends of their ancestors sailing with these boats to the North. But Norwegian historical science never accepted Thor’s hypothesis of migration from Caspian to the North along Volga river and further. It died out. Hopefully, someone starts his work again.
Didn't Snorri Sturluson locate Asaland (where some of the early ancestors of some of the Scandinavian kings supposedly came from) east of the Don river. Not far from "West of the Caspian". That said, I got the impression he was guessing and ruling out various places such as Troy. But it does square with the idea that a number of groups over time have entered Europe from the steppes (e.g. possibly indo-European speakers, huns and other groups, and later mongols).
@@peterjamieson263 Snorre said that Odin(the god) came north from somewhere in the caucasus.
Tottally agree with you.
some years ago i was on visit in georgia, (where i was born).
uppon hearing that i grew up in norway and now lived in denmark, our nabour there showed me a article in a magsine that resambled national geographic, just in georgian.. and there were pictures of huge stones, belived to be grave stones, with viking runes on it..
100% they made it all the way down there, no dought. there boats had no problems on the rivers.
they where in america long before columbus, but thats not what they teach in schools around the world.
@@d.m6614 I watched a program here in the States on the Discovery channel that showed proof that Viking's had been all the way too northern Minnesota. My brother had a DNA test done and it showed that we are Scandinavian and all this time we were told we were German.
@@chrismaurer2075 Thats awsome.
My step father, from norway, has a thing with his little finger, where the joint is stuck in one position.. couple of years ago, we had visiors, ad he told him that it was something only in viking genecis...
so if you have famaly members with that, you can be 100% sure..
Yes i know they made it all the way over there to. off course, it wasnt called New york back then, but aparantly arceologists found writings somewhere, that described the river banks and everry thing.
I allso saw a documentary, where aparantly the viking aølso met withe indians.. but that it didnt tur out well because the indians had offerd them some sort of milk in a ceremony, but the vikings got sick, because of lactose intolerant.. and tought the indians were trying to poison them 😆
the only reason they held back, was becaouse they were just a few in numbers, compered to the indiginouse..
The viking were sure interesting folk. Its a pitty bbc is trying to wite wash there historry, because of political convinience..
The besst to you and your brother.
Greetings from Denmark.
where can I get one of those helmets?
is there a repository of viking dna? i live in the US and have yet to find anyone near my Ydna match. last name mcmindes. Ydna I2a
We know what what the Vikings looked like because their little-changed descendants are still with us today. "It's not ethnicity that determines whether you're a Viking or not, it's a lifestyle." In other words if we redefine the word Viking to mean anything we want it to mean, then the Vikings weren't Northern Europeans. A bit like saying because people around the world (unfortunately) wear American logos on their clothes and adapt many American fads they're American citizens. Defining a people's history out of existence in service to eventually putting them out of existence.
We also have to keep in mind that hair and eye color are both carried on the X gene, not the Y gene, so Y DNA haplotype distribution cannot be correlated to eye or hair color distribution. I see too many people jumping to conclusions just based on the Y DNA haplotype.
"Defining a people's history out of existence in service to eventually putting them out of existence."
Which is precisely the BBC's woke agenda.
Exactly. Viking was a verb, that became a pseudo ethnicity. A bunch of Norseman in a boat setting sail to pillage and steal were said to be "going viking."
❤
Well said
come on, everybody who actually knew a bit of norse history already knew this. the vikings travelled and settled all over the place.
You would be surprised how many people do not know history (the vast majority of humans). They just read some far-right websites that claim that Vikings were some pure-bred ethnicity or watch some shows where Vikings are often shown as muscular giants with blond hair and blue eyes. They will not go and investigate whether what they read or saw is true.
The majority of people are ignorant, so it is easy to manipulate them.
@@Flamdring Yeah, most people are not illuminated like you are
Of course we knew this. It's been known for decades that "viking" were made up of a lot of different people from all around the known viking trade routes. "Viking" was a verb, an activity, not a racial group. Danes, Norsemen and Swedes went viking ie roving, trading, and yes pillaging. They also settled in many places they raided, interbred and started New towns and cities all over Europe.
I have a small % of Norwegian DNA which I'm assuming comes hand-in-hand with my Irish (Munster) DNA. The rest is Welsh, English and Chinese.
They didn't settle. Hence they left the Americas 100 years before the Spanish.
@@Flamdring Could you please direct me to some of those far-right websites. I haven't seen any of them and it would be interesting to see what they say.
I was listening to this, and the narrators voice and accent was occasionally a dead ringer for
Craig Charles (was watching Red Dwarf the other night). I could really hear the Scandinavian influences on Scouse. Where he says "On real science" near the end!
I am Iberian but I share a chromosome from Viking that lived in England around 800 to 900 year. Incredible! I had freckles, many red hairs mix with my brown hair. The males in my family have red beard. All off this information was in my DNA.
Redheads can even be found in North Africa, so I don't think it's related only to Viking migrations.
The trouble is, in these days terms like The Dark Ages have been re-defined, in order to be more historically correct and accurate to the period. So the Dark Ages are now the "Early Medieval Period", AD and BC have now been re-defined as BCE (Before the Current Era). And yet, all the historians have not yet got to grips with the fact that the term "Vikings" is not only (largely) a more modern term, but is a completely un-defined term, which can include various different peoples in various different activities (or not, depending on the commentator), with no strict definition to categorise them. So working out "The Truth About the Vikings" is like trying to find out where all the slaves came from, in history, and what their ethnicity was. Define what "Vikings" means FIRST, then you can work out where those defined groups or individuals originated. Otherwise, taking a small sample of individuals from a certain place in time and history, establishing their origin, then claiming that you know where all the "Vikings" came from is nonsensical. Because how do you know if they were Vikings or not, and how do you know if that small sample is true of all the "Vikings"? You can't know, unless you define what "Vikings" were.
Vikings happened to come from Scandinavia. It is not that complicated...
Globalism fanatics in our time, seems like removing or blurring any sort of boarders are of major importance?
