Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
A little qualifier and background should have been added to my last posting:
Rollo was considered the leader of the "Vikings"........who became the leader of Normandy.......settled it........and established what we now call Normandy........around 950 AD or so.
Normandy as an entity: wasn't much.......the French avoided living on the coast .........weather was bad: raids and pillage were constant.........core French tended to prefer to live inland........so Normandy was a bit of a "wasteland" if you will......especially depopulated after Viking raids down the Seine.
But the Vikings didn't limit their activities to the north coast: were busy and often raiding Loire valley......just north of La Rochelle........
Rollo was offered a deal: take Normandy: stop the raids....and he took the deal.....
So it should be noted: there IS the possibility that the DNA of Rollo could have been randomly left behind in the Loire........to form a Pierre........
but mainly they destroyed and killed everyone they encountered.......people were so terrified of them: they ran when they could.
Just clarifying that point....
Rollo led an army of Irish "Vikings" and Danes....into France.
There is much argument as to his own heritage: the Norwegians claim him........as do the Danes......
If our DNA indeed is his
DNA
it is more likely he was Danish.........who show a good mix of R1b1 DNA along with the traditional Viking "I" type....or the R1a1's......
Viking as a term is hotly debated as well:.......some say it was no "race" at all: just the profession of being a pirate.......that anyone could join.
And they did it because they could: whenever they met great force: they left........they weren't after much besides plunder.........not the land or world domination....
As in the Irish: finally had enough and chased them out....thus forming the R1b1 types Rollo took with him to northern France.
(should anyone wonder why so much "Irish" type DNA seems to show up in NOrmandy as well: this is one reason)
When Rollo finally got his "kingdom" he took it very seriously and made great efforts to rebuild abbey's he had previously burned down: to settle the land.
But otherwise: Normandy and Brittany were the wild wild west of France........took a special breed to live there.
Interestingly: the more "mixed" the DNA samples are in a geography: the more LIKELY it has a FOUNDER effect.......meaning the beginning point of a large group of people.......
Other than the foundational Celt DNA........that is what you see in Normandy.......we know this via the Canadian data banks of known Norman emigrants.
Whereas in Basque regions: the DNA dries up into just a few varieties: little growth or new input......everyone ends up being very similar by percentages.
When we look at Brittany: one does see a lot of variety of DNA types: including traditional Viking types.......eastern Europeans etc.......
Only Finisterre shows a prevalence of Celt R1b1
but in Normandy: it is overwhelmingly R1b1: Celt.
Rollo made sure his sons and relatives all got towns and land and had families.........as well as ingratiating any local nobles into his fold.....and had no problem himself and his stock having a lot of illegitimate children.......
Richard was said to have been castrated finally because of how many he fathered.....
It is entirely probable that Pierre is an offshoot of one of these adventures: because otherwise we don't see the Sirre name associated with him or his........at least yet.
And of course we have the Louis Sire/Acadian bunch claiming Dunkirk as their origin.........this would certainly fit the program of this new theory......
Criel is next door to Dieppe...........in the 1600's the King of France undertook an entire inventory of Normandy: who what etc....
Dieppe was given the grade of "quaint unimportant" dock......limited to a certain size of vessel.........unlike Rouen...........which was the Toronto of the day..........in Normandy...
Every important chateau or fiefdom is listed: as well as any important official...........not a single Sire or Sirre...but a lot of LeSeurs.........and a lot of other Quebec family names........
We do find really significant Sire families somewhat later though: 1700's..........in the very most northern towns....said to have come from Amiens........
So my guess is: our roots must have been confined to a really small geography in the most northern and central regions of France/Belgium.........to the right or east of Paris.........if one follows the paper trail of people named Sire.........
Sure would be great to have Louis Sire to test to add to this discovery...........the way it looks at the moment: he indeed would likely be related........
So: as the argument rages about Rollo being a true northern Norwegian or even Icelander.......or Swede....
so far the DNA says: just plain old Celt.......somewhere around Friesland..ancestry.
These Celts did migrate around: and there were no "countries" of Sweden, Norway etc at the time......
But Viking is a category we associate with a special type of DNA and Rollo isn't that: if the genealogy is right.
I have seen other families make the same claim: some saying they can go right back to the dawn of time in Norway: and Rollo is in their lineage.........but as a type "I".......
These are nearly always English based families:.....the Hastings, the Sinclairs,,,etc.
I do tend to believe our French version though:.......because we have historical proof that Robert de Criel actually lived in Criel Normandy.......there was a castle........and parts still exist.
There are just a handful of generations between him and Rollo: to Robert D Eu............father of Robert de Criel.
maybe 2......
So it would be hard to get that wrong.....if they weren't related.......whereas all the English families have is their name mentioned in the Roll Call of the Abbey as partnering William the Conqueror..on the English side of things........
However: not saying they are wrong..........they have their paper trails they rely on too........
But we can't be both: R1b1 and "I".........it has to be one or the other....
One of these two sides had an "outside" event........or one is just wrong in their paper trail......
More testing is the key to this mystery....
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/cyr/messages/1759.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|