@@OmmerSyssel The term "viking" as a noun to describe a certain people group is a modern fiction. "Viking" means sea raider. They were pirates, and they included people from all over the place. The term "viking" is a Scandinavian term, yes, but the viking and to go "a-viking" (raiding), is not a strictly Scandinavian occupation or activity. Criminals from all around were vikings, just as in the later period we have pirates in the seas between Western Europe and Africa composed of many people, all sharing the same criminal activity called "piracy".
So true. I love this arguement/ assessment. A parallel would be to take a sampling of Native American Indians, do all kinds of tests and then say okay now we know all the Indians.
@@OmmerSyssel I watched one of the genealogy programs that I like: the teacher asked this control group, is there anything that you don't want to be? Most of the group didn't have much of an answer. One young man said German, cause I hate Germans. When their dna tests came back two weeks later he had quite an interesting portion of German heritage. He was surprised.
@@droe2570 not as much a raider as an explorer
"Vikings are often thought of as 'pure-bred' "not sure where you guys come up with this kind of assumption, however blonde people were very rare and relatively speaking they were more common in the north same as gingers.
By the way in all popular depictions they are show to interact a lot with many cultures, as expected if you travel the world in your little boat.
Had to watch it to the end, science mixed with politics....
A lot of white supremacists in thinks that - that their forebears were all pure Aryan race of blonde hair blue eyed people including the Vikings. Even in the Vikings series, the key actors are mostly dark to light blonde. I also Googled "Vikings" and the images mostly show blonde or red haired and blue eyed people.
Lol. And that’s what you call a political comment. Politics always aim to make blonde guys seem pathetic and weak so you can’t have that Vikings were blonde. This broad, non-specific comment that they also had genes from other places. Of course they did, what a dumb comment, the were raiding and traveling all across Europe. Doesn’t mean most of them weren’t native
And movies
@@carljohan1234 Politics makes blonde guys like Boris Johnson or David Cameron look weak and pathetic? I guess they should have chosen a different profession, then.
Vikings were pretty wide-spread, as mentioned in the video. And the video also mentions that they appeared to be native to the many areas they were from, be it Scotland, Spain, or Sicily.
So the fact of the matter is that - contrary to popular belief - Vikings were not usually yellow-haired. They also had no horns on their helmets.
A proven succes story about diversity within a shared culture. Not cultural diversity within a shared country 😉
That guy learned English watching Arnold Schwarzenegger movies😂
Fantastic observation
that one guy sounds like a skyrim guard
Sounds like being a viking was more a job than some kind of ethnic identity.
Just as being a pirate of the Caribbean.
the old Norse word vikingr was literally an occupation. like singer, baker etc. it is only much later in history that English romanticists turned that occupation into an ethnicity,
William the Conqueror and his people did not consider themselves Vikings or even descended from Vikings.. they referred to themselves as Normans literally norsemen/northmen.
LOL ✌
@@wildschwein9066 .. but yes
If that’s what you wanna believe but no
I kind of expected the BBC to highlight that the Vikings were in fact sub Saharan African, and that Europe has always been diverse as per "Diversity and Inclusion" lesson 101.
But you know they tried. This was the best they could come up with.
Europe and Scandinavia have been predominantly always white did they have very few people from around the world there yes but majority was all white
@@Crusader1984 Not even a few people.
Only in Netflix 😂
Great clip and info...I'm half Swedish Viking 🇸🇪 and half German🇩🇪...
I’m an ancestor of the Vikings during the Landnám period, with traceable ancestry back to the 11th century. There was almost no additional added DNA, according to the records, except some Danes in the 17th century. My DNA is basically what you would expect.
100% European with 99.8% northwestern European which comprises of 79.4% Scandinavian and 20.4% British, and then 0.2% Ashkenazi Jewish.
My maternal lineage is Scandinavian and paternal lineage is British, which is the opposite of what is expected of my heritage. :)
I have straight dark brown hair and almost black eyes, and almost no one in my family is blonde, but the majority have light colored eyes.
1. When graves survive usually they’re given elaborate burials. Common graves tend not to last so you’re selecting for elites who are more likely to mix through arranged marriages for alliances. Thus this study greatly overestimates the admixture of the Vikings. 2. All the admixture is European. So because the Vikings took back some English girls that means race isn’t real white people don’t exist and somali’s need to be in Sweden. 3. The fact that they don’t link the study and that it’s behind a paywall shows the dishonesty of this. Make a claim, but don’t show you the evidence.
Agreed, I was waiting for the DNA tests, but they showed NONE! Maybe they aren't 100% Scandinavians, but most likely 100% Europeans. Then maybe they spread their genes outwards, like Viking Halfdan who worked in Turkey.
Perhaps the reverse is true. Gentics elements that are found outside Scandinavia and anong Vikings originated in Scandinavia first. Far more Vikings for example settled in Sicily and Anatolia than the reverse.
God I’ve always been extremely fascinated with the Vikings my son asks me if I hang out with such tall girlfriends that I think I’m tall like a Viking too. I’ve felt it in my bones I’ve always known I’m Sicilian but I didn’t know my Vikings were there!!!
Curious as to why they never go into that at all. Almost as if “Diversity” repeated ad nausea was all they wanted to spew as their truth. It is the BBC, after all.
My Sicilian father had ple skin, dark hair and blue eyes. He always thought he had Viking in him. Nope. Italian, Greek, Sephardic Jew and No. African DNA.
@@carolsaia7401 I believe it. Did you know that Scott’s have been traced to North Africa as well? Egypt. They took DNA samples from the mummified Pharaoh’s.
The point is, if we can trace ourselves to these other places, where can those other places trace themselves to? It’s not as if we all left and those are just the peoples who stayed behind. Repeatedly this is what programs like to leave out.
Given that during the ice age, nobody was really occupying much of Europe. So, where do we come from? And when did we leave?
Here’s more for you, that may surprise you. Dating in Egypt is coming under increasing scrutiny with some saying the Sphinx dates back to the end of the last ice age. That those we have credited with building the pyramids are just those who claimed credit by writing there own narratives and histories over those who predated them.
Do you hear what I’m suggesting? It’s not like it’s unheard of. Just look around and see what’s happening right now.
History repeating itself, that’s all.
Another thing to consider. The slave trade from Europe to N. Africa. More slaves from Europe than to North America. Any European living on the coast, or daring to board a ship, was under threat of being attacked by the Barbary pirates. It was a slave trade that started around the middle ages, after the Muslims had captured North-Africa
@@pinchebruha405 I saw an episode of "Secrets of the Dead" on PBS in which they examined the remains of a female warrior interred in a Viking burial chamber. In the episode they mentioned Vikings averaged about five and a half feet in height, which was not unusually tall for a European of the Viking era. Maybe their aggressiveness made them seem bigger?
Professor Willerslev is very passionate and educated on this subject.
What exciting new information!
Altogether now, “Genetics and culture are not the same thing”. This should be the headline of nearly all such studies. Europe, or even just the U.K., is replete with examples of invaders adapting to local cultures and assimilating, locals adopting the culture of the new overlords who killed off their aristocracy, cultures blending to produce hybrids etc - and all of that being overlaid onto changes - if rather less dramatic changes - in the underlying genetic composition of the population.
One of the best examples - and relevant to this piece - is what happened to the Norse who colonised and dominated the islands and seas of western Scotland, coastal Ireland and Scotland and the Irish Sea for several centuries. They became the “Norse-Gaels” a hybrid culture. Norse disappeared. The last ruler of the whole territory, in the 12th c, was Somerled “Lord of the Isles”. His sons divided it between them and their descendants became some of the most powerful and numerous of Scotland’s clans - who thought of themselves as Gaels and who retrospectively claimed Somerled as a Gaelic hero who resisted the Vikings.
But the echo of the Vikings is still there -
From Wikipedia:
“Since the early 2000s, several genetic studies have been conducted on men bearing surnames traditionally associated with patrilineal descendants of Somerled. The results of one such study, published in 2004, revealed that five chiefs of Clan Donald, who all traced their patrilineal descent from Somerled, were indeed descended from a common ancestor.[165][note 20] Further testing of men bearing the surnames MacAlister, MacDonald, and MacDougall, found that, of a small sample group, 40% of MacAlisters, 30% of MacDougalls, and 18% of MacDonalds shared this genetic marker.[166] These percentages suggest that Somerled may have almost 500,000 living patrilineal descendants.[167][note 21] The results of a later study, published in 2011, revealed that, of a sample of 164 men bearing the surname MacDonald, 23% carried the same marker borne by the clan chiefs. This marker was identified as a subgroup of haplogroup R1a,[170] known to be extremely rare in Celtic-speaking areas of Scotland, but very common in Norway.[171] Both genetic studies concluded that Somerled's patrilineal ancestors originated in Scandinavia.[172]”
And in 100 years time we'll all be named after f****** Ali.
I was amazed that my last name has Norwegian roots. But looking at my family - Battersbys , Crockfords and Vowels are all from one area of England where there were the first Viking landings. And the other side is Irish and N. Ireland was a Viking city. There is likely Scandinavian DNA in our Inuits because there are enough legends. I know one thing - you wouldn't have wanted to see my Dad coming through the mists for you - 6'6" with a red beard that starts below his eyes and wild curly red elf locks and armed with 2 axes and a short sword. Although as a firefighter for 42 years he was exactly who you would want to see coming for you through the smoke. 🇨🇦
@@cardroid8615 Don't you mean al-Lee? After all, Lee is the most common family name in the world.
@@joannebattersby8365 😂😂 that visual of your dad is amazing...I thought lord of the rings or game of thrones characters
@@joannebattersby8365 your dad sounds like a marvel character
Anyone should know that Scandinavians were more blue eyed and blonde back then than they are today. Entropy increases with time.
Actually, they were migrants from more southerly climes who had dark hair/skin and blue eyes as their phenotype, which changed in response to the decrease in sunlight and daytime hours as they moved farther and farther north. "Back then" has nothing to do with it.
In addition consider that the blonde and blue eyed characteristics are recessive traits.
Why the 17th century (or later) brigantine in the opening sequence?
That jawline tho. You can tell they were badass.
Why would you be surprised, they were a slave keeping culture, they invented the word “slave” every slave culture breeds with their slaves, even the Spartans.
In Scandinavia it is called träl. Not slave.
I think research like this skipped the social system like it was back than. Slaves, vikings, lords, nobles, kings. If you don't know whether you're sampling any of these, or even worse, perhaps viking burials of those they'd slain, you cannot come to such strong conclusions. The logical reason the diversity decreased in the scandinavian region is because the import of slaves and wives, stopped at some point. You cannot conclude anything without knowing the social status of the ones you've sampled. This does sound like a (weak) attempt to justify mass migration, something the EU seems to love (and why there was money available for such a weak but costly project).
Totally cheaper to just go right into full racism, like you've done. 😆 🤣
@@TheGoofy1932 how so? I think that you got to know to what part of the social structures the dna belongs to, to get more accurate ratings to justify any of the preliminary conclusions these scientists want to make. You need more information about the poeple you sampled in order to be justified to make the bold claims they do. Any (neutral) scientist remotely interested in the topic will tell you the same thing.
This is the bbc, they want to prove that diversity exited all over Europe, they made a children’s cartoon about a roman officer who was supposedly black and claim there was a lot of black legionaries, when in reality the few black legionaries that where, was discriminated by the others,
In regards to this clip about vikings, you are absolutely right, its weak and the samples they are investigating are most likely træl(slaves) graves, i live in Denmark and its sad to see how so many people here follow this American trope of wanting diversity in there history and dna, when these white blonds with blue eyes have a very interesting history and fascinating mythology, of the few things that were written down not being the edas, i heard once about a jarl who married a woman from far north of Norway where people look like siberians they tend to be somewhat darker in skin, they had kids who took after there mum and the jarl and even the mother was ashamed just because they were darker in skin tone. So i don’t find this research credible, you would have to be unintelligent to believe this.
Since it was common to bury the dead with some of their belongings, it's really not that hard to make a destinction betweeen their social status.
I always figured only rough men like the vikings would want to live in such an inhospitable place but they needed some farmers, miners, and women also which is why they went off on these raids, it was specifically for the purpose to loot but also capture people to help populate the scandinavian peninsula. To their credit though these societies were among the first to abolish slavery and were one of the most equal societies in the world up until the industrial revolution.
None of this is news here in Scandinavia ~ it has been known for decades, even centuries. "Viking" is a profession like "pirate", so anyone can join in. The Viking certainly started in Scandinavia, but quickly included Celts, Balts and Slavs, as the closest other "barbarian" (pagan/non-civilized) peoples. The Norse were tribal, identified by immediate family, intermarried with neighboring tribes whereever they went, including non-Norse ~ had no sense of "nationality" or "ethnicity". There are lots and lots of sagas from Ireland and Scotland, as well as the Eastern Baltic telling these exact stories. The genetic results in this report are more of a confirmation of what was already known from historiological and archaeological studies. Why report it as some sort of ethnological "gotcha" moment?
I am an ethnic Dane. I have brown hair and unusual facial features for one. I have been asked several times where I come from. My family on both sides were common farmers in Denmark as far back as any records go and up until my parents.
And they stayed in and married people in the immediate area.
According to family history on my mother's side, they have been there since before the marshy land rose, which is 600-800 years ago.
And yet there is this line of people in my mother's family, with brown hair and these facial features. We look very much like each other. 2-3 people in each generation.
I am curious about where it comes from, but I am not convinced that DNA testing would reveal anything.
Because sometimes you are just a brown-haired ethnic Dane - not all ethnic Danes are blond with blue eyes.
(I did suggest to my mom that the look might come from the Polish seasonal workers in the 1800s. She vehemently denied that it could be the case. Because that would have meant that, ahem, someone believed to be the father, wasn't 🤭).
What people forget, or don't want to know, is that almost every person in the north is a descendant, in one way or another, of the Celts or "Keloid" as the Greeks called them. From Northern Chinese, to mongols, all the way to Ireland.
Back 4, 000 years ago, they were known by their red hair, fair skin and blue or green eyes.
(They also invented the wheel, horse taming, spinning and weaving, elaborate jewelry and more)
Seeing as most Irish are either Nordic or Celtic DNA background, it's not a mystery why so many are red haired, blue eyed and fair skinned.
That is why the English made fun of them...out of pure jealousy at their won mongrel DNA.
Buy a test and see what it says. It's fascinating. 😊
Funny I have never seen a BBC report on the genetic purity of the Zulus. I wonder if they have an ulterior agenda...
Its a western agenda.
Africa is “over there” ,mind you the Moors were “over here” but that’s not important.
Of course they do.
Just the fact that you use the word "purity" shows that this is over your head...🤷♂️
Makes sense. It's similar to the Sea Peoples. Basically, groups of pirates. Hence the strong connection between vikings and slaving.
Meanwhile most Scandinavians stayed home and farmed.
Viking were mostly traders, and settlers. Not so much pirates.
In the video it is right near the beginning that their trade routes spanned from Canada to Afghanistan.
What isn't mentioned is that they also spanned down to sub-saharan Africa.
Thanks for the clarification about most Scandinavians staying home and farming. It's so easy to see all Scandinavians as out-and-about on the high-seas socializing w / their neighbors.
The young men who did not own
land were the ones who went to
sea to find their fortune. That is
common in warrior societies.
After 20 years or so of being
a raider/trader. A man was apt
to settle down where he wanted
to settle within the Viking realm.
It was the agriculture presumably that made the whole viking enterprise necessary and feasible.
Enslaving people who lost battles was very common across the board in those days.
I always thought I was English Irish and French. But my dna test says mostly Scott’s and northern Western European. Which includes Viking. The geographical map includes Denmark Scandinavia and Iceland. My tree goes back to Edward I and the kings before him. All the nobility married only each other so I guess that’s why Viking genes still show in my tree even though it shouldn’t because it’s too many generations back. My family has lots of red hair. So did the kings.
Nordic- Thor ✊️⚡️
Hittites- Teshub ✊️⚡️
Common Origins 🇹🇷
It would be useful if the BBC linked to the research. I did a search on Google scholar and cannot find relevant articles by Eske Willesley or Martin Sikora, so it is impossible to assess their claims or the BBC's interpretation of them. I know David Reich argues that European populations are made up primarily of hunter-gatherers, farmers from Anatolia, and the Yamnaya from the Steppe. I would expect Viking DNA to reflect that, but who knows if we can't read the research discussed in this package?
You'll probably have to search the catalogues, at a University library... or, just send an email to the BBC and ask them, perhaps??
Eske Willerslev was published in Nature, I believe. Are his sources cited there?
The two groups you referred to are the recent Neolithic era invaders of Europe, the natives who had the fair European features you see today and who represent the third component of the genetic makeup of modern Europeans are referred to as the Western Hunter-Gatherers in archaeogenetics.
True true. At Uni I was bombarded with the importance of showing your sources. But the BBC makes mayor claims (I guess with good sources) but do not showes their sources.
What separates science from storytelling is peer reviews...
I did read the study and the diversity here is very much exaggerated.
It's a total sham by the BBC.
Only the fraction of them traveled, the majority of course lived like farmers.
@Bryce Calabaza Yes.. there is a Celtic Scottsman skeleton burried in Scotland. And it shows typical DNA for a Celtic Scott. SO WHAT IS THIS SUPPOSED TO PROVE IN REGARDS TO SCANDINAVIAN INVADERS? That Scoots lived there even once the Vikings were active in the region? So what..
@@NickVenture1 He was a Viking. He was buried according to Viking customs is a Viking grave.
@Bryce Calabaza Yes. Now we are two to point out that a Gaelic Scott buried in Scotland is rather normal. Even if he had adopted Viking habits.
I wish they'd teach us more about the Vikings
You start a documentary about vikings with pictures of a ship from the 18th or 19th century? What has happend to the BBC?
Yeah, the Scandinavians spread across the world and married people of other cultures, above all the British isles, today's Russia, etc. That's been known for a long time. It doesn't mean that the Scandinavians were a recently "mixed" people. The population was mixed in the sense of it being a product of Yamnaya peoples who invaded Scandinavia and the neolithic farmers. Norway and Denmark has a majority distribution of R Y-DNA whereas Sweden has majority I, former being Yamnaya, latter being neolithic farmers.
These people in the program want to make it seem as though Scandinavians were comprised of Afghans, Africans, Mediterraneans, which is just not the case.
Outside of traders and royalty, isolated groups tended to have isolated dna and most of these dna studies that reveal "diverse" dna tend to be of Scandinavians at foreign trade centres or cherry picked examples
Define isolated
Yes probably true. Why would an isolated, un married person with no children have a test done !
Is haplogroup I from the south?
3:36 I’m surprised this program allowed a map where Iceland is spelled “Island” to make the final cut.
My brother did a test called the BigY that only men can take that will reveal the dna from the paternal lines a lone. Prior to this test, earlier tests revealed that he carried a mutant gene that has been found in the Scottish Highlander Kings. They were fraternizing with the Vikings long, long before England. Our ancestry is now included in this specialized research and study along with thousands of others. They found that my great grandmother was of Viking heritage.
@@graemelamont4094 wow. Reminds of how on the island where im from theres a family that carries a gene for 6 toes. Only that family and their descents have this genetic trait
@@graemelamont4094 pretty sure this is called deutron contraction or similiar and as you age causes your hand especially little finger to curl up... my grandad was invited to a study because he has this, that study concluded his ancestry was from coastal Norwegian villages..
@@graemelamont4094 my step father, or the husband of my mother, has that with hes little finger on one hand, it is allso like that.. hes Norwegian
Dupuytren's contracture! I have it. When it plays up and becomes sore, my doctor tells me it is the price I pay for being a Viking.
My grandfather is from Glasgow and he has that genetic trait. 3 of his fingers are frozen. He knows for a fact that he was descended from the Vikings. I did a DNA test. My mum only had 2% Norwegian and I had 0%. But it was good to hear that you can be descended from Vikings yet not hold Norwegian DNA.
I saw a small special where a “black” man got a DNA test, and it came back he was 15% Swedish.
Now, this came from his Fathers side of the family, which meant his father was 30% Swedish. He then recorded a live stream of him telling his dad the findings.
His father was shocked, because he was told he had some Irish in him, not Swedish.
The Father thought it was hilarious. Dad had a friend who was 10% Swedish, a die hard Vikings football fan, and very proud of his Viking heritage.
He was gonna run it in his friends face (had a smirk on his face when saying this) that HE had more Viking in him then his “white” friend did!🤣
DNA is a fickle thing sometimes.
A bosses sister (white) had a black baby girl when the father was thought to be “white”.
Chaos ensued.
This was the early 2000’s and I guess a nurse got a DNA sample in all the screaming and accusations being thrown in the maternity ward.
They were just about to get a divorce when the DNA results came back. Not only was the husband the father, but the “black” gene came from HIS side of the family.
His great great grandfather had been African American.
His family😳.
The couple stayed together, love their growing healthy baby girl.
But they constantly have to explain their daughter is NOT adapted.
Yea. Prior to WW2, back door and secret adaptions were quite common, and is practiced world wide.
People were desperate to have a son or daughter, some people were desperate to get a rid of a kid, and adaption agencies were often wrong on guessing the race of a baby dropped off.
Heck. One woman had be adapted a “black” as a baby learned thru DNA testing she was full blooded Italian….in her 70’s.
She got to meet her “white” siblings too.
Apparently she had to have a family meeting about this “discovery” being the matriarch.
When asked how this “made her feel” identity wise, she just sighed and replied,
“I still like Jazz”.
Stay classy granny 😎.
I enjoyed the quotation marks as much as the actual content. 😅👍🏿
@@snm2222 I did too 😁
hmm i have 34 odd % celtic dna my son has 27% Celtic dna (my wife is 100% east asian (also dna tested) , people dont necessary get exactly half ethic dna, both my parents have 12-14% swedish dna (my dads mum was theoretically 100% irish. my cousin from dads side of family (who is incredibly asian looking she 75%) has 13% irish dna 10% swedish dna, and my kids have 0% swedish dna
It's adopted, not adapted.
Black is not a racial category, it's an adjective used to describe human populations with a darker skin hue. It's common knowledge in the African diaspora to find non-African racial categories present in our DNA. You should really get out in the world more.
Thank you Denmark fore clearing this up. By the way he is also the director of the National museum of Denmark.
This doesn't change anything we know about the Viking age
It's just presented in a misleading way
There is no doubt that Scandinavian Vikings were taller and blonder than the others. However, those who settled abroad married local girls for the average man and local princesses for their chiefs. The interest of local lords was to tie friendly relationships with these rich traders. That means that the Vikings born overseas were very often only "half Scandinavian". Even the chiefs and second generation may have been only a quarter Scandinavian. On the continent, the Vikings opened their ranks to any volonteer wishing to get rid of the Franks. People from Saxony, Frisia, Bretagne and Aquitaine joined Viking troops to fight the Franks. This is the reason why they were so efficient. Their scouts and spies were locals.
nah not true, look for example the pople before the vikings the Heruler forexample that came from Småland, they had pitch black hair.
@@Lukky_Luke Also, the Frisians where vikings till they got subdued by the Franks, matter of fact, being a viking was as much of a job as being a farmer
to claim anything like that you should provide strong scientific evidence. link to some research or something. and only then you can use "no doubt" approach.
@@renejagers4364 true enough. Going viking is to go trading. Which is the primary occupation of the people known as vikings before they were better known for raids.
We will make the wretched Franks pay yet...
Just wanna add, because I find it interesting, but 'Viking' comes from the Danish Vik, meaning bay or inlet of water. So Viking/ Baying would be an active action of travelling from bay to bay or town to town. Wic could also refer to a settlement, harbour or village from the Latin Vicus, York, was referred to as Eoferwic, Berwick is still called Berwick, Norwich, Ipswich, Dunwich etc. So 'Vikings' were anyone in northern Europe and beyond who actively travelled from town to town for whatever pragmatic purpose, trading or pillaging.
Actually, the etymology of ‘Viking’ is hotly disputed.
@@matthewg.2086yeah as I've shown by giving multiple interpretations of vic and wick, as a bay or a dwelling place.
It's called vik in Swedish and Norwegian too because....we are siblings.
Viking means summer travel, so when the horse winter was over the cheaf would ask the local lads anyone for Viking. They would leave some behind to look after there village town and the others would go Viking!
Harse
My grandmother's grandfather was a 7' Dane from Copenhagen. Ive always thought he would have been terrifying if he had been a viking.
Did the height get passed down through our family? Not too much. His son emigrated to the US and married an short irish girl who had emigrated to the US around the same time. We have a lot of 5'+ people in the family with the tall ones being mainly men.
The tallest people in the world are the Dutch. Look it up.
@@tomroberts7221 oh. I always thought the Zulus were the tallest. Learn something new every day. When I was in the Netherlands they looked pretty regular sized.
@@susanfarley1332 It is a measurement of the entire population. The Dutch are the tallest people in the world. They have an average height of 175.62 cm (5 feet 7.96 inches).
@@tomroberts7221 I stayed in a dutch hotel and the bathroom was tiny. When you sat on the toilet seat you hit your head on the door of the bathroom. Poor Dutch people. Must be bruised all over. I saw the match wearhouse in Amsterdam and it was very narrow. It was something else. There must be even more people there since I saw the Netherlands. There were people from all over the world there. Fascinating place!
I am a 6'4” man of mainly north German heritage living in Sweden. It's very rare that I see anyone as tall as I am here, but in N. Germany and Holland it's common.
The only time I've ever heard the reference to blue-eyed blondes as any sort of 'pure-bred race' was referring to the Nazis and their Eugenics campaign. When did the Vikings get involved in this bs?
The Vikings have left their legacy in Britain as place names eg Derby,Grimsby and Rugby as by means farm,Thorpe,Thwaite surnames as in Jarvis,Anderson and Earle originally Jarl for example the Viking settlers not been fully assimulated till the 12th century.
People in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and Leicestershire are largely descended from Angles and later Danish Vikings. Some Norwegians in say, West Yorkshire, etc. They can't tell a first wave Angle apart from a later wave Danish Viking by DNA. There are near clones of Danes and Norwegians in these parts of England. They're still not what I'd call assimilated, more like dominant.
"By" means town :)
My home town is Limerick in the mid West of Ireland which was founded by Norse raiders. The city still has many Norse descended surnames. Recent more detailed DNA testing has revealed a far stronger Norse signature in Irish DNA then previously thought.
@@christopherlynch9006 Yes Chris, the Norse have certainly stamped themselves on these islands, they were still a menace in Scotland till 1263 at the failure of Haakon;s invasion but matters improved after Alexander III daughter married Eric II of Norway and though he still controlled the Orkney,s and Shetlands the Norse Kings turned to fighting amongst themselves in the Baltic and Russia and the English Kings turned to land grabbing in France from Edward Ist till Henry VI and of course maintaining their hold on Eire till a hundred years ago.
@@Annakist76 or village... ;)
The Vikings also lived on the southern coast of the Baltic Sea on the Polish side, the daughter of Mieszko I Świętosław (Sygryda Storrada born in 968) was the wife of the Vikings king Eric the Victorious (1 son), second husband Swen Widłobrody. She had 2 sons with him, Harald (King of Denmark) and Cnut the Great, one invaded England and the other stayed on the throne after his father. The language and runic writing of the Vikings / Etruscan is a Slavic language, the so-called runes Polish researcher, archaeologist Tadeusz Wolański 1785-1865 read inscriptions on Etruscan monuments. After writing the book, he received the protection of the tsar - a battalion of the Russian army (Poland was under partition), who did not leave him a single step so that he would not die for reading Etruscan inscriptions.
This BBC propaganda is so shameless it's unreal... as if a bunch of arabs and asians lived among them ROFL!
so you saying they were black? I'm woke.
Oh kurwa jebana! Stop it 😂
Correct, was a lot of vikings who settled there
What a heck are you saying???
_"runic writing of the Vikings / Etruscan is a Slavic language"_
Etruscans where assimilated into roman culture roughly thousand before viking emergence and that -both of these languages are slavic- is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard... IE yes but slavic NO, NO, *NO* .
EDIT: *By the way Etruscan language isn't even Indo-European language.*
I think we've known for some time that "vikings" is a social construct and not a DNA identity.
Apparently Leroy was an incredibly popular name according to the BBC
I remember watching an episode of History's Mysteries on The History Channel (back when they still did history) the last scholar on the show remarked about how diverse the Vikings were through their travels and he said: "If you want to know what a Viking looked like, look in a mirror."
Thank you for the info. Really interesting 😁👍
What utter bs. What did this "scholar" have his degree in? Critical Theory?
@@TomorrowWeLive The thing was, unless you can tell me differently with historical backing, the Vikings traveled anywhere their boats could take them. They didn't just conquer, they also lived among others and also adapted aspects of the cultures they merged with. It's the reason they ended up Christians instead of following Norse religions. It's what happens with all invaders when they move into an area, they have babies with the locals and take up whatever that culture has to offer. It has nothing to with so-called "critical theory."
Exactly, it's the reason so many us still contain a small bit of Neanderthal DNA. They didn't "die out". They intermarried/bred with the CroMagnum people. But Tomorrow We Live seems like a fragile ❄ so 🤷.
It’s so sad what happened to History Channel! I love history documentaries, it’s my favorite TV viewing!
Talking about someone's genetics and not mentioning a haplogroup is stupidity or evil intent.
Considering the vikings brought people (non vulantary househelps) home with them after raids and probably had children with them, their genetics must have mixed t some point
Just check out Fomenko's New chronology. It all fits!
I am of Norwegian descent born and raised in Seattle Washington around a bunch of other people of Norwegian descent and I have never heard anybody talk about Vikings as a race or being pure
Sadly it is a fantasy held by racists, attaching themselves to the legands of viking expansion, strength and domination to re-enforce their beliefs that their is an inherent superiority within a particular race.
It is also sad as they seem to re-imagine a complex and interesting coulture into a two dimentional sociaty.
The rewriting of European history and their people is strong with this one
@@karlosthejackel69 When evedence presennts us with new knoledge and understanding it is not a 're-writing' but a 'discovery', meaning something has not been invented, but that something that was always there has been found :)
@@David-js2vp Funny how this ‘new evidence’ is always immigration propaganda, just like all those Cheddar men from Britain suddenly turning black the week after Brexit when even the scientists said the media was lying about it.
Maybe it’s just me eh?
@@David-js2vp A nations history is not owned by ‘racists’. I’d like you to examine how Africa was originally Kho’sian before the Bantus expanded, over bred and inherited the land. But I’d imagine theirs no virtue signalling points to be gained doing that is there?
Viking was a profession more than an ethnicity - But still only a Norse profession. The Vikings that went to conquer England never actually called themselves "Vikings" but only referred to them as "The Danes" because they were from Denmark.
Viking raiders were Scandinavian. It's not like there were Southern European or African Viking hordes, nor were there brown or black people among them. But dark hair and dark eyes was very normal like we see in Scandinavia today. Blue eyes and blond hair was more apparent than in other places in the world, but never dominant. That is only Hollywood fiction. Long before the Viking age, Scandinavia had DNA from many places which makes up the Norse gene pool in present time.
So the "diversity" they talk about here is nothing special and shouldn't be news, nor is it what they make it out to be. It's basic probability theory that no European race is 100 percent pure. White people come from somewhere else like anybody - They didn't grow from trees lol
Some people...they just want to push their M.C. narrative and will use any shred of evidence no matter how weak to craft the story they desperately want society to believe.
@@bladeswelove Vikings got about. Certainly S Europe, N Africa and into Russian Asia and the Middle,e East but once there they stopped being called Vikings and became Norman's or the Rus.
They were remarkably adaptable and dropped their old culture and religion to rule whoever they had conquered.
When they stopped being called Vikings they didn't stop their acquisitive behaviour
The DNA shows your racial purity does not exist because people move and always have.
And dont forget that that the North of Scandinavia was part of the northern cold cultures that mixed across northern Eurasia because no one had discovered being European yet.
@@julianshepherd2038 In Quebec, the government wants certain people to not work or access public services if they wear conspicuous religious attire. That's carrying racial purity just a bit too far IMHO.
@@bladeswelove - dude, there's evidence of Muslim Vikings
Get your head our of your arse
Perhaps the most important fact about the Vikings is that they were mostly farmers and fishermen who went to Viking in the offseason.
When he said Asia it makes sense because scandinavian/germanic have originated from central asia. The scythians are very related to the scandinavians.
Germanics never come from Asia, even finnic peoples not come from Asia, they were native north est europeans uralicized aslo original slavs split from balts(indo european language speaking peoples from north est europe close genetically to finnic peoples )for this est slavs can look very finnish
My great-grandfather and great-grandmother were from Norway 🇳🇴 and Sweden 🇸🇪. So interesting this video is ... thank you for sharing ❤️
In this 400 person sample, I wonder if any were actually slaves etc and not Vikings
Sleeves would not have been buried that way as neither did Norwegians at the time Viking was more of a profession like think of a Spartan warrior would get buried with a shield a viking would get buried a certain way with certain items
Also, many Vikings were cremated. I take this supposed "research" with a big grain of salt. Too convenient that it all falls perfectly in line with the modern day liberal globalist agenda aimed at stripping Europeans of their cultural and historical identity
social sciences have been saying this for a long time.
My surname originates from the Norse name of Rögnvaldr.
I find this sort of thing totally fascinating
One of interesting things is our modern usage of the word viking. The people of Scandinavia were known as Norse. When they went raiding they were going vikings or going on a viking. My usage is no doubt not completely accurate. But my understanding is they used viking as a verb. Modern usage is more of a noun. If you were tough enough to join a raiding group you could go on a viking no matter your ethnicity. You could stay in Scandinavia and be simply Norse. Of course there is a lot of crossover in names and terms.
Takk. exactly.
That's exactly right. I wish they would stop calling them Vikings.
_Norse_ references the Atlantic side of the population. The Baltic Scandinavians were the _Rus,_ and the area just adjacent to Stockholm is still known as Roslagen. As the Rus went viking through East Europe, it's generally accepted that the name Russia is derived from them.
The gerund (ing) did not appear in the English language until the time of Shakespeare. The spelling may be a corruption of an Old Norse word. As for diversity? Only the BBC could squeeze that into a discussion by finding two scientists willing to take the money to support the argument. I remember a BBC special where Andrew Marr tried convincing us we were all descended from a Nigerian woman and showed cavemen as mixed race with dreadlocks.
The Vikings may have travelled far and wide but i doubt their community could be described as ‘diverse’ in the modern sense.
The scientist stooge even says “We are changing the story”.
I’m not.
Viking babies and viking chickens......
Fascinating! I hope we can get more DNA information and details over the next few decades.
yes , Vikings were apparently Brazillian samba dancers - BBC says so
fake news
You would think that the BBC would know that Vikings did not sail in 19th century sailing ships.
EXCELLENT !!! FRM, U.K. (2023).
Thanks for this. I’ve always wondered about the Vikings.
Very interesting! But what I find equally fascinating is that Vikings, like Pirates, have been glorified. As the video says at the very beginning, they sailed the seas plundering coastal towns.
A lot of the time they were trading.
Not just the coastal towns. Viking ships were designed for rivers, too. They traveled through Europe on the river systems, so reached inland as well as the coasts. That's how they ventured deep into what's now Russia -- in fact the Rus were originally Scandinavian -- and down to the Black Sea. The map they showed in the video was way oversimplified.
Compare them with modern day Rock Stars people found them fascinating and exciting.
and this activity was going on 1 thousand years before the vikings ever walked. and they were glorified too.
imagine that :p
@@wendylorimer5663 Yeah , slave trading !
Why does this first guy sound like Ahnold?!
The people before the viking era for example, the Heruler that came from middle part of sweden that wenty on raids around year 500 AD. They were described as having pitch black hair and blur eyes.
There's no confusion about who the Vikings were. Nobody's claiming they were a monorace so I wonder where BBC gets that idea from. Northwestern Europeans are the 1st or 2nd most diverse in the world (the other is Ashkenazi Jews. Sorry I lost the source on that, so I don't know which is 1st place or 2nd place but it doesn't matter much). Proto-Germanic U106/R-L48 groups from around Friesland go up the coast around 1,700 BCE and take over, likely by invitation. From these people we get the language, Odin, boats, farming and much more. Proto-Germanic U106 groups are 5,100 years old and of that, R-L48 is about 4,700 years old. The dominant culture of Scandinavia is R-L48. R-L48 and I1 (native Scandinavians) and subsets of R1a Baltic-Slavic formed the peoples of Denmark, Sweden and Norway. From 1,700 BCE to about 500 BCE, things progressed. In the coastal areas, U106/R-L48 and I1 blended to some degree, becoming something new: Coastal North Sea Germanic Scandinavians. They built boats and ships, much, much earlier than the Viking Age. Jutes from Denmark, under Hengist, founded England in 449 CE. They even got up to Orkney at that time, all in rowed keel ships. They can't tell a first wave Angle (or Jute) apart from later wave Danish Vikings by DNA. Just becase some Vikings joined in for work, from say, Belarus, or others in Orkney were part Pictish (and part Norwegian) does not discount all we know about Viking whatsoever, it only expands and confirms what we already know, if we think accurately. To try to claim that a Celt in Britain could become 'Viking' by choosing a lifestyle... is rare and a stretch at best. While not all U106/R-L48 or I1 are Viking, it is definitely true that most Vikings were R-L48 and I1, that is overwhelmingly clear and not up for debate. Blond(e) and blues are a Baltic trait, but those traits were common long before the Viking Age and are noted as trait amongst the Vikings wherever they went: Height, strength, blonde and blues, though many had brown hair, near black hair, olive skin, sometimes green eyes, etc, blond and blues and height are, and were, 'a thing'. No debate.
@@ghostladydarkling3250 Opinionated nonsense ,made up to fit your very much present- day concerns /agenda, and bearing no relation whatever to the lives/lifestyles of these ancient Northern Europeans , who would undoubtedly, due to their geographical location , have been a light-eyed, fair complexioned people.
@@ghostladydarkling3250 nonsense, if any one could head out as Viking why is this phenomenon only connected with Scandinavia?
Vikings were Scandinavian men!
Absolutely agree as to the looks/appearance of these as you say , ancient Northern Europeans, however ,find their fawning glorification by the likes of the BBC - and others, a bit hard to take. Reasons?Their virtually calamitous impact on the thriving, literate, monastic civilisation developed in Ireland ,with outposts in Germany founded by St Killian ; at Bobbio in Italy ,Gallen in Switzerland , even reaching as far to the east as Kiev ,bringing literacy across Europe , is a matter of record in these places, (literacy literally!)a light in the so called Dark Ages barely mentioned/acknowledged.Likewise, the fact that the city of Dublin was founded as a centre for the “Vikings “ slave trade has not been disputed .That the Irish in the Battle of Clontarf ,1014, drove the “Vikings “ out of Ireland and the other historical facts ,are disputed by you as”… nonsense…. “ only serves to show how far the present-day cult of the glorification of the Vikings ,& their concomitant heathenism has come, becoming an unhealthy rejection of our common European , Christian heritage.Why is the “evil BBC “ cheering this on?! And you talk to me about “ having an agenda ?!
It's funny that they are financing research into subject that is already clear. It's nothing new. Social phenomen of going viking wasn't related to Scandinavian peninsula and local Scandinavian populations only and for that reason it's logical, that there would be diverse genetics. If we are speaking about genetics, then it was already clear from various researces done already, that faire and blonde traits was more pronounced in local peoples from Eastern Baltic. All this research cleared was pinpointing concrete people groups.
A Norwegian historian that worked on this project called them out for having a garbage sample size selecting for places outside of Scandinavia while ignoring the inner regions. Most Vikings where buried at sea or cremated so those graves might be Christians. Furthermore the study says the Viking had non Scandinavian European admixture not black admixture. This is an obvious attempt by academia to erase white people’s history. ua-cam.com/video/wc1GOPN5X3g/v-deo.html
Fascinating 🤔
Great video!
Me, a Norwegian: Why does that guy sound like he is being strangled? Yikes! Oh, hold on, he's just Danish....
😂😂😂😂
Is that what it is?! Surely they don’t all sound that bad and deep throat certain words?! 😬😬😬
@@lanaconin5704 they dont all sound that bad, you’re right
I've read, that now current Danish, Swedes, Icelanders, Norwegians & Finish could barely understand one another when they talk. What happened? I thought you all used to be Scandinavians as a whole.
@@ravenbonanza1522 Finnish is an entirely different language. It is much more similar to Estonia etc. As a Norwegian I have no problem understanding Swedish, and written Danish is really close to Norwegian. It's just the pronounciation that's so difficult to understand. Icelandic is a really ancient language with much more complex grammar
A lot of sea burials and cremations happen in Viking culture. I'd like to know where they got their samples from because it seems they have a chip on their shoulder.
It doesnt correlate with Arab accounts of Ahmad ibn Fadlan from the Rus Vikings that describe them as follows: "I have never seen more perfect bodies than theirs. Tall as (date) palm-trees, with blond and red hair like a burst of fire and ruddy skin. Each is tattooed from the tips of his toes to his neck, with dark blue or dark green "designs" and all men are armed with an axe, sword and long knife".
My DNA / heritage is from the Scottish Isles on my father's side and Cornwell on my mother's. What I found that supports these findings is that my father and I share 1% northern India and Bengal DNA. We can say 100% that no one has even been there in our modern